It has been difficult for many to understand why the board of the Charlotte Housing Authority (CHA) has agreed to give outgoing CEO Harrison Shannon a $121,000 severance package plus a two-year, $50,000 consulting contract. If the authority, which oversees public housing in Charlotte, were rolling in money, that would be one thing. But CHA is in such a financial crunch this year, it had to cut close to 40 of its 250 staff positions, about half of which were already vacant. In addition, CHA has an estimated $12 million to $25 million in renovation needs that must come from somewhere over the next few years to prevent public housing units from becoming completely uninhabitable.
More puzzling still is the fact that although Shannon had successfully lobbied to bring over $100 million in HUD grant money to the agency over the last 12 years, his record of late has been clouded by charges that he had done a poor job of actually managing the agency. A story last year by Creative Loafing revealed that the agency’s Section 8 and public housing waiting lists had fallen into such disarray that no one was sure who was next in line. A report documenting flaws in the way the organization managed money and assets also caused problems.
Yet the board, which is made up of citizen volunteers appointed by Charlotte City Council and mayor, saw fit to push the authority’s 2001 budget further into the red to hand Shannon, who resigned from his job, a six-figure severance package, every dollar of which could have been spent to renovate crumbling public housing units.
Why? There’s both a public version and a back-room version of this story.
Publicly, both board members who wanted to fire Shannon last year and those who fought to keep him say the severance package was money well spent. Even board member Kip Kiser, one of Shannon’s harshest critics, says he favored the package.
“Shannon has brought a lot of federal funding to Charlotte and worked here for 12 years,” said Kiser. “We wanted his replacement to feel like if something goes wrong, we are not going to put him out without a decent severance package.”
Others who defended Shannon then defend his severance package now.
“Harrison Shannon did an excellent job as a CEO and brought national recognition to Charlotte,” said board member Eric Douglas. “He has moved on and we wished him the best of luck. Those people are working hard over there. For once, can they read something positive?”
Board member Lucy Bush has remained one of Shannon’s biggest supporters, and a passionate supporter of the severance package.
“I think Harrison is a good man and I think he did a great job here and was doing the best he could do given what he had to work with,” said Bush. “I want Harrison Shannon to leave this position with his head held high. All of that is part and parcel of allowing him to maintain himself as a credible contributor and asset to this community. I’m not sorry today and I won’t be sorry tomorrow. If people want to filter out of this another lens of negativity they need to come and learn about the housing authority before they do that because they are jumping to a judgment that they don’t know enough to make. We deserve the benefit of the doubt and the confidence of the community that we know what to do.”
Like Bush, board member Mickey Aberman also emphasized what a difficult job running the agency likely was for Shannon.
The back-room version of this story makes more sense. Some board members, including some of Shannon’s supporters, say there was a fear among some on the board that if Shannon were fired, his popularity and personal relationship with HUD bureaucrats around the country could result in the agency, which is fully funded by HUD, not getting needed grants and favorable rulings in the future. A large part of what Shannon will be paid to do as a consultant for CHA is to lobby for those grants and help bring more funding to the struggling authority. Others say some board members feared that an effective public relations backlash might be caused by Shannon’s attorney Julius Chambers, a prominent, and politically talented civil rights attorney and activist.
Another board member, one of Shannon’s supporters, simply thought that offering Shannon the package was a quick way to clean house and send Shannon packing without any more public relations fallout like the negative press CHA has endured over the last year.
“It may have been that it was money well spent,” said one board member who wished not to be named. “If we had prolonged any longer, the place would have been broke.”
And finally, some board members simply thought Shannon did a good job running the authority. But if there’s one thing board members agree on, it’s that things are looking up at CHA. The waiting lists are fixed. The 2002 budget is balanced. Systems to better monitor the agency’s financial dealings are in place, and better yet, much of the old guard, higher-level staffers who were part of the system, have been fired, released or allowed to resign.
“It’s a new day at the housing authority,” says Kiser. “Things are really looking up and they are just going to get better.’
This article appears in Apr 24-30, 2002.
