Editor's note: This is a version of the letter read to members of the East Providence Housing Authority and its Board of Commissioners at the meeting held Thursday, Jan. 5.

I was angry to hear that our mayor chose to appoint an individual to the Board of Commissioners privately instead of at the council meeting. The mayor had the opportunity to make his appointment at the Dec. 20 council meeting instead of on Dec. 22 in the city clerk's office. This is the first time a mayor has made this decision in the past three years, according to the city clerk. I requested additional research, however her office was unable to provide me with the information for the past 20 years until next week.

As I stated to Mr. Rogers, I felt he was disrespectful to his peers and the public, whether the council could change his appointment, or not. When the appointment is for a public position, why not appoint publicly instead of privately, the mayor’s decision reflects very negatively on all involved and
presents the appearance of a back room deal.

This board is extremely difficult to become a member of, members seem to continue to serve  for consecutive terms (five-year terms), not providing for an opportunity for other qualified volunteers. Some members serving for 15 years.   Also, everything is kept very private for a non-profit corporation. I expressed my anger to Mr. Rogers because he assured me I would be the next appointment to the Housing Board.

I don’t have a private agenda, and I don’t have any relatives on the board or in the housing any longer. I have had a strong desire to be an advocate for individuals in our public housing because I don’t feel they are being treated with the respect and dignity they deserve. I am willing to fairly compete for a board position, I  have been a public servant and worked for the City for 21 years, and am very knowledgeable about housing, politics, have a strong accounting background, and many years of programming experience for seniors as well as others besides being a member of the city management team as well as past president of the Steelworkers Union. My mother lived comfortably in City View for more than 25 years until she passed away in 2007. I still attend programs held in the public housing buildings, and I am kept aware of the existing problems.

During the last couple of years I have been a witness to conditions listed below that I don’t feel our seniors and disabled individuals should have to endure.

• Malfunctioning elevators
• Lengthy repair times, sometimes days
• Power outages with lengthy repairs
• Emergency lighting not functioning
• No Hot water
• Outside doors stuck open during snow storms
• Exit doors blocked by snow (these are fire egress doors)
• Walkways not cleared of snow
• No vehicle for dissemination of information
• Public embarrassment of residents
• News media has to be notified, then problems are corrected
• Extremely poor communication with residents
• Elevator inspections were last completed in 2009 in City View and Goldsmith
• Missing fire extinguishers on the fifth floor in Goldsmith Manor
• Washing machine broken in Goldsmith for more than three weeks.
• Management should be addressing mail delivery schedule, which is usually after 5 p.m. and mail left in odd places.
• Drug usage in building, walk along the 5th floor in Goldsmith, often times it reeks of marijuana.

I feel this is a time for change, there is too much active nepotism, and cronyism and the appearance of conflict of interest. Board members should always opt to recuse themselves from voting on issues when there is a conflict of interest.

In these times of stressful economic times, whether city, state, or federal issues we should all be concerned with appearances and be cautious when making financial decisions that impact on the people in our community. I have been informed and confirmed with the mayor there is a Florida trip planned for Board members, whether all members are included I don’t know. But I must ask, because I do know in the past repairs were delayed due to budgetary constraints and concerns, and I have to question whether this is a financially worthwhile venture. Will enough information be gained that will benefit the residents and help the management in 2012, or could two people attend and report by bringing the information back to the other board members? Perhaps additional service for seniors might be a better use of this money.

I’m sure some of you are wondering why I am here alone, and I can only inform you that many individuals in these two buildings are afraid to speak because they are afraid of  intimidation and retaliation. I am not, I’m a senior, disabled, but I am fortunate enough to be able to reside in my own home and I am not concerned or fearful of retaliation or of being intimidated. The elusive behavior of this board has intrigued me to search for answers to many questions, and I have only just begun.

Advocate for seniors,
Joanna F. Britto