Gilding The Lily

Chairman of D.C. Housing Authority Board okays questionable contracts for female companion

By Jeffrey Anderson

————————————————————————————————————————————————————————–

In 2018, and again in 2021, D.C. Housing Authority Chairman of the Board of Commissioners Neil O. Albert approved contracts totaling millions of dollars for a female companion whose architecture and design firm has failed to deliver on the first contract and is under-qualified for the second.

After a competitive bidding process initiated by Albert himself, DCHA awarded, and Albert approved, a $305,000 contract to Moya Design Partners (“Moya Design”) in December 2018 for “Master Planning Services” to evaluate the marketability of four undeveloped Capper Carrollsburg parcels in Southeast D.C. near the Navy Yard. 

More than two years later, Moya Design has delivered only a “Draft Master Plan” that ignores contract specifications, offers no financial or economic analysis, and charts no clear path to putting the parcels out to market. 

To date, DCHA has revealed no concrete plans for developing the property, despite substantial development since 2004 that has fallen short of its obligation to build a sufficient number of affordable housing units to meet the needs of the city’s lowest earning residents. 

In June, Albert then voted to approve an architecture and engineering contract  for Moya Design worth up to $3.75 million, despite the firm’s lack of requisite experience, according to a review of its own website. 

In neither case did the CEO of Moya Design, Paola Moya, disclose her personal relationship with Albert; nor did Albert disclose his personal relationship with Moya—even as he approved both awards in writing.

When the Capper Carrollsburg contract went out to bid, Moya Design had been in business for just nine months, and shared a business address with the DowntownDC Business Improvement District (“DowntownDC BID”), where Albert serves as President and Executive Director.

Veteran housing officials say Albert instructed then-Director Tyrone Garrett to hold a competitive bidding process that would allow Moya Design to compete with the firm that drafted a pre-existing Master Plan—Torti Gallas + Partners (“Torti Gallas”), one of the nation’s top planners and architects of affordable housing—for a project that already had a procured developer but has languished for 17 years.

Though the Request for Proposal (“RFP”) specified five years of master planning experience, Moya Design scored higher than Torti Gallas by wide margins, on both technical and overall scores. Even today, the firm’s website makes no mention of Capper Carrollsburg, and lists only two projects under a section labeled “Masterplan.”

After making the award, DCHA increased the contract amount by 6 percent to $350,000, in 2020. Thus far, the only deliverable is a Draft Master Plan that housing officials, industry experts and members of the business community who reviewed it say is devoid of the kind of financial and economic analysis that informs a decision to go out to market and attain the maximum value of subsidized development—what public housing experts refer to as the “highest and best use.”

These revelations, reported for the first time by District Dig, come as DCHA has become a nest of insider dealmaking and a magnet for internal crises that are testing if not calling into question Albert’s tenure as Board chairman. Public trust of DCHA has been eroding for years.

Housing officials, affordable housing builders and housing rights advocates say that Mayor Muriel Bowser has all but taken over the federally funded, purportedly independent agency by enlisting Albert and her chief of staff and Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development John Falcicchio to exert control over DCHA management—specifically, Garrett.

Observers say that Albert, in turn, is allowing the city to take over DCHA’s public housing portfolio and spin it off to Bowser’s friends in the developer community so they can build mixed-use projects with so-called “affordable housing” units that are beyond the reach of residents who earn between zero and 30 percent of Area Median Income, known as “AMI.”

DCHA is the only entity charged with the mission to serve the neediest population, Albert’s critics say, though on the surface, it does not appear that he has made that mission his highest priority.

In 2019, The Dig exposed a land deal between DCHA and a Bowser crony who had secured the rights to purchase DCHA’s headquarters at 1133 North Capitol Street NE far below market rate, even as land value rose and contract extensions piled up, for five years. https://districtdig.com/2019/06/10/sweet-deal/

Last year, The Dig reported that the Board approved an outsized subsidy to the same insider despite a report by the Office of the D.C. Auditor (“ODCA”) titled “Low Ranked Projects Secure Affordable Housing Funds,” which found that DCHA selected that same firm and four others after ranking them in the bottom half of qualified bidders for other housing projects. https://districtdig.com/2020/06/10/easy-money/

Just last week, the Office of the Inspector released a report that said D.C. officials misspent nearly $82 million of affordable-housing funds intended for extremely low-income residents from the same fund that DCHA’s diverted projects tap into, raising further concerns about how the city awards contracts and to whom.

Over the past year, DCHA has been a constant source of bad news.

As reported by Washington City Paper, a whistleblower has alleged a violation of procurement rules involving KN-95 masks; an audit showed DCHA misspent funds on a a leading consulting firm for a “strategic plan” it never received; an internal auditor resigned and alleged that Garrett and others retaliated against her for refusing to root out ODCA’s source; and DCHA police officers reported incidents of serial abuse and sexual harassment by a ranking sergeant.

DCHA’s housing stock is in bad shape, too. Garrett himself admitted as much when he testified before the D.C. Council in 2019 that DCHA will need $2.2 billion over 17 years to ensure its 8,000 units are in good shape. 

Perhaps all of this explains why Garrett left DCHA this year when his contract expired. Or that his replacement is D.C. government veteran Brenda Donald, who lacks housing experience but who will protect Bowser.

The question in the public housing community is whether Donald will, like her predecessor, take directions from Albert, or whether Bowser has installed her to rein in Albert. 

***

A former senior policy advisor for lobbying powerhouse Holland & Knight, Neil Albert has served each of D.C.’s last four mayors as either a deputy mayor or city administrator. Prior to chairing the DCHA Board of Commissioners he served on the boards of D.C. Water and the Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority.

Throughout his career in the upper echelons of government and business, Albert has acquired a reputation for somehow avoiding or rising above controversies and scandals that have befallen others. 

This time, however, friends and colleagues alike say his approval of contracts for Moya Design is an unusual lapse in judgment on his part. 

The personal relationship between Albert and Moya is, in the words of more than one DCHA veteran, “the worst-kept secret in the building.”

Paola Moya describes herself on her LinkedIn page as “a visionary leader” who has “an eclectic array of design expertise, ranging from architecture, interiors and environmental design to product and graphic design.” 

The Washington Business Journal has recognized her as one of the area’s “Power 100 Playmakers,” a top “40 Under 40” professional and a “Minority Business Leader of the Year.” Both the D.C. and Hispanic Chamber of Commerce have named her “Young Entrepreneur of the Year.” 

Moya formed Moya Design Partners in the District on September 25, 2017, according to the Department of Consumer Regulatory Affairs–less than a year before bidding on the Capper Carrollsburg contract. The website describes the firm as a “multidisciplinary boutique studio producing creative work in the fields of architecture, interiors, and visual design.” 

Observers were surprised by how well the firm did in competition with an established architecture and urban design firm like Torti Gallas that specializes in master planning and affordable housing. 

In 2018, according to numerous sources familiar with the contract, Albert directed Garrett to issue an RFP for a new Master Plan so that DCHA could put the undeveloped Capper Carrollsburg parcels back on the market. 

His expectation, these sources agreed, was that Moya Design would somehow come out on top.

The original Capper Carrollsburg Master Plan dates to October 2001, when DCHA received a $34.9 million HOPE VI grant from HUD to redevelop the 23-acre public housing project as a mixed-income community. 

Torti Gallas completed the Master Plan in 2003, showing DCHA how it could replace some 700 units with equally affordable units, while developing market rate units, workforce housing and affordable rental and ownership units that would help finance its investment in the property.

This would allow housing officials to reassess the vision, landscape, and market conditions of the expanding Navy Yard neighborhood, and perhaps find a new home for DCHA’s headquarters.

Developing a Master Plan to bring a project of Capper Carrollsburg’s size out to market requires not just urban planning, architecture and design  experience, housing experts say, but also expertise in financial and economic analysis to assess the feasibility of the project.

The RFP, dated July 30, 2018, called for a real estate market analysis, a residential and retail/commercial market assessment by a certified market analyst, an evaluation of costs and a feasibility analysis, and an evaluation of grading plans, foundations, pipes, utilities, and stormwater management, among other technical tasks. 

The “Qualifications” spelled out in the RFP, Section B.2. required bidders to “have significant experience with large urban in-fill, mixed income and  mixed finance development projects.”

Section C of the RFP required bidders to provide a narrative of at least  three projects within the past five years that best demonstrate “experience with large-scale Redevelopment Planning and HUD Reporting,” and “experience with residential and commercial conditions assessments, zoning and markets assessments for public housing and/or assisted housing property(ies).”

The Dig could not identify three projects in the past five years showing “experience with large-scale Redevelopment Planning and HUD Reporting,” however, because Moya Design had been in business for less than a year at the time.

Even today, under the heading “Masterplan,” its website shows just two projects: One is from 2019, after the firm won the Capper Carrollsburg contract; the other dates back to Moya’s college thesis, in 2008-2009, which was “improved and rendered” during her leadership at a predecessor firm in 2016.

More troubling perhaps was the failure of Moya to disclose her close personal relationship with Albert, with whom she shared office space at the time. 

In her firm’s bid submission, on September 16, 2018, according to a copy of the certification, Moya signed a Conflict of Interest Certification affidavit for all bids/offers over $100,000 that attested, “No conflict of interest, real or apparent, exists.” 

Yet her firm’s “Best and Final Offer,” dated November 7, 2018, is on letterhead with a return address of “1275 K Street NW #1000,” which is Albert’s business address at the DowntownDC BID. 

The DCHA certification further states that under federal law, “no officer, employee, contractor or agent…shall participate in the selection, or in the award or administration of a contract supported by Federal funds if a conflict of interest, real or apparent, would arise…”

That statement, the certification states, applies to “His or her partner,” a characterization that numerous sources—housing representatives, DCHA officials, developers and a D.C. Councilmember—say is an accurate description of Albert’s relationship with Moya.

In the event of such a conflict, the certification goes on to say, the “officer, employee, contractor or agent” shall “fully and immediately disclose” the matter so an official determination by the agency can be made. Failure to do so “may result in immediate termination of any relationship, employment, contract, award or appointment with DCHA…”

In addition to the agency’s certification process, the HUD’s General Conditions for Non-Construction Contracts states that a conflict exists when an “Award of the contract may result in an unfair advantage,” or “The Contractor’s objectivity in performing the work may be impaired.”

Not surprisingly, final score sheets for the competitive solicitation show Moya Design blowing its competitors away, with an average technical score of 407 to Torti Gallas’ 107.66, and an overall final score of 135.66 to 107.66. (A third firm, Peter Filliat Architecture Inc., scored in the 80s on both.) 

None of these issues were discussed at the Board of Commissioners hearing on December 12, 2018, when, after Albert suddenly left the room, according to attendees that day, the Board approved the award. 

After missing the vote, Albert nevertheless signed and approved Resolution 18-37, that same day, authorizing Garrett to “execute a contract with MOYA Design Partners, LLC to provide Capper Carrollsburg Master Planning Services, for a period of one (1) year, in the aggregate amount of $305,883.” 

The following week, DCHA Contracting Officer Cheryl Moore sent a “NOTICE OF INTENT TO AWARD” to Moya, “CEO & Founder of Moya Design Partners,” once again co-located with Albert’s office with the DowntownDC BID at 1275 K Street NW, Ste. 1000.

Moya continued to work out of Albert’s office while under contract with DCHA (and other District agencies), according to a February 2019 media package with the same address that accompanied a press release for the opening of the “Downtown Day Center,” a rapid housing and supportive services project the firm did for the DowntownDC BID.

A Contract Modification on May 26, 2020, which extended the contract by an additional year and increased the amount to $350,000, shows that Moya Design Partners had moved to a different address by then. (The Contact page of the firm’s website still displays the DowntownDC BID’s office lobby. https://moyadesignpartners.com/contact/)

Still, the taint of a conflict of interest lingers.  

One definition of a conflict of interest, said At-Large Member Elissa Silverman, who sits on the housing committee, is a personal relationship that benefits one party because of the influence or authority of the other. 

“It’s a competitive advantage,” Silverman said. “It depends on the procurement process. Did he tilt the competition in favor of her company?”

“Why, as the chairman of the board, do you even create an appearance like that?” asked one veteran housing official. 

The answer to these questions, as unsatisfactory as they may be, perhaps lie in the rationale behind the RFP, the integrity of the contract award, and the quality of the deliverable. 

***

More than two years after receiving the contract award, Moya Design Partners submitted a Draft Master Plan, in March 2021, that developers and real estate finance experts described as a “rendering,” or what is known as a “massing study,” a blueprint  devoid of any economic or financial analysis that would support a decision as to whether to put Capper Carrollsburg back on the market. 

Which is the whole point of a Master Plan in the first place.

And rather than focusing on affordable housing for those earning below 30 percent AMI, it focuses on affordable housing as part of a mix of market-rate housing, commercial and retail space—which is not what DCHA is in business to do. 

It also reached the same conclusions DCHA had already reached some three months earlier, in December 2020, in a document titled “Capper Master Plan Update: Draft/Final Recommendations.”

Under a section titled “Why Update the Master Plan Now?” DCHA concluded that in the 20 years since it received the HOPE VI grant to build public housing at Capper Carrollsburg, “A neighborhood that in 2001 was isolated, is now ‘plugged-in.’”

Demand for smaller sized market-rate rental units had increased in the last five years, the document stated, while “The demand for affordable housing units (especially replacement units) is in larger bedroom sizes than the typical market-rate mix.”

Moya Design’s draft Master Plan, delivered in March 2021, also has a section titled “Why Plan Now?”

“[Market] forces in DC that were starting to gain momentum in 2001 have now fully taken hold,” the firm’s draft states. “A neighborhood that in 2001 could have been fairly-termed as ‘up-and-coming’ is now a community of opportunity with excellent public schools, growing market-rate housing, and a high level of job access.”

The 68-page draft goes on with a generic account of feedback received during five community meetings; boilerplate commitments to  affordability, sustainability and transit accessibility; and a rendering of “Zoning and site analysis concepts.”

The Dig spoke with Jon Fitch with the Landscape Architecture Bureau, one of Moya Design’s colleagues on the project. To call the draft product a Master Plan would be “gilding the lily,” Fitch said.

“We were there to work on ‘massing studies,’ which look at the basic geometry of the buildings,” said Fitch. “From our side it was quite limited. It was strategic for DCHA to figure out what to do with the remaining parcels, to the extent they were looking to spin them off.”

Which is exactly what DCHA plans to do, according to a March press release reported by Bisnow, a commercial real estate publication, during the Bowser administration’s annual event, “March Madness,” which features new initiatives “to build more housing, bring new food options to underserved neighborhoods and help people return to work.”

“Our goal each year with March Madness is to bring development to the areas in our city that need it most, and to think creatively on how to continue the development of our communities for D.C. residents,” Falcicchio, the deputy mayor for planning, said. 

Without a genuine Master Plan, it’s hard to say what that looks like. Tony Robinson, Vice President for Public Affairs and Communications, said DCHA is still working out details, but he stopped returning calls and emails when pressed for answers. 

Neither Moya nor Albert responded to phone calls asking for comment for this story. 

***

Despite questions surrounding Moya Design’s qualifications, the appearance of a conflict of interest, and, after two years, the firm’s failure to deliver a complete Master Plan for Capper Carrollsburg, Albert approved a far more lucrative contract in June 2021

This time, after being publicly challenged by his colleagues over the bid scoring, he voted to approve the contract and signed his name to the award resolution. 

Back on September 14, 2020, DCHA procurement officials issued an RFP for “Professional Architectural and Engineering Services” that also  required licensed architecture firms to have “a minimum of (5) five years of experience designing and leading multifamily residential construction or rehabilitation projects, including affordable housing projects.”

DCHA received 38 proposals in response to the RFP, for a contract of indefinite delivery/indefinite quantity, known as an “IDIQ” contract. DCHA would authorize up to  $27 million worth of contracts to multiple firms within two categories. A separate review panel would score the proposals for each category and select the awardees.

Category A, according to a September 29, 2020, Pre-proposal Conference, accounted for most of the authorized amount. It consisted of large rehabilitation and new construction projects over $5 million, with services including site planning and urban design; analysis of economic and environmental studies, censuses and market research data; field investigations to analyze land use factors; and feasibility assessments.

Category B consisted of small-to-medium projects under $5 million, with services including construction management and architectural/engineering services; space planning and interior design; and plans for redevelopment requiring technical services such as electrical, civil, structural, environmental, geo-technical and environmental assessment.

Technical proposals were required to include a narrative to demonstrate “Specialized Experience and Technical Competence” in five multifamily housing projects within the past six years. However, Moya Design’s own website does not come close to forming a credible basis for such a narrative.

The firm was still only three years old when it responded to the architecture and engineering RFP, and its website showed limited multi-family residential experience. Rather, its expertise consists of “all-inclusive design services in architecture, interiors, brand strategy and visual design,” with a strong emphasis on the latter.

Moya Design’s “Branding and Visual Design” portfolio consists of 79 projects; “Interior Design” accounts for 16; and “Exhibition and Design” accounts for four. That’s 95 projects that have little or nothing to do with architecture, and nothing to do with urban planning or engineering. 

The Dig was unable to confirm that Moya Design has any engineering experience whatsoever.

Under “Architecture and Urban Design,” the portfolio consists of two dozen projects, with a focus on the “urban design” of parks and public space, master plans, arenas, theaters, developments, convention centers and streetscape design.

Half of those projects fall under “Civic + Public Space,” and just four of those have anything to do with housing. Of those four, two are listed as “Designed under Paola Moya’s leadership as CEO of Marshall Moya Design.” 

Of the seven projects on Moya Design’s website that involve development of “Mixed Use” properties, three are from Moya’s time with Marshall Moya Design, in 2015 and 2016. Just two of those projects involve affordable housing—not including the Cartagena refugee project—and one of them is from when Moya was with a previous firm; One is from 2018, the same year as the RFP.

Something else is peculiar about the firm’s experience: In its submission to the review panel, Moya included at least one project, from 2016, that does not appear on its website, involving “Principal and Design Director FOR MULTIFAMILY ARCHITECTURE” Federico Olivera-Sala.

But Sala worked for a different firm at the time, not even as lead designer, according to a veteran housing representative who worked on the project.

And, as with Capper Carrollsburg, Moya failed to disclose any conflict of interest, “real or apparent,” despite a requirement for affirmation that “there exists no actual or potential conflict between the [contractor’s] business and financial interests and any commissioner, officer, employee, or agent of DCHA or DCHA’s affiliates or instrumentalities.”

Nevertheless, Moya Design was the top-ranked firm among a field of 21 in Category A, according to the award resolution, besting Torti Gallas and putting it in line for up to $3.75 million of the $22.5 million allocated to the contract. (DCHA later raised the single contractor ceiling to $4.5 million.) 

In Category B, which accounted for just $4.5 million of the overall contract—Moya Design came in sixth out of 17 firms that submitted proposals.

When the contract award for Category A came before the Board, on June 9, 2021, Thor Nelson, Deputy Chief of Planning, Design, and Construction with the DCHA Office of Contracts and Procurements, explained that DCHA needed an IDIQ contract to allow for task orders to keep up with more than $300 million in rehabilitation construction, which would generate more than $20 million in architecture and design contracts, according to a written transcript of the hearing.

This, Nelson explained, allowed DCHA to a preset fee schedule to avoid having to negotiate pricing with contractors he described as “a very strong, experienced bench of architects and engineers who had experience in multifamily construction and showed innovative design.”

Category A also would include land planning services and “a full suite of [architecture and engineering services] from pre-concept master planning all the way to construction administration.” 

Modeling the process after a federal procurement, Nelson said, “we gave heavy weight to the experience and technical competence of the firms over other factors…[so] professional qualifications and specialized experience were heavily rated to ensure that we were getting the highest talent in this contract selection.”

He described Moya Design as “a small women/minority-owned business within the District” that specializes in “innovative, affordable design.”

Torti Gallas, he noted, “has a deep experience in both HOPE VI choice neighborhoods and master planning and housing redevelopment.”

Commissioner William Slover asked for confirmation that no matter the size or scope, none of the task orders would come before the Board for approval. Then he took aim at the size and scope of the two categories, emphasizing that Category A firms were “bigger and have more financial capacity,” able to deliver full landscaping plans and architecture and engineering designs.

This would eliminate the need for subcontractors, Nelson noted.

“So, in following that logic, why would the firm that scored the highest in Category A score sixth in Category B?” Slover said, referring to Moya Design.

Nelson stated that the firm did not submit the same proposals for each category, and speculated that maybe its proposal for Category B was not as good as Category A.

Lorry Bonds, the Vice President of Administrative Services, added that separate panels evaluated the bids for each category, but Slover pressed further. “Okay, but you can see the—why that would stand off the page, right?” he asked.

“I can see how it can raise a question, yes,” Bonds replied.

Slover then wanted to confirm that competing firms were required to have been in business for five years as an architectural firm licensed in the District of Columbia, with experience in “designing and leading multifamily residential construction.”

“So the company has to have been in business for five years,” Slover said.

“No,” replied Nelson. “The lead principal of the firm could have been at a different firm being a project principal leading multifamily design…”

“That’s not what it says. That’s not what it says. It says the firm,” Slover replied.

“It’s the experience of the individuals, the principal, the designer, the project managers,” Nelson said. 

Slover wasn’t buying it: “I can take five people who’ve never worked together that could have the greatest credentials in the world. They still may not be able to deliver the project on time, do all the reporting, and do all those things. And so part of what you’re hiring is a company and the ability for the company to perform, not necessarily the individuals.”

Nelson referred to such factors as project management, management of subcontractors, relationships that show success, and the ability of the principals to work together.

“Well, without the benefit of having seen that, obviously you can’t respond to it,” Slover said, objecting to Moya Design’s lack of a pertinent track record. “But based on the RFP and based on the little research I was able to do, I have concerns about this process and the awards. 

“So I will not be able to support the resolution given the amount of money that we’re approving.”

DCHA planning chief Alex Morris chimed in to recognize Torti Gallas as “an industry leader nationally” on HOPE VI and redevelopment of public housing communities with the addition of wraparound services to address “non-housing-specific issues the residents may be experiencing.”

“They do affordable housing all over the place,” Morris said.

Nelson steered the subject back to Moya Design, and said it is creating buildings that are advancing residential amenities as a means of  “transformation of public housing into supportive environments.” 

He said DCHA was using a new selection process that follows best practice standards of design excellence modeled by [the General Services Agency].

“And we hope that we can get the same level of architectural excellence using this contracting process here at Housing Authority.”

Slover had one last concern; he asked if any of the competitors disclosed any conflicts of interest. 

“No, not to my knowledge, Commissioner Slover,” said Bonds.  

After some more general discussion, Albert moved for a vote. And with that, the Board voted 7-3 to approve the contract award to Moya Design, with Albert voting “Yes,” and just two commissioners joining Slover in voting “No.”

Time will tell who really runs DCHA, whether they are willing to honor the mission to build housing that the lowest earners in the District can afford, and whether compliance with procurement requirements means anything any more.

“DCHA strikes me as smelly,” says a member of the D.C. Council. “That whole place needs a cleaning out.”