Binghamton Council Seeks Third-Party Investigation of Housing Authority Operations

Binghamton's City Council is calling for a third-party investigation into operations at the Binghamton Housing Authority, escalating a dispute that now spans tenant conditions, employee labor allegations and a stalled financing decision for a property renovation. Council members allege violations of New York state labor law by the authority that they say date back years, WBNG reported October 14.

Councilwoman Rebecca Rathmell said the reported violations include employee discrimination, pay inequality and wage theft. An independent investigation, she argued, would ensure allegations are examined and that any findings and recommendations would need to be addressed. "Those reports not only have continued from tenants and from employees, but they've escalated," Rathmell said. "We've seen the employees filing for their own union because of their full lack of faith in management."

The authority's leadership is resisting the framing. BHA president Charles Kramer told WBNG the authority has made efforts to respond to work orders, and he does not plan to request a third-party investigator that is not paid for by the council and brought to their lawyers. Asked about employee complaints, he pointed back at the workforce: "Some folks see it as, 'oh, I'm working for the Housing Authority, I don't have to work that hard.'"

TENANT COMPLAINTS PREDATE THE LABOR ALLEGATIONS

The council's move did not arrive out of nowhere. In 2025, members of the Binghamton Tenants Union accused the housing authority of mistreating tenants and neglecting properties, drawing up a petition and weighing a rent strike, WSKG reported at the time. Residents described mold and asbestos they said was not being properly addressed, along with rent increases they said made BHA housing unaffordable.

Tenants also told WSKG that amenities were disappearing, including in-unit washers and dryers, leaving residents paying for shared machines that did not always work - an added cost and, for disabled or elderly residents, an obstacle. One resident, Jesula Saintus, said dozens of tenants found they were dealing with similar problems and organized when the authority did not respond to requests.

Rathmell said she and other council members had been hearing from tenants more often since the spring of 2025, including through the Tenants Union, which raised concerns that the authority was not following some federal regulations. The new labor allegations now layer employee complaints onto that tenant record, which Rathmell says the authority has not addressed.

The authority's position throughout has been that it is working within real financial limits. Its explanation for the Saratoga Heights conversion - unstable annual federal funding and no access to long-term mortgage capital - is the same logic Kramer now uses on the PILOT: without predictable financing, he argues, properties deteriorate no matter how management responds to individual complaints. Critics answer that financing strain does not explain the specific condition and labor allegations, which is why they want them independently examined.

THE AUTHORITY AND COUNCIL ARE ALSO FIGHTING OVER MONEY

The investigation call lands in the middle of a separate dispute over the Saratoga Terrace apartments. Kramer raised concerns that the council has not yet approved funds for a reduced tax payment agreement - a payment in lieu of taxes arrangement - that he said is needed to rehabilitate the property.

"If it doesn't happen, what happens is that our population there, we can't move them into places that are falling down," Kramer told WBNG. "And then eventually we're just going to have to stop the property and maybe put it on the market for private investment." The warning ties the PILOT approval to the property's future, including a possible sale to private investors if the agreement fails.

Rathmell's response connects the two fights: she said the council would like to see the authority take steps to address the complaints before making the investment. That sequence - accountability first, financing second - is now the council's stated position, and it leaves the Saratoga Terrace rehabilitation schedule exposed to the investigation dispute.

A 42 MILLION DOLLAR RENOVATION RUNS THROUGH THE SAME FIGHT

The authority's flagship capital project sits inside the same conflict. The Press and Sun-Bulletin reported in 2025 that BHA was renovating Saratoga Heights, an 11-building, 100-apartment complex with a community building and medical clinic, in a two-phase, $42 million project designed to avoid long-term resident displacement. Work included replacing aging infrastructure, eliminating environmental hazards including asbestos, improving energy efficiency and revamping stormwater systems.

Residents' 2025 demands, published by the Tenants Union, went directly at that project's promises: immediate repairs, restoration of community areas, increased transparency and a freeze on rent increases. Tenants named problems at Saratoga Heights and Terrace, North Shore and Carlisle Hills - mold, accessibility issues and rent increases - as the grievances the renovation was not answering.

Executive Director Jean Westcott told the paper that year-to-year fluctuations in federal funding and the inability to access long-term mortgage capital make long-term planning difficult, which is why the authority was transitioning Saratoga Heights from public housing assistance to HUD's Section 8 long-term project-based rental assistance. That funding-structure explanation is the authority's own account of why renovations and rent changes are happening at once.

GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE EXPLAINS THE STANDOFF

BHA is a public agency funded mostly by HUD, and five of its seven board members are appointed by the mayor, according to WSKG's earlier reporting. The city council does not run the authority, which is why council members are reaching for an outside investigation rather than issuing internal directives.

The council has tried direct engagement before. WSKG reported that the council invited the authority's executive director to attend a council meeting to answer the complaints and she refused. That history helps explain why council members now describe a third-party investigation as the workable route: it moves fact-finding outside both the authority's management and the council itself.

Employees organizing their own union adds another governance pressure point. Rathmell's account - that staff are unionizing out of "full lack of faith in management" - is her characterization, but the union filing she describes is a concrete step that will proceed on its own track regardless of any investigation.

High staff turnover, which council members attribute to the reported problems, carries its own service cost at a small authority. Maintenance backlogs, recertification delays and lost institutional knowledge all compound when an agency churns workers, and that operational decay is part of what tenants described in their 2025 petition.

THE ALLEGATIONS REMAIN ALLEGATIONS

None of the claims - labor law violations, wage theft, discrimination, tenant mistreatment - has been established by a court, a state agency or an independent investigator. The council's call is for exactly that kind of independent fact-finding, and the authority disputes the picture painted by its critics, pointing to work-order responsiveness and questioning employee motivation.

Kramer's counter-condition also matters procedurally: he would accept an investigator only if the council pays for it and it is brought to their lawyers. That response neither accepts nor entirely rejects outside review, and it sets up a negotiation over who controls the investigation's scope and reporting.

The labor-law allegations themselves cover a wide range - discrimination, pay inequality and wage theft are different legal claims with different forums, from state labor agencies to court. Rathmell's argument for bundling them into one independent investigation is that only a comprehensive review can produce findings and recommendations the authority would be forced to address as a whole.

For HUD watchers outside Binghamton, the episode is a reminder that oversight of smaller authorities often runs through local government conflict rather than federal enforcement. HUD funds the authority, but the first line of accountability described in this dispute is a city council using investigation and financing leverage because it lacks direct operational control.

Whether any federal review follows is an open question. Allegations of this kind can draw HUD attention through complaints, audits or the city's own reporting obligations, but nothing in the public record this week shows HUD involvement, and the council's investigation call is aimed at the local level.

WHAT COMES NEXT

The immediate questions are mechanical but consequential for everyone involved. Will the council formally fund a third-party investigation, under what scope, and reporting to whom? Will the authority cooperate voluntarily or only under negotiated terms? And will the Saratoga Terrace PILOT decision move before or after any investigation begins, given that Rathmell has linked the two?

The employee unionization effort will proceed through labor channels independently of the council's decision. If workers file or have filed for recognition, that process generates its own record about management practices, which could overlap with or outrun any investigation the council commissions.

The tenant union's 2025 escalation options also remain on the table. Members weighed a rent strike last year while pursuing a petition, and no resolution of their core demands has been reported since. An investigation that substantiates conditions complaints would strengthen the union's hand; one that does not would test the council's next move.

For tenants, the dispute's practical stakes are the condition of their homes and the future of at least one property. The 2025 complaints about mold, asbestos, rent burdens and removed amenities remain unresolved in the public record, and the investigation call is the first formal step this year that could produce findings the authority would be pressed to address.