The Housing Authority of Butler County’s plans to convert two of its housing complexes into Section 8 housing may be delayed due to its failure to meet benchmarks set by the federal government as part of the application process.

The authority filed applications with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to enroll two properties in the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) program, which allows public housing agencies to use public and private debt and equity to reinvest in public housing.

In the program, public units move to Section 8 with a long-term contract that must be renewed. This ensures that the units remain permanently affordable to low-income households, according to HUD.

The authority said the program would give it more freedom in managing its properties.

The housing authority in October 2012 submitted an application to enroll the Terrace Apartments in the program and was given a commitment to enter into a Housing Assistance Payment contract award in December of that year.

The authority then submitted an application for the Cliffside Apartments the following year.

However, HUD officials on Jan. 29 voted to send a letter to the authority providing a notice of revocation of the two previously awarded commitments because multiple benchmarks have not been met for either application.

Jacqueline Molinaro-Thompson, the director with the HUD office in Pittsburgh, wrote in an e-mail to authority officials Jan. 23 warning them of the pending review of the applications.

Molinaro-Thompson said in the e-mail that authority executive director Perry O’Malley failed to keep HUD up to date on the applications.

“Perry has been consulting and training on RAD with other PFAs (Public Housing Authorities) and in the meantime, ignored HUD’s requests and demands for information about his own PFA and provided incorrect information to the RAD team regarding the status of the (Capital Fund Financing Program) payment bond.”

Molinaro-Thompson recommended in the e-mail that the authority withdraw its applications before HUD revoked them.

Molinaro-Thompson said in an e-mail to the authority Feb. 4 that it is better for the authority to withdraw an application rather than have HUD revoke it.

She said the application would be placed at the end of the program’s waiting list under both cases, but said RAD reviewers take into account whether an application has previously been revoked.

The authority included the e-mails in the board member’s packets from its meeting Friday, although the board did not discuss the e-mails at the meeting.

But authority board member Jerry Andree said Friday the authority has not decided whether it would withdraw or not.

“Our staff is still in contact with HUD seeing if they can sort through everything,” Andree said, adding he expects the authority to know whether it will continue with the program switch by the end of March.

Andree would not say whether the missed benchmarks had anything to do with O’Malley being placed on paid administrative leave Jan. 15.

Niki Edwards, a spokesman with HUD, said withdrawing from the RAD program or having it revoked would not hurt the housing authority.

“It is a completely voluntary program,” she said. “The authority will not lose money if revoked. There would be no changes for the authority.”