MassHousing CEO Chrystal Kornegay speaks at a State House press conference on April 28, 2026. Photo by Ella Adams | State House News Service
Welcome to that vast, sleepy backwater of Massachusetts state government, the quasi-public agency.
The “quasis,” as they are called, are supposed to combine the speed, flexibility and drive of the corporate world with a public-sector mission.
In reality, quasi-public agencies too often combine the worst of both worlds: big salaries, fat expense accounts and lots of revenue sloshing around, with weak oversight and freedom from that basic mechanism of private sector accountability: the need to make a profit, or at least break even.
The latest quasi to find itself in the headlines for all the wrong reasons is MassHousing.
Apparent Fraud at MassHousing
Founded in the 1960s to finance the development of affordable housing and low-cost mortgages, the agency’s importance has increased in recent years with the escalation of the housing crisis.
In June, the Boston Globe Spotlight investigations team reported that MassHousing had awarded $1.4 million to two developers who submitted bogus invoices.
The invoices listed the names of several subcontractors who later informed the Globe that they had not done the work.
The apparent fraud, for which the two developers were paid more than half a million dollars as part of a $1.4 million project, left the multi-unit buildings in Pittsfield and Worcester they were supposed to rehab in poor condition.
It doesn’t stop there. Months earlier, according to the Globe, Anthony Richards II, the now-former MassHousing executive who awarded the two developers the money, got a sweetheart deal from them.
The one-time top aide to former Gov. Charlier Baker purchased a home in West Roxbury from the pair for considerably less than the original asking price. Richards, who made $255,000 before he resigned last month and had previously failed to disclose the connection at the time, a likely violation of Massachusetts ethics laws.
Richards, the Globe reported in a follow-up story last week, also oversaw a separate MassHousing sprinkler-installation grant program. The agency itself claims a sober home operator bilked the program for nearly $430,000 after supposedly falsely claiming he’d installed sprinklers in several sober homes. That operator, Vanderburgh Sober Living, denied the allegations to the Globe.
MassHousing has referred both cases to state Attorney General Andrea Campbell, who has launched a probe.
Kornegay’s Questionable Judgement
The question now is whether we will see a real investigation that digs into whether this troubling series of transactions was a one-off situation, or evidence of larger problems at the agency, and which also holds those at the top accountable, not just their flunkies.
That means taking a good hard look at how Chrystal Kornegay, MassHousing’s $392,000-a-year CEO, handled the situation and whether, barring the Globe Spotlight team’s work, any of this would have ever come to light.
Kornegay, who was named to her post 2018 after a career developing housing and a stint as a top Baker administration housing official, was herself aware of the questionable transaction nearly two years ago, according to the Globe.
In fact, Richards, then the vice president of equitable business development at MassHousing, told Kornegay in October 2024 about the transaction, claiming it was an innocent oversight. Richards insisted he hadn’t realized that the developers he had awarded the $1.4 million housing rehab grant to were – golly, gee! – the same ones from whom he bought his discounted home in West Roxbury, the Globe reported.
Yet, as it turns out, Richards had exchanged messages with the very same developers “about real estate financing opportunities” around the time he bought his home from them, the Globe reports, citing emails it obtained.
That undercuts an already weak story while raising the question – which the agency won’t discuss – of whether Kornegay took disciplinary action against Richards at the time.
What we do know is that Kornegay, after that conversation with Richards, told him to go talk to MassHousing’s lawyer, according to the Globe.
The Steps MassHousing Took
We also know that MassHousing had already taken action to deal with the shoddy projects a few months before Kornegay’s meeting with Richards.
An inspection ordered by the state housing authority had found construction quality issues with the housing rehab projects in Worcester and Pittsfield undertaken by the developers who had sold Richards his home at a cut-rate price.
MassHousing staff took steps to address the construction issues while overhauling the grant program Richards had overseen.
But there is more to the story here. Given the cozy, insider nature of Massachusetts politics, there is no guarantee that MassHousing will get the extensive, wide-ranging and unsparing investigation it deserves.
Kornegay contributed $1,000, the legal maximum, to Campbell’s campaign coffers on June 15 of this year, and in 2024 and 2022, a review of state records reveals. The eight other contributions Kornegay made were much lower, ranging from $500 to a Boston mayoral candidate in 2013 to $60 to now-former Lawrence Mayor Daniel Rivera that same year.
No one is suggesting that Campbell would skew an investigation because she received a few campaign contributions or that the MassHousing CEO would have similar expectations.
There are many reasons people give, including a genuine desire to support a candidate they believe in. But politicians certainly know who’s footing the bill for their campaigns.
Scott Van Voorhis
Will ‘Third-Party’ Inquiry Be Independent?
There’s another, more visible factor to consider: Campbell has not exactly been a profile in courage in dealing with State House bosses.
Campbell has fired off lawsuit after lawsuit against the Trump administration, but she is oh-so-careful not to rock the boat when it comes to the Legislature.
The AG has seemingly done everything she can to avoid getting caught up in state Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s attempts to examine the Legislature’s books and enforce the 2024 ballot question that 72 percent of Massachusetts voters supported. She’s gone so far as to tell DiZoglio she can hire a special prosecutor to represent the auditor’s office in her fight after being backed into it by the state Supreme Judicial Court.
And then there is MassHousing’s transparently cynical decision to hire the law firm Mintz to conduct a so-called independent investigation into the allegations.
When asked about the decision to hire Mintz for the job, a spokesman for MassHousing, said the law firm would conduct “a thorough, third-party review.”
Really? The last time we checked, Mintz has made a bundle doing work for MassHousing for decades. In 2024, for example, Mintz touted a $100 million bond deal it had “closed” for MassHousing to help finance the construction of new affordable housing.
That looks like a conflict of interest that is beyond laughable.
Scott Van Voorhis is Banker & Tradesman’s columnist and publisher of the Contrarian Boston newsletter; opinions expressed are his own. He may be reached at sbvanvoorhis@hotmail.com.
