Pubdate: Tue, 02 Apr 2002
Source: Advocate, The (LA)
Copyright: 2002 The Advocate, Capital City Press
Contact:  http://www.theadvocate.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/2
Author: Amy Wold

SOME EBR HOUSING TENANTS APPLAUD COURT RULING ON DRUG-RELATED EVICTIONS

The Supreme Court recently upheld a federal law that allows public 
housing tenants to be evicted if anyone in their household or a guest 
is caught with drugs in or near housing property. That rule applies 
even if the tenant doesn't know about the drug activity.

Residents in East Baton Rouge Parish Housing Authority facilities 
have mixed feelings about the decision.

"If they sign their lease and they know, then yeah, they should go," 
said Debra Moses, resident of Scotland Villa public housing. "Who 
would want their kids growing up around drugs? I don't want mine to. 
I wouldn't want kids seeing that."

However, others felt that evicting people who don't know about the 
illegal activity of a household member, or guest, goes too far.

Sharon Edwards, a resident at Capitol Square public housing, posed 
the question of what if you invite someone over and they bring a 
friend you don't know.

"What are you going to do? Pat everyone down?" she asked.

As the parent of four children, she said, she can imagine it would be 
hard to throw your own child out of the house when they have nowhere 
else to go. Instead, the Housing Authority should use some of their 
money to offer counseling to people who find themselves in trouble.

"This is the last thing before you get to being homeless," she said. 
"I've been homeless and I know what that is. I wouldn't wish that on 
my worst enemy."

According to The Associated Press, the Supreme Court ruling was the 
result of a federal lawsuit filed in 1998 when four evicted public 
housing tenants from Oakland, Calif., said the law couldn't have been 
meant to punish people who were unaware of any violation. The law was 
passed by Congress and signed by President Reagan in 1988.

In 1996, President Clinton ordered the Department of Housing and 
Urban Development to encourage stiffer enforcement of the policy by 
the nation's 3,200 public housing authorities. The law applies to 
families living in public housing and those receiving federal rent 
subsidies.

"I think it is fair," said Lilie Whitfield, a resident at Kelly 
Terrace public housing. "If they say they don't want them in here 
using drugs, they should be (evicted)."

She said if someone is in public housing it's because they need 
somewhere to stay. If they then bring someone who is using drugs into 
their home and get evicted, they've brought it on themselves, she 
said.

"When they put them in these projects, they explain all that to 
them," Whitfield said.

East Baton Rouge Parish Housing Authority Executive Director Richard 
Murray said the law is a good tool in protecting law-abiding citizens 
who live in public housing or receive subsidies.

"You don't want the drug dealers in your neighborhood. We all want a 
peaceful neighborhood," he said.

Although the Housing Authority tracks who is evicted under the law, 
Murray said Thursday that it would take several days to compile a 
total.

The law had been overturned by a federal appeals court last year, but 
the Supreme Court said the law is a basic tenant-landlord agreement. 
In addition, the decision said that if a person can't control drug or 
criminal activity by a member of the household, they are still a 
threat to the safety of the neighborhood.

However, the law does give housing authorities leeway on how to deal 
with a situation in which a tenant doesn't know a member of their 
household is involved with drugs. The law does not require that the 
tenant be evicted, but gives local housing authorities the ability to 
evaluate each case, according to the Supreme Court decision.

"Each case has its own merit, and that's how we need to look at 
them," Murray said.

Murray said the East Baton Rouge Parish Housing Authority tries to 
work with a tenant before going to eviction.

"We would ask to remove that person off the lease," he said. "If 
she's willing to remove that family member from the lease, we could 
ban that person from the property."

Edwards said that working with the tenant instead of automatically 
evicting them sounds fair, but on one condition.

"If they do it," she said. She expressed little faith that what 
representatives from the Housing Authority say they're going to do 
will actually get done.

Rev. Gennie Warren, resident at Kelly Terrace, agreed and said the 
Housing Authority should work with residents if they're faced with 
this situation instead of automatically evicting the entire family.

Although he doesn't think it's fair to evict the entire family 
because of one person's actions, he did agree that using the law in 
some cases would make a neighborhood safer and act as a deterrent to 
others. If a person agrees to get help, the Housing Authority should 
work with that person, he said, but in some cases the agency might be 
forced to use the eviction law.

"Keep in mind that it says may, not must (evict)," Warren said.
- ---
MAP posted-by: Josh