WAR ON DRUGS GETS BOOST FROM POWER TO EVICT

'It's A Whole Lot Better, Honey,' One Community Watch Member Said

There has been a 50 percent drop in drug activity at two Northwest Roanoke
housing developments since the program began, police say.

"It was a living nightmare" at Afton Gardens when Sonya Hough moved into
the Northwest Roanoke housing development two years ago, she said.

But since Roanoke police's Community Oriented Policing Effort unit started
using a federally mandated "one strike" process there - and at neighboring
Hunt Manor 18 months ago - Hough says things have improved immensely.

"Now you don't even have to see the COPE unit. It's done got so good that I
think the community patrols itself. Most of the bad people, they're gone."

The federal policy, established by the Department of Housing and Urban
Development in 1991, says residents who live in subsidized housing can be
evicted if they are found to be using or distributing drugs on or near the
premises.

Based on crime analysis data, police found a 400 percent increase in drug
activity at the two projects from the summer of 1999 to the summer of 2000,
said Roanoke police spokeswoman Shelly Alley. In response, COPE officers
asked residents where drug activity was happening.

If proof of drug offenses are found, that information is given to property
managers, who in turn begin the eviction process. So far, seven tenants
have been evicted from the two projects and three more are pending, Alley said.

In addition, more than 50 people have been banned by police from the
properties and face trespassing charges if they are caught there again.
COPE Officer Rick Morrison said those are all non residents.

"These people are not up here on a legitimate basis," he said. He hopes to
get funding for digital cameras and laptops to build a database of those
banned.

While police and housing management argue the benefits of the "one strike"
process, David Beidler, staff attorney for the Roanoke Legal Aid Society,
says it has flaws. The program is widely used in the United States, he said.

Beidler has one case pending where a tenant was evicted because a guest was
found with drugs.

"Even if it's found that somebody was involved in drugs, it doesn't mean
the tenant should be evicted," he said.

An Oakland, Calif., judge in a 2001 U.S. Court of Appeals case agreed,
ruling that evictions were allowed only when the tenant knew or should have
known about the drug activity. That ruling is binding in nine Western states.

Recent cases in which evictions were overturned include that of a pregnant
San Francisco woman who was sleeping upstairs when police found heroin in a
guest's pocket, and that of a Fort Lauderdale woman whose grandson was
convicted of selling crack cocaine out of her unit.

Hough said she would tell police about a neighbor's drug activity even if
it meant they could be evicted, but when she learned that the same policy
that makes such evictions legal also allows them based on drug use or
possession by a guest, she was a bit skeptical.

"I know my guests on one level, so I shouldn't be held responsible for
them," she said.

Bob Farmer, regional manager of Artcraft Management Inc., which owns Hunt
Manor and Afton Gardens, said he knows there are gray areas in the process
but "the resident is responsible for all of their household members." Lease
agreements at both developments clearly state that guests are included.

"I think each case has to be looked at individually," Farmer said. All of
the evictions from their properties occurred after the tenant was convicted
of drug charges. So far, none of those tenants has challenged the evictions
in court.

In the summer of 2001, the drug-related activity dropped by 50 percent,
Alley said, and a neighborhood watch group was established.

"It's a whole lot better, honey," said Hough, a neighborhood watch member.
"It's wonderful here."