News (Media Awareness Project) - US OR: Editorial: Stay Flexible |
Title: | US OR: Editorial: Stay Flexible |
Published On: | 2001-08-16 |
Source: | Medford Mail Tribune (OR) |
Fetched On: | 2008-01-25 10:48:49 |
STAY FLEXIBLE
Housing Authority can tighten drug rules without going too far
Jackson County residents who live in federally subsidized housing shouldn't
be booted from the program - and their homes - because of one minor misstep
with drugs. But residents with serious drug problems belong somewhere else.
The issue has emerged as the Housing Authority of Jackson County, the
agency that runs a program that provides government vouchers to help people
pay their rent, is updating the rules tenants must follow.
Some landlords who rent to voucher recipients want the Housing Authority to
enact a one-strike-you're-out approach to drug use: If tenants are
convicted of drug use even once, they say, kick them out of the program and
make room for people willing to follow the rules.
That's not how it works now. The Housing Authority allows a landlord to
kick out a tenant for suspected illegal behavior but also allows the tenant
convicted one time on drug charges to continue receiving federal funds and
rent again.
That's too lenient an approach in some cases. Jackson County, perpetually
short of affordable housing, has a waiting list of 1,500 families who would
like help under the federal subsidy program. It's reasonable to require
people to follow the rules to get the money.
At the same time, the Housing Authority needs to use latitude in deciding
how to treat drug convictions. More important than whether a tenant's
conviction is the first is how serious it is.
A renter convicted once of possessing an ounce of marijuana is less likely
to be a problem than a tenant dealing heroin. A tenant following treatment
for a drug problem may be better off in the subsidy program than out of it
and desperate for money. The Housing Authority should consider families as
well when deciding whether to boot drug abusers.
Some situations, on the other hand, call for swift action. People who cook
meth in a back bedroom or sell drugs to neighbors should not receive public
money to help make the rent. They should be out of the program the first
time it happens.
Thanks to the long waiting list for help, tougher rules about drug abuse
won't reduce the number of people helped by the subsidy program. What they
may do is show tenants that the Housing Authority is serious about drug
abuse by voucher recipients - and help make the housing available to those
who deserve it.
Housing Authority can tighten drug rules without going too far
Jackson County residents who live in federally subsidized housing shouldn't
be booted from the program - and their homes - because of one minor misstep
with drugs. But residents with serious drug problems belong somewhere else.
The issue has emerged as the Housing Authority of Jackson County, the
agency that runs a program that provides government vouchers to help people
pay their rent, is updating the rules tenants must follow.
Some landlords who rent to voucher recipients want the Housing Authority to
enact a one-strike-you're-out approach to drug use: If tenants are
convicted of drug use even once, they say, kick them out of the program and
make room for people willing to follow the rules.
That's not how it works now. The Housing Authority allows a landlord to
kick out a tenant for suspected illegal behavior but also allows the tenant
convicted one time on drug charges to continue receiving federal funds and
rent again.
That's too lenient an approach in some cases. Jackson County, perpetually
short of affordable housing, has a waiting list of 1,500 families who would
like help under the federal subsidy program. It's reasonable to require
people to follow the rules to get the money.
At the same time, the Housing Authority needs to use latitude in deciding
how to treat drug convictions. More important than whether a tenant's
conviction is the first is how serious it is.
A renter convicted once of possessing an ounce of marijuana is less likely
to be a problem than a tenant dealing heroin. A tenant following treatment
for a drug problem may be better off in the subsidy program than out of it
and desperate for money. The Housing Authority should consider families as
well when deciding whether to boot drug abusers.
Some situations, on the other hand, call for swift action. People who cook
meth in a back bedroom or sell drugs to neighbors should not receive public
money to help make the rent. They should be out of the program the first
time it happens.
Thanks to the long waiting list for help, tougher rules about drug abuse
won't reduce the number of people helped by the subsidy program. What they
may do is show tenants that the Housing Authority is serious about drug
abuse by voucher recipients - and help make the housing available to those
who deserve it.
Member Comments |
No member comments available...