Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Current Events & Hot Topics Current Events & Hot Topics

Public Housing Authority instituting ban on smoking

Posted by   + Show Post

 JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -

Thousands of people in Jacksonville are finding out they will no longer be able to smoke in their own homes.

The people live in public housing, and a new rule will ban smoking inside their apartments.

April Cain and her family live in Blodgett Villas near downtown. She recently got a notice that says starting in October, she won't be allowed to light up inside her home.

"I think it's wrong," Cain said. "Just because it's run by the government, we should not be told what to do in our own house."

But that's exactly what the Jacksonville Housing Authority is planning to do. Smoking will not be allowed in the complexes the city owns.

"We are going to enforce it at the site level," said Frederick McKinnies, of the Housing Authority. "We have 23 sites of public housing in Jacksonville, and each manager will be required to monitor the situation. It's obvious when people smoke in their units, and some people are going to be reported by other residents, of course, and we will take the appropriate action."

That action will mean warnings and eventually could lead to evictions.

"But our purpose this first year is to be very flexible and work with the residents who want to quit smoking to provide assistance to them to do so," McKinnies said.

As expected, the news of the ban is getting mixed reactions.

"It don't bother me," resident Delores Ardley said. "A lot of that smoke, it irritates me when I be around it. So basically it don't bother me."

Derek Carson is a smoker who lives in a high rise. For him to smoke, he will have to go down 15 floors.

"I understand why they are doing it," Carson said. "I feel for people who don't smoke that have to live with people who do smoke, but still, there has got to be another way around it. And I don't know what the answer is, but I am willing to try anything."

Smoking areas will be set up outside, and for those who have a patio or balcony, they will be able to step outside. The Housing Authority will meet with residents later this month to go over the new policy, but some are saying it's just taking away their rights.

"If somebody wants to smoke inside, they should be able to smoke inside," resident Christie Krestalude said.

http://www.news4jax.com/news/smoking-banned-in-jacksonville-public-housing/-/475880/19972712/-/knw1rwz/-/index.html

by on May. 1, 2013 at 11:41 PM
Replies (11-20):
Della529
by Matlock on May. 2, 2013 at 12:07 AM
1 mom liked this

 No, not specifically.  But this...

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What does it say to you?  Would they not be in "their homes"?

Quoting Tag3.0:

 

The constiution mentions nothing of smoking in someone lse's property. If rental properties are allowed to have stipulation and regulations than so can the government. They are providing a service, at low cost to individuals, they must follow all rules while on government property. How is this no different. If these individuals want to smoke, tell them to buy their own home or move out.

Quoting Della529:

 Same questions:

What about Constitutionally?  Do you think these people lose their right to privacy?

Quoting Tag3.0:

Good, It's not their propert anyway, they should smoke out side. It ruins the property overtime, which is not good anyway, that is more money that has to be spent on renovation.

 

 

 

 

Tag3.0
by on May. 2, 2013 at 12:10 AM

 

They waiver some of their rights in the agreement to live in government owned homes. Its in their contracts.

Quoting Della529:

 No, not specifically.  But this...

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What does it say to you?  Would they not be in "their homes"?

chloedee
by Bronze Member on May. 2, 2013 at 12:10 AM
1 mom liked this

Would it violate their Constitutional rights to say they can't paint the walls black? That they can't have pets? That they can't sublet their space to other people? That they can't constantly have guests spending the night?

Quoting Della529:

 No, not specifically.  But this...

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What does it say to you?  Would they not be in "their homes"?

Quoting Tag3.0:


The constiution mentions nothing of smoking in someone lse's property. If rental properties are allowed to have stipulation and regulations than so can the government. They are providing a service, at low cost to individuals, they must follow all rules while on government property. How is this no different. If these individuals want to smoke, tell them to buy their own home or move out.

Quoting Della529:

 Same questions:

What about Constitutionally?  Do you think these people lose their right to privacy?

Quoting Tag3.0:

Good, It's not their propert anyway, they should smoke out side. It ruins the property overtime, which is not good anyway, that is more money that has to be spent on renovation.

 



 



Della529
by Matlock on May. 2, 2013 at 12:11 AM
1 mom liked this

 I don't disagree about damage.

My smoker won't fit through the door, lol.

Quoting Talee:

Honestly smoking in a structure can cause all kinds of damage. Besides the health kinds of things, there is tar that builds up on the walls and streams down when there is moisture, there is the smell that builds up as well. I smoke myself (hate it, but its true)...why wouldnt a landlord NOT want that extra problem? I don't blame them.

Its not like you're smoking a chicken or turkey every day in the house...am i making sense?

 

Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on May. 2, 2013 at 12:11 AM
Don't like it? Move.

Plenty of apartment complexes have rules like "no nails in the wall" "no music after 9" etc.

Don't like the rules then move...
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on May. 2, 2013 at 12:11 AM
2 moms liked this
Also... It's given to you.

Be thankful you have somewhere to live!
Posted on CafeMom Mobile
Della529
by Matlock on May. 2, 2013 at 12:12 AM
1 mom liked this

 Government leases are different?  Do you have a link to one?

Quoting Tag3.0:

 

They waiver some of their rights in the agreement to live in government owned homes. Its in their contracts.

Quoting Della529:

 No, not specifically.  But this...

"The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."

What does it say to you?  Would they not be in "their homes"?

 

jllcali
by Jane on May. 2, 2013 at 12:22 AM
Wah fucking wah. Not your property? Abide by the rules of the property owner. Don't fucking like the rules associated with living in someone else's property? Get your own property and make your own damn rules. This is why there are rental agreements.,
Mipsy
by Bronze Member on May. 2, 2013 at 12:51 AM
1 mom liked this
There's no smoking aloud in our home. We rent. It's not uncommon. It's not your own home if you don't OWN it!
Farmlady09
by Silver Member on May. 2, 2013 at 1:04 AM

While I don't really have an issue with landlords deciding what is/isn't allowed on their property, I don't think this is going to make much of a difference. HUD can't keep the illegal drugs out of their housing, and I doubt they will have much success at keeping the legal ones out.

There may be some initial 'reporting' by other residents, but once that dies down (and enough people get evicted), business will go back to usual.

I'd rather see HUD banned entirely. The only thing it's been successful at is driving all rent costs up, costing compliant landlords a small fortune ... and for landlords that rent to both HUD/non-HUD tenants, the non-HUD units end up with terrible conditions because all of the money goes towards maintaining HUD standards in only those units. I watched it happen on a daily basis in a property with 784 some odd units while I was working there. The rest of the places had almost all maintenance put off until floors were caving in from leaks, wiring was actually sparking, etc. HUD sucks ~ and the people who live in those units aren't even held accountable for damage (unlike other rentals).

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)