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 (41-50):
Woodbabe
by Woodie on May. 2, 2013 at 9:34 AM

The government (and their agent) is responsible for the upkeep, safety and standards of the facility. Someone is having to make repairs and clean the apts. between tenants. If they can't make rules against smoking and  the damage it causes, then why can they make rules against pets and other things that cause damage (like parking a motorcycle on the carpet).

Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:

Except that most landlords are private entities. This is public housing, the government is not the same as a private entity.

Quoting DestinyHLewis:

This is no different than the landlord you rent from stating no smoking is allowed in the home you rent. I see no issues here. 


 Sexy If its unladylike, fattening or fun, I'm in!
  

turtle68
by Mahinaarangi on May. 2, 2013 at 9:39 AM

it is public housing, government owned or specifically owned by the public for the public.

Are they exempt from allowing the public to have a legal vice?  when you sign that rental agreement are you now owned by the owner of that property....Is everything you do on that property have to be in line with what the owner wants?

Im actually asking ...not being a smart arse.  Here there can be no impositions from a landlord.  Even pets from houses that are equipped to take on pets (fully fenced with enough space for a dog or cat)  Houses that arent equipped can state no pets.  They can state that only one dog or cat is allowed but even then they have to give a reason why the tenant cant have 7 dogs.  Smoking cannot be denied in a rental home....however the agreements have loads of rules and regulations in regards to house hygiene.  Most rental agencies demand a 3 month house inspection.  And tenants have to pay a 4 week bond on top of a months rental when they move in...this is if the house gets damaged from tenant wear and tear and needs to be fixed.  Walls and ceilings washed or painted as well as carpets steam cleaned are a MUST clean before you leave the home.  

Its late and I have no idea if Im making sense any more...sorry.

Quoting Ms.KitKat:

 and to go with that logic, government owned housing is also "Public housing" (this is even noted in the second sentance of this OP)

Quoting turtle68:

government buildings are subject to the public and the health and safety of that public....a home is not

Quoting Ms.KitKat:

 The problem here is that it is not "their homes" it is government housing. I could be wrong about this (doubt it but I could be), that there is no smoking allowed in government buildings. (thinking ss building, dmv, etc.......)

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.

 



 

 


 


JoshRachelsMAMA
by JRM on May. 2, 2013 at 9:43 AM
Huh? What do you think about this then?

Fourth Amendment:

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.


Quoting UpSheRises:The constitution doesn't grantee anyone privacy.
Quoting Della529:
 What about Constitutionally?  Do you think these people lose their right to privacy?
Quoting chloedee:
Lots of landlords ban smoking indoors. If you want to smoke in your apartment or home, own it yourself. Until then, the person renting to you gets to make certain rules. 
 

 
Traci_Momof2
by Silver Member on May. 2, 2013 at 9:47 AM

 Saying "no smoking" does not infringe on the security of the persons and they are not doing any searches and seizures to enforce this.  Therefore, I don't see how this applies.  It's simply the owner of the bldg enforcing some rules on the tenants to protect the property from damage.  Seems very reasonable to me.


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.

 

 

 

 


 

turtle68
by Mahinaarangi on May. 2, 2013 at 9:48 AM


Quoting Aislinn:



Quoting turtle68:


Quoting Aislinn:

 They do not own the home. They rent the home. Landlords are allowed to ban certain things like pets and smoking. I just had to paint and clean a house a nasty smoker, who could not open a window, lived in. It does SEVERE damage to the property that takes a LOT OF MONEY to repair. So, I say, GO OUTSIDE. I have been smoking for twenty years and my ass lives in cold ass Maine. I go outside. It is that easy.

As much as I dislike smoking inside and have seen what smoking can do to a place that is rented.

This is what bond covers...renters pay a bond when they move in so that if the house has been ruined the money is kept to clean it.

I have also seen how clean smokers can leave a house....where they have painted it so they can get their money back.

Here landlords cant lay down a no smoking rule when renting a house.  Apartments yes...because of the safety of many others.  They can say non smokers please apply but not say smokers are not welcome to apply.  

 That may be true in your state, but that is not the case in a lot of states. Any landlord, for any reason, can ban whatever he wants as long as they do not discriminate based on race, handicaps, etc.. Smoking is not a right. Ruining someones house is not a right. My company has been paid by many a landlord that got screwed over by a smoker who ruined their premises. I find it disturbing that a state would protect people who can severely ruin someone elses property. That is the good old, US of A for you. We wonder why our society is falling apart. And, I just spent two weekends, in a row, cleaning and painting my new camp after a smoker destroyed it. I may have to rip out sheetrock in his room. Jury is still out. It is not the right of ANY person to DESTROY the property of ANOTHER person, ever.


Im in another country :-)  I think you may of missed the part where the tenant pays a bond ..which is basically to cover all cleaning and repair costs that may occur over the period that the tenant lives in the house...4 weeks rent on top of the 4 weeks in advance rental when you move in.  The landlord is to put that bond into a "landlords account" and cannot be touched until the house is vacated and they can prove that the house was ruined from wear and tear from the tenant.  Repaint and carpets is what the money is usually used for....IF that tenant has ruined something.

I agree people have no right to destroy anothers property.  Which is why ..here with most realtors there is a three month house inspection.  So a house could NEVER get to that state of disrepair.

chloedee
by Bronze Member on May. 2, 2013 at 9:54 AM
Is it "unreasonable" if you agree to it as a condition of your lease? No one is forcing you to live there. How is this any more "unreasonable" than the government saying you can't have 20 cats, can't paint the walls black and bright orange or remove carpeting, and can't have as many guests or tenants as you'd like?

Plus, no one said they'd be doing searches or seizures. Through smell alone it's pretty obvious when someone is smoking in their house.


Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:

Huh? What do you think about this then?



Fourth Amendment:



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.





Quoting UpSheRises:The constitution doesn't grantee anyone privacy.

Quoting Della529:

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

Quoting chloedee:

Lots of landlords ban smoking indoors. If you want to smoke in your apartment or home, own it yourself. Until then, the person renting to you gets to make certain rules. 

 



 

momto3B
by Bronze Member on May. 2, 2013 at 9:56 AM

Public buildings were the first to go "smoke free" .  The government is responsible for public health and safety and OSHA laws. It s actually surprising that it has taken this long to enact such policies in public housing. 


Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:

Except that most landlords are private entities. This is public housing, the government is not the same as a private entity.

Quoting DestinyHLewis:

This is no different than the landlord you rent from stating no smoking is allowed in the home you rent. I see no issues here. 



free1
by ~FreeSpirit~ on May. 2, 2013 at 9:59 AM

 How are they going to monitor everyone that Smokes(go door to door)?  Like some posters said already if you don't like the rule move somewhere else.

Something's not quite right about this rule. MO 

 

Mommy_of_Riley
by Jes on May. 2, 2013 at 10:09 AM
You can tell when a home has been smoked in. And when renting... The renters have to replace carpet and such because the smell sticks...

If I'm renting out a home or other building I say I have the right to tell my renters what they cannot do on the premises...


Quoting turtle68:

I think they should ban junk food as well and any outlet that allows internet and tv.  

Rules are already in place for maintainence and upkeep, cleanliness etc.

What the fuck people do in their own homes if its legal should be allowed not monitored.

Damn this is crazy...who the hell is going to enforce it?  How will they enforce it?  Will it be based on heresay...smell...ash found.

stupid

Posted on CafeMom Mobile
JoshRachelsMAMA
by JRM on May. 2, 2013 at 10:34 AM
A woman's "right" to privacy is also based on the fourth amendment as argued, would you apply your argument to that as well?

Quoting chloedee:

Is it "unreasonable" if you agree to it as a condition of your lease? No one is forcing you to live there. How is this any more "unreasonable" than the government saying you can't have 20 cats, can't paint the walls black and bright orange or remove carpeting, and can't have as many guests or tenants as you'd like?



Plus, no one said they'd be doing searches or seizures. Through smell alone it's pretty obvious when someone is smoking in their house.




Quoting JoshRachelsMAMA:

Huh? What do you think about this then?





Fourth Amendment:





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.








Quoting UpSheRises:The constitution doesn't grantee anyone privacy.


Quoting Della529:


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


Quoting chloedee:


Lots of landlords ban smoking indoors. If you want to smoke in your apartment or home, own it yourself. Until then, the person renting to you gets to make certain rules. 


 





 

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)