Apparently, Charleston, South Carolina faces the same problem:
The story of the Gadsden Green public housing evictions is as complex as itMisplaced outrage from a city council member sounds eerily familiar (they even have a President St. near their public housing):
In October, six boys, ages 14 to 16, were arrested for allegedly
confronting people on Wentworth Street late at night in two separate incidents
and demanding money. One of the victims was shot in the hand with a pellet gun.
The six youths were members of five families — all headed by women —
who lived in Gadsden Green. In signing their federal Housing and Urban
Development leases, the women had agreed that if serious criminal charges were
brought against any member of their respective families, the whole family would
be subject to eviction.
Last Saturday, Charleston City Councilman Wendell Gilliard held a rally forThe conclusion arrived upon by this columnist:
the five families at Nichols Chapel AME Church, across President Street from
Gadsden Green. About 50 people came out in support of the families.
There was a jarring disconnect Saturday between what I saw in that
small church and the reality of what was going on.
"I chose to work from the church," Gilliard intoned to his
constituents. He went on to invoke the name of Martin Luther King, Jr. He called
the eviction of the five families from public housing a lynching and said the
HUD code that made the eviction possible was a Jim Crow law.
Gilliard shamelessly played the victim card, demanding that HUD put
central air conditioning in Gadsden Green and revamp their eviction
Most of the talk last Saturday was about the rights of the five families. I wishand the 'second' from one of his commenters:
the councilman and his constituents had given some consideration to the rights
of the citizens of Charleston to not be robbed by young punks on the street.
What about our right to live in safety, councilman?
As an MUSC employee, that area west of Rt 17 would be better utilized asIt appears that HUD is perfectly willing to punish residents that commit crimes, so the "it's not Annapolis property" argument fails. That the administration denies that a problem exists is unacceptable, and that we would further allow offenders to live on untaxed property is an abomination. There are things that can be done.
privately-owned, tax generating, student and employee housing for medical
residents, as well as CofC students and faculty. Right now it's a blight which
we avoid for the obvious reasons, and we refer to the highway as the "moat" to
keep out the riff raff. There must be a more suitable location for
this population up the peninsula or in North Chuck. A lot of us used
to be social liberals but we've had it with having to constantly be confronted
by these creeps.