I'm with you, Leigh. I love it when public housing receives funding for critically-important-but-too-often-overlooked capital improvements. I only wish this funding could support the creation of decent, affordable housing stock. 
In the Triangle region, where I worked and lived, there was a total lack of affordable housing in safe neighborhoods. This made our efforts to rapidly rehouse homeless families extremely challenging. 
Public housing gets a bad rep. But the fact that this housing is still home to many, despite the lack of upkeep throughout the years, says a great deal about the success of these federal housing programs. 

Public housings' bad rap is well earned. I used it for five years, and I would again if I needed to. Ideally it should be used as a place to live while you work 3 jobs, put money in the bank and/or get an education, and get Your family out of there! There are plenty of good people there, We formed a tenants organization, found money to build a playground, took kids on field trips, and cleaned the place up in spite of the housing authority fighting Us every inch. The people trying to change things were up against the authority and some dirt bag tenants. (yes, sorry but some people are dirt bags). 

Perhaps I should clarify before I am attacked by the overly sensitive. By "dirt bag" I am referring to behaviour, not anything anyone was born to. The majority, maybe 100% of my neighbors I tag with that nomenclature were of the same cloth as Me, all American mutt. I also recognise that it is not always a life long condition. I have seen people realize They were hurting themselves and their families and turn it around. Anyway by now I'm sorry I went so far off course.

I've never lived in public housing, but I've lived next to it in privately owned/managed housing with lots of tenants that are there through other housing programs (like Section 8) and I can see what he means.

Something is really backwards in how the laws for low income housing programs are written.  It's almost like the programs protect the problem-causers, meaning people like those who are violent, those who cause noise 24/7, the drug dealers, gang bangers, thieves, prostitutes, people manufacturing (or growing) drugs in their apartments, etc. - and not those who are living there trying to behave and (hopefully) better themselves and their situation.  Some of the best - and worst - people I've ever met (through volunteer programs) or lived with were on housing assistance of one kind or another, be it living in public housing or on a program like Section 8 in housing like my current apartment.

I'm eternally grateful to see SOMEWHERE finally do SOMETHING to make the long overdue improvements to affordable housing, even if it is all the way catty corner cross country from me.  I just wish that improvements would be made - and made publicly - to clean up the programs of crime before it's firmly entrenched.  I suspect this would help to remove one of the barriers to wider public support.  Many, besides Charlie and myself (and a wide variety of landlords and neighbors) have had the experience with the sorts of tenants we describe.  No one wants to have these people live nearby or to give them reason to come and stay...and unfortunately this is punishing all the poor.

My current landlord is slowly but surely evicting all Section 8 tenants and refusing to take new ones.  Why?  Because he's had so many problems with the ones he's had.  In just the time I've been here (OK, that's approaching 5 years), the problems have gone from tenants using their supposedly one person apartment as a flop house (and propping the security door open so any and all people could get in to the building for that) to prostitution and drug dealing that got traced to one resident who, because of gangsters "sharing" his apartment, had to be evicted by SWAT.  Normal measures for eviction on the grounds of nuisance - even when this egregious - don't apply to such tenants.  They've explained it takes 6-12 months of paperwork and documentation ON AVERAGE to evict even tenants such as these.  No wonder people don't want to live near public housing or take Section 8.

Danetta, It's a shame Your landlord has taken that stance. Maybe He has been unlucky, but most of the people I have met on public asst. housing have been pretty decent people, trying to get along. I have seen them take pretty good care of their homes even though they don't own them. I also would think there is an added stability with section 8, because at least the govt. portion of the rent should be pretty regular.

As he put it, if it weren't so (bunch of words deleted) difficult to evict problem causers like the ones I mentioned, he'd be happy to take it.  However, since it takes ON AVERAGE six-twelve MONTHS to evict them even with tons of proof...  He'd rather not, just to protect his building and those willing/able to at least try to pay cash.  Part of the problem is that those with Section 8 have brought so much police department attention to the building that it's kind of developed a reputation - and the vast majority of the trouble (not all, but just about all of it) traces to the Section 8 people...and the trouble is the kind that gets buildings marked as nuisances for things like drugs and gangs. 

Besides, honestly, I think he has a bit of an ulterior motive.  If the Section 8 people are gone there aren't as many outsiders paying attention to the condition of the building.  This is about a 100 year old building and let's just say that maintenance tends to be done in flurries when enough calls are made that someone like the Housing Authority or Fire Marshall comes through for an inspection. 


Also, this is where I'm not quite as familiar with the rules, but if the Section 8 people are gone aren't there fewer limits on rent increases?

You know I wrote a letter to Maine State Housing asking that renters be given a deposit program. I have not thought about NEW low-income housing.  That would also be a great place for stimulas money to go.  Maine's housing stock is older than myself. 60 years is fine  its even youthful for a tree, but not for a house. 90% of Maine's housing stock is over 60 years old.- without many new starts.

Some places call themselves low-income are designated as Low-income but charge $500 for a $700 apartment. I think it should be the other way around $200 for a $700 apartment.