CEO caught living in ARHA housing

[Anonymous]

The head of Alexandria’s public housing authority—tasked with managing homes for the city’s most vulnerable residents—is now under investigation for living in one of those very homes himself.
This week, City Council Member John Taylor Chapman called for an official inquiry into ARHA CEO Erik C. Johnson, who admitted to briefly residing with his family in a public housing unit in Old Town. The revelation has sparked serious ethical concerns and fueled public outrage, especially among tenants who’ve been demanding better living conditions from ARHA for months.
“I thought we had the approval to do it the right way,” Johnson said, claiming the stay was temporary and made during a family housing transition.
But according to ARHA’s own Board of Commissioners, no such approval was ever granted. In fact, the Board says it only learned of Johnson’s occupancy recently—and has since directed him to vacate the unit immediately.

[Anonymous]

So he was living in one of the nicer ARHA owned townhomes in Chatham Square (cook Street). GTFOH!

The article is confusing to me because I can't tell if he was 1) living there with his family and they all moved in together at the same time, or 2) his family members already lived in the unit, and he was crashing with them.

Do you have any idea how long it takes to get a Section 8 unit? Years. This is really bad. And he's not living in the ones by the Braddock metro where people get shot all the time. He's living in the nice townhomes that were built for ARHA that were part of the Chatham Square development.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

This.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

And they should be required to live in the dodgier ones. The ones that need improving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

I agree. This appears to be a paperwork question - he didn't get the requisite approval. It's not good, but it's not terrible either.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

And they should be required to live in the dodgier ones. The ones that need improving.

Exactly. It’d be well worth the cost to have them move every 2-3 years to make sure all of the buildings are getting attention. Go in alphabetical order and if one leaves, the next picks up at the next building on the list.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

And they should be required to live in the dodgier ones. The ones that need improving.

He was living in the nicest ones in Alexandria, a regular multistory townhome that is in the middle of a regular $1-2million TH complex. It was a section 8 unit in a market rate development. It’s was not in regular section 8 housing, like the ones by Braddock metro or off of Rt 1. This was deliberate.

[Anonymous]

God chose him to be the head of the housing authority. God wants him to live in a nice place!

[Anonymous]

There is a lot of corruption in the section 8 housing industry

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

And they should be required to live in the dodgier ones. The ones that need improving.

Exactly. It’d be well worth the cost to have them move every 2-3 years to make sure all of the buildings are getting attention. Go in alphabetical order and if one leaves, the next picks up at the next building on the list.

The rule should be that anyone in the program is allowed to swap units with him at their choosing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

And they should be required to live in the dodgier ones. The ones that need improving.

Exactly. It’d be well worth the cost to have them move every 2-3 years to make sure all of the buildings are getting attention. Go in alphabetical order and if one leaves, the next picks up at the next building on the list.

IDK if you can do this without some extra hazard pay or whatever that employees get who do not get to choose where and how to live. Because you are effectively making his life outside of working hours be dedicated to work, for which people are usually compensated. Like people who are military deployed or work on oil rigs or have to be live-in caretakers, etc, e.g. don't control their living conditions. It would have to be free housing to motivate people to do this and disclosed as part of a job.

[Anonymous]

These positions typically pay very well.

It would be interesting to see his gross pay.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Honestly, I think public housing leadership should be required to live in the different units as a condition of keeping the job. Yes, it would take out a unit for someone who doesn’t have other options. But it would absolutely improve conditions for everyone who is in if the leader had some skin in the game.

And they should be required to live in the dodgier ones. The ones that need improving.

He was living in the nicest ones in Alexandria, a regular multistory townhome that is in the middle of a regular $1-2million TH complex. It was a section 8 unit in a market rate development. It’s was not in regular section 8 housing, like the ones by Braddock metro or off of Rt 1. This was deliberate.

Nope. Just luck of the draw. Completely coincidental.

[Anonymous]

Just bananas. He should be couch surfing in a relative's home like the thousands of other homeless folks during a "housing transition."