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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.