Posted on 07/27/2002 7:47:02 AM PDT by vannrox
by Marie Szaniszlo
Saturday, July 27, 2002
The notice arrived yesterday giving Stanley and Eileen Green 30 days to leave their Chelsea home of 45 years.
Their crime? Having two cats.
Frank and Dianne Stephenson and their three children are expecting a similar letter any day. Their crime? Having a cat and a 66-pound German shepherd - 46 pounds over the limit.
They are two of dozens of Chelsea families who have suddenly found themselves faced with a terrible choice: give up pets they consider members of their families, or give up the only homes they can afford.
A new policy the Chelsea Housing Authority has adopted limits both the number and weight of pets at affordable-housing developments: Only one animal is permitted per unit, and cats and dogs must weigh no more than 10 and 20 pounds, respectively.
``I'm 78 years old. I fought for my country in World War II. And now they're going to take me to court and evict me for having one extra cat?'' said Stanley Green, who has refused to give up Pebbles and Velvet, the two tortoise-colored cats he and his wife adopted after their last two cats died of cancer. ``This is ridiculous.''
Housing Authority Director Michael McLaughlin could not be reached yesterday for comment. But according to figures the agency provided to the Massachusetts Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals, tenants of 46 of the 197 state-subsidized family units have applied to keep pets they own. Eight of them have received permission.
The MSPCA understands the reason for the policy change: a series of high-profile attacks across the nation that have resulted in serious injuries, and opened owners and landlords up to potential lawsuits.
But basing a policy on weight instead of behavior, MSPCA officials say, will only force out harmless pets and allow some smaller ones with behavior problems to remain.
``The instances where there have been problems should not reflect adversely on longtime, responsible pet owners,'' said Nancy McElwain, the MSPCA's ombudswoman. ``Their best bet is to use the dangerous-dog laws that have been written by animal behaviorists and that have been proven to work.''
In the more than 20 years the MSPCA has worked with housing authorities across the state, Chelsea's is also the first that has refused to make exceptions for the pets it has permitted in the past.
Three years ago, Ed and Sandy Muzarol received the authority's permission to adopt a German shepherd.
But two months ago, they were notified that they would have to get rid of Sheena or face eviction.
On the day before they took the dog to the pound, their 4-year-old daughter packed her bag and asked, ``Are you going to get rid of me too?''
``The kids are still just trying to get by day by day,'' said Sandy Muzarol. ``It's broken their hearts.'
'
Wow, a logical and just way to preceed . . . You don't work for the government do you?
People who join homeowners' associations are born socialists who can't get enough government in their lives. "Please, tell me what kind of fence I can and can't have! And what I can and can't paint my house! Take the burden of decision off my wretched shoulders, oh God-kings, that I might not make a wrong choice!"
Blech.
They should be saving their money to get OFF PUBLIC HOUSING and OUT OF MY POCKET!
I worked for a cable company for a while and we were upgrading the system for Digital phone, Digital TV, and broadband. There were special filters for digital TV, and I couldn't believe how many were in these Public Housing buildings!
They need public support to pay their rent, but they can have cable, digital TV, and high speed internet?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.