Case Title: Powell v. Housing Authority of the City of Pittsburgh, Aplt (Concurring Opinion)

Citation: 

Docket Number: 

State: pennsylvania

Court: Pennsylvania Supreme Court

Date: 2002-12-23T00:00:00Z

Document:
[J-2-2002] IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT BEVERLY POWELL, Appellee v. HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF PITTSBURGH, Appellant : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 29 WAP 2001 Appeal from the Order of the Commonwealth Court entered on August 30, 2000, at No. 3073CD1999, affirming the Order of the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County entered on November 23, 1999, at SA 99-746. 760 A.2d 473 (Pa. Cmwlth. 2000) ARGUED: March 4, 2002 CONCURRING OPINION MR. JUSTICE NIGRO DECIDED: DECEMBER 20, 2002 I join in the holding and analysis of the majority, and write separately solely to emphasize that although HUD regulations authorize a PHA to terminate Section 8 benefits for violent criminal activity of a family member, they by no means require PHAs to do so. Compare 24 C.F.R. § 982.553(b)(1)(ii)(PHA “must immediately” terminate assistance when a household member has been convicted of drug-related criminal activity on the premises of federally assisted housing) with 24 C.F.R. § 982.553(b)(2)(PHA need only establish standards that “allow” the PHA to terminate assistance if a household member has engaged in violent criminal activity). In fact, the regulations make clear that in exercising its discretion to determine whether to terminate assistance, the PHA: may consider all relevant circumstances such as the seriousness of the case, the extent of participation or culpability of individual family members, [J-2-2002] - 2 mitigating circumstances related to the disability of a family member, and the effects of denial or termination of assistance on other family members who were not involved in the action or failure. 24 C.F.R. § 982.552(c)(2)(i). Moreover, when only certain family members are culpable for the criminal activity giving rise to the threat of termination, the PHA is specifically authorized to: impose, as a condition of continued assistance for other family members, a requirement that other family members who participated in or were culpable for the action or failure will not reside in the unit. The PHA may permit other members of a participant family to continue receiving assistance. 24 C.F.R. § 982.552(c)(2)(ii). Given these additional regulations, I believe that it is incumbent on PHAs to consider “all relevant circumstances” before terminating a family’s assistance based on the errant conduct of less than all of its members.