A few months back I mentioned the use of lead paint on products from China in Africa. The Guardian has
an article on the high levels of lead paint and poisoning in mostly black Baltimore.
But Saul Kerpelman, a lawyer who has handled thousands of lead cases, says these numbers don’t really show the extent of the problem. Those numbers, he said, are calculated based on a blood lead level (BLL) of 10 micrograms per deciliter (mg/dl). But the CDC has recently determined that any amount of lead in a child’s blood can immediately and irreversibly cause brain damage. Kerpelman said that if you cut the BLL number in half to the current threshold number of 5 mg/dl, there could be as many as 4,000 cases in Baltimore last year and if the acceptable lead level were set to zero, it could be as many as 10,000 exposed children. Kerpelman said that out of the more than 4,000 cases he has dealt with, “99% are black”.
And who owns the property?
Many of the same absentee landlords come up in these cases over and over again.
“If you type Stanley Rochkind into Maryland case search, his name comes up over 500 times,” Kerpelman said.
One of those cases was a suit filed by Freddie Gray, who lived in a Rochkind-owned home as a young boy and tested with a blood lead level of between 11 and 19 mg/dl. He suffered from the effects of lead poisoning, which studies have linked to decreased IQ and short and long-term memory impairment, causing numerous related social problems.
Rochkind? The same Rochkind in
this 2010 article?
“The consistency needs to be there in terms of fining these property owners. Honestly, some of them should be in jail. When you break a law enough times you should run the risk of coming before the judge who says you’re done,” she said.
Agreed 100%.
What I'm wondering about here is whether there is/was a situation whereby if a residence was found to have lead paint, it would mean that the occupants would have to leave. I do know that in some cases, like in Detroit with the water issues, inspectors and social workers would not report on conditions that would lead to removal (particularly of children) in order to not create a homeless situation.
On the other hand if the inspections would not result in a loss of occupancy (though I don't see how as the old paint has to be removed before new paint can be applied and anyone who's watched an HGTV show knows, you don't live in a residence while that kind of stuff is going on) then the inspector must be protecting the property owner. If that is the case, then I'd think that there could be RICO statute involvement.
Either way, Baltimore is suffering enough from low IQ persons causing mayhem. We don't need lead paint caused low IQ adding to the problem.
