Family Forum / Parenting / Parenting / March 2007

This is a tale of Springfield, Missouri. It is the third largest city
in Missouri after St. Louis and Kansas City.

Old Monterey Apartments, owned by Edward Rose and Sons of Kalamazoo,
Michigan, located at 3108 S. Jefferson St., Springfield
(417-881-1334), is the largest apartment complex in the the area.  It
is probably home to the most families with children of any complex in
the area.  It was also home to two child rapists (anal rape and
deviate rape), a pedophile recidivist, a first degree child molester,
and a woman who committed "Lewd and lascivious acts upon a child."  At
this time the Resident Manager was a man named Tim Keiger.  Whether he
still continues in that capacity I do not know.

Here are the names, crimes, and the then Old Monterey addresses of
these pedophiles on July 7, 2006:

Steven D. Keehn
"First degree child molestation"
200 E. Montclair, Apt. 1B

Frank A. Kuhn
"Deviate sexual assault upon a child"
(This man had been living with Dustin P. McEntire, but moved to a non-
Old Monterey address on Luster before 7/7/06; McEntire and Kuhn had
been living at 203 E. Montclair, Apt. 2A)

Stacey Lynn Davis
"Lewd and lascivious acts with a child"
204 E. Montclair St., Apt. 2D

Dustin P. McEntire
"Sexual misconduct with a child second offense"
210 E. Montclair St., Apt. 3B

Wade Hampton Poole
"Forcible sodomy on a child"
619 E. Montclair St., Apt. 2B

The first four pedophiles were concentrated in an area on the west
side of Jefferson St., just north of the recreation area, which
includes a basketball court, a volleyball court, and the pool.  Wade
Hampton Poole lived in an area north of a school bus stop on the east
side of Jefferson St.

These people were all convicted sex offenders who were required to
register on the sex offender registry of the Missouri State Highway
Patrol, which is accessible on the internet.  Missouri does not
require sex offenders to notify the neighbors when they move into a
community, so unless one is savvy enough to periodically check the
registry, nobody will know they're there.

Edward Rose and Sons, owner of Old Monterey Apartments, which owns
complexes in a number of Midwestern states, had lost an appeal of a
Federal lawsuit alleging housing discrimination due to failure to make
their buildings accessible to the disabled on August 25, 2004.

On June 21, 2005, a tenant of Old Monterey filed a Housing
Discrimination Complaint alleging discrimination for Old Monterey's
refusal to renew the lease of the tenant.  The tenant, who suffered
from a serious mental illness, had walked onto his balcony, close to
where Keiger and another employee were planting a tree.  The tenant,
who was not fond of Keiger, asked the pair if they wanted "a
problem."  During the investigation, Keiger claimed that the tenant
had threatened to beat him and his employee up.

However, this allegation is contradicted by the letter Keiger himself
sent the tenant on April 8, 2005, following the incident, which reads
in part:

"Please be advised that this letter constitutes legal notice of a
lease violation provided by Paragraph(s) 12 g as follows:
"Commit or permit any act, or use the premises in any manner, that
will injure the reputation of the owner or owners property, or will
cause a nuisance to annoy, obstruct or interfere with the right and
peaceful occupancy of other residents of the owner.

Should these lease violations continue, your tenancy under this lease
may be terminated.  In which case, you are liable for unpaid rent,
court costs, attorney fees, and the remaining balance on your lease
contract.

You are expected to immediately cure the violations outlined in this
letter."

A copy of the letter was placed in the tenant's file.

The complaint was investigated by Lori Aduddell of the Missouri
Commission on Human Rights (based in MCHR's Springfield office), a
state agency which investigates complaints on behalf of HUD.  On
August 22, 2005, Donna M. Cavitte of MCHR issued a finding of "No
Probable Cause," which meant that MCHR could not find evidence that
the landlord had committed discrimination in refusing to renew the
tenant's lease.  The landlord had pointed to a number of leases that
had not been renewed around the same time.  He further said that the
tenant's lease was not renewed due to tenant's "confrontational
history towards residents and employees."  Evidence supporting this
claim, which the tenant had never seen and which was never discussed
with him, was accepted by MCHR, even though much of it was vague as to
date, etc.  In an email to tenant from Donna M. Cavitte, then
Executive Director of MCHR, she stated that although they try, direct
evidence of discrimination is often difficult to find.  Many
subsequent email exchanges with various state officials did not
produce any assistance to the tenant.  In an email dated August 30,
2005, Ms. Cavitte said, "I stand by my decision and have no obligation
to justify it to you unless a court compels me to do so."

The tenant obtained a copy of the case file of the complaint.  In it,
Lori Adudell noted that on July 25, 2005, she had visited the Old
Monterey rental office and examined a number of files randomly, noting
the contents.  The first file examined was that of Steven D. Keehn,
initial lease date 10/26/01, and under "Problems in File" was written
"None."  This man was in fact our friendly first degree child molester
as noted above.  A perusal of the case file contains no note that Mr.
Keiger (who had been employed by Old Monterey since 1997) or any other
Old Monterey employee informed Aduddell that they had a child rapist
and three other pedophiles on the premises, and that another child
rapist had departed only a short time before.

Although the Old Monterey website current on July 9, 2006, claimed
that "An applicant cannot pose a threat to the safety of others," and
the Old Monterey lease application states that the owner can obtain
criminal record information, nonetheless all of these sex offenders,
except Kuhn, were residents at Old Monterey at the time of the
complaint.

The question is:  were there ever any notes in these residents' files
that they were sex offenders, and if so why was that not noted in the
case file?  And if it was observed but not reported, why did MCHR not
consider that relevant to the complaint?  The actual reason that Mr.
Keiger refused to renew the tenant's lease (since the letter quoted
above is NOT a refusal to renew the lease) was that the tenant was
angered by the letter and had words with Mr. Keiger, who said he was
throwing the tenant out for arguing with him. It should be pointed out
that the Federal statute of limitations on filing an appeal of the
dismissal of the complaint has not expired.

The tenant has since moved on.  However, when the tenant made a lease
application to his new complex, Mr. Keiger told them on May 31, 2005
(before the expiration of the tenant's Old Monterey lease) in a fax
that there had been complaints and that he would not rent to the
tenant again.  Under the complaints section, the Old Monterey office
staff had actually said No, but Mr. Keiger crossed that out and wrote
in Yes.  Fortunately the tenant was able to secure a lease anyway.

I don't know what Mr. Kieger considered a danger to the community.
Disputes with landlords are very common.  I do know that in the
meeting with Mr. Keiger the tenant was treated to a tirade, and had
not only (against his better judgement) apologized to Mr. Keiger for
the incident, but had planned to ask for an accommodation, which
request the tenant was not permitted to present.  The case law would
seem to indicate that the tenant had the right to an accommodation,
but MCHR did not investigate that claim, although of course a fresh
complaint could still be filed on that basis.

I do know that sexual aggression against children has become a
pressing and pervasive problem.  It is the subject of TV shows and
seminars.  I am not a parent and cannot imagine what the mother and
father of Jessica Lunsford must be feeling.  I do know that parents
have a tough enough time protecting their children.  Why this
apartment complex, which was under no obligation to lease to these
people, plopped five of them down in the neighborhood (which has two
other apartment complexes and a retirement complex) is a complete
mystery.  Old Monterey is a particularly inappropriate place for such
individuals, as it rents to many families with one or more children of
elementary school age.

This is of course a précis of the situation, but it presents the main
points.  Live and learn.