Massachusetts housing officials are facing new questions about how taxpayer-funded rental assistance is being approved after an NBC10 Boston investigation found that a tenant with a long history of evictions received public help while an elderly homeowner said she was left frightened, unpaid and trapped in her own house.
In a report for NBC10 Boston, investigative reporter Ryan Kath said the case centers on Jeanette Jackson, a 76-year-old Dorchester homeowner who lives upstairs from the first-floor unit she rented to Kenyatta Saunders.
Jackson described Saunders as a “tenant from hell,” saying the tenant did not pay rent, damaged the home, complained to city inspectors about the property, then allegedly refused to allow repair workers inside to address the problems.
The case is now raising a larger policy question: whether Massachusetts is doing enough to protect both taxpayers and small landlords when families receive rental assistance through programs designed to prevent homelessness.
An Elderly Homeowner Says She Was Afraid In Her Own Home
Kath reported that NBC10 Boston was there when Jackson finally walked through the first floor of her Dorchester home after the long eviction process ended.
The scene, according to the report, was overwhelming for the elderly homeowner, who reacted emotionally while surveying the damage and asking how anyone could live in such conditions.
Jackson told Kath that the ordeal stretched for more than a year, during which she said she had no peace in her own home and no steady rental income from the tenant downstairs.
When Kath first interviewed Jackson last November, he said they met on a park bench because she did not feel safe speaking inside the house.
“A lot of days I don’t want to get up out of my bed,” Jackson said in the report. “Because this is not a life to live.”
That sentence captures the part of the story that can get lost in policy debates. Rental assistance programs are often discussed in terms of budgets, eligibility rules and housing stabilization, but in this case the person describing herself as desperate and unsafe was not a large property company. She was an elderly woman living upstairs, relying on rental income to help keep her mortgage paid.
A Long Eviction History And Taxpayer Help
Kath reported that the tenant at the center of the case, Kenyatta Saunders, had a lengthy housing court record, with eviction cases across Boston stretching back more than a decade.
According to NBC10 Boston’s investigation, Saunders still qualified for Massachusetts’ HomeBASE program when she moved into Jackson’s property with her two daughters in December 2024.
HomeBASE is designed to help families avoid homelessness by providing rental assistance, including first month’s rent, security deposit support and a subsidy toward monthly rent based on household income.
The goal of that program is understandable. Families facing homelessness often need quick help, and Massachusetts has been under intense pressure from rising housing costs and shelter demand.
But Kath’s reporting highlights the difficult question state leaders now face: when someone has repeated eviction cases involving similar allegations, should taxpayers keep subsidizing new housing placements without stronger safeguards?
Attorney Tushar Schrier, who handled three of Saunders’ cases, reacted with alarm when Kath asked how someone with that kind of eviction record for nonpayment could keep receiving taxpayer rental assistance.
“Wow. That’s a question I can’t answer,” Schrier said. “I’m shocked. I’m horrified.”
The Tenant’s Response And The Landlord’s Loss
Kath also spoke with Saunders outside housing court and asked about taxpayer money being used in her case.
Saunders said she felt the money was being misused by property owners she described as “slumlords.”
That response points to another complicated part of these disputes. Tenants may claim poor conditions, landlords may accuse tenants of refusing access for repairs, and housing court often becomes the place where those conflicting claims slowly unfold.
But in Jackson’s case, Kath reported that the financial damage kept growing while the case moved through the system. HomeBASE eventually removed Saunders from the program last May, which meant Jackson no longer had money coming in from the tenant or from the taxpayer-funded subsidy.
Jackson, who lives on Social Security and depends on rent to help pay her mortgage, estimated the ordeal cost her roughly $80,000.
That is not a small procedural inconvenience. For an elderly homeowner, a loss that large can threaten the home itself, especially when legal fees, repairs, missed rent and stress are all piling up at the same time.
Another Case Raises Similar Concerns
Kath reported that this is not the only example NBC10 Boston has found while investigating what the station described as “professional tenants,” a term used for people accused of using the legal process and public programs to remain in housing while avoiding payment.
Last year, Kath said NBC10 Boston reported on Brian and Nicole Coombs, who received $23,000 in HomeBASE funding despite having more than a dozen evictions on their record.
One former landlord in that case said he lost $95,000 and had to sell his Reading home to get out of debt while the tenants lived in the property for two years.
“I use the law, and the law helps me do what I need to do,” one tenant said in Kath’s earlier reporting.
That quote is hard to ignore because it cuts to the fear many small landlords have: that a system built to protect vulnerable tenants can also be manipulated by people who understand how slowly the process moves.
There is a fair debate to be had about tenant protections, especially in a state where many families are one rent increase away from crisis. But when public money is involved, the public has every right to expect stronger review, follow-up and consequences for misuse.
State Housing Secretary Says Officials Will “Move Swiftly”
Massachusetts Housing Secretary Juana Matias responded to Kath’s reporting after a housing-related event at the State House.
“There are going to be instances where certain bad players are doing what they shouldn’t be doing,” Matias told NBC10 Boston. “And when that happens and that is brought to our attention, we’re going to move swiftly to rectify that.”
Matias said the state is “fully committed to program integrity” and emphasized that HomeBASE helped 12,000 families avoid homelessness last year.
She also said the Dorchester case described in NBC10 Boston’s investigation is not the norm.
“At the same time, we’re going to make sure that if there are ways that we can improve internally, our work to be able to prevent this from happening, that we do that as well,” Matias said.
That is the right posture from the state, but it will need to be matched by more than reassurances. If a person’s eviction history is visible in housing court records, and if similar patterns have appeared in several cases, officials should be able to explain exactly how those risks are weighed before taxpayer money is approved.
A Program Under Growing Scrutiny
Hayden Dublois, a public policy analyst with the Fiscal Alliance Foundation, told Kath that Jackson’s case raises serious questions about the integrity of HomeBASE.
Dublois recently authored a study on Massachusetts welfare spending, and Kath noted that one of the findings highlighted a steep increase in the HomeBASE budget over the past five years.
“The HomeBASE program is broken in a lot of ways,” Dublois said.
He asked how society allows individuals to abuse a system intended for people who are truly in need.
That is the central tension in this story. Programs like HomeBASE exist because homelessness is real, expensive and deeply damaging, especially for children. But when the state fails to distinguish between families who need help and repeat bad actors who may exploit the system, it risks undermining public trust in the entire program.
And once public trust erodes, the people hurt most may be the families the program was meant to protect.
The Larger Question For Taxpayers And Small Landlords
Kath reported that a spokesperson for the state housing agency previously said prior evictions are considered during the approval process, but do not automatically disqualify a family from receiving assistance.
That policy may be humane in some cases. A single eviction can happen because of illness, job loss, domestic violence or an emergency that spiraled out of control.
But repeated eviction records involving nonpayment, complaints, refusal of access and taxpayer assistance should trigger a much higher level of review. At minimum, small landlords should not be left carrying months of losses while the state discovers problems only after serious damage is done.
Matias said the state acts when cases are brought to its attention, but the better question is whether the state can identify red flags before an elderly homeowner ends up frightened on a park bench, wondering how she will keep her home.
For Jackson, the eviction finally came through in March, but the end of the tenancy did not erase the cost.
According to Kath, she was left with months without rent, emotional distress, property damage and an estimated $80,000 loss.
The state may insist that cases like hers are rare, and perhaps they are. But rare does not mean acceptable, especially when the warning signs were sitting in public court records and the money came from taxpayers.
Gary’s love for adventure and preparedness stems from his background as a former Army medic. Having served in remote locations around the world, he knows the importance of being ready for any situation, whether in the wilderness or urban environments. Gary’s practical medical expertise blends with his passion for outdoor survival, making him an expert in both emergency medical care and rugged, off-the-grid living. He writes to equip readers with the skills needed to stay safe and resilient in any scenario.
