The Pentagon must stop dawdling on housing reform implementation

Three years ago, Sens. Mark Warner and Tim Kaine of Virginia worked to include sorely needed reforms for military base housing in the 2020 Defense authorization bill. The provisions — among them a tenant “bill of rights,” dispute resolution and increased oversight of private housing units on bases — made it into the final bill, a major step toward correcting intolerable conditions for many military families.

But reforms and policies are only as good as their implementation. A recent report by the General Accounting Office says the Defense Department has often fallen short, concluding the mechanisms to carry out the new policies are inconsistent across the services and from base to base.

In some cases, policies lack adequate information and education for tenants. Sometimes, changes are announced, but those expected to carry them out lack training and don’t know what to do. Sometimes, there aren’t enough people working to conduct inspections and other tasks.

In other words, the Defense Department and the branches of the military have technically complied with the directives in the 2020 law, but too often they haven’t done so in a way that effectively corrects the housing problems.

Now Warner and Kaine are, quite rightly, asking military leaders to explain why implementation of the reforms has been inadequate. They want answers, and they want the shortcomings corrected so that the reforms will become reality: strong policies and mechanisms that consistently provide those in military service with safe, quality housing.

The need for reform was obvious three years ago and, unfortunately, it’s still obvious today.

Back then, mounting evidence of unacceptable housing conditions on military bases — news stories, congressional hearings, studies — brought the problems to the forefront. One survey, arranged by the Navy, found that conditions in Hampton Roads, Va., were among the worst anywhere.

The problems go back to the mid-1990s, when Congress authorized the Defense Department to enter long-term contracts with private companies to manage, maintain and renovate base housing. The idea was that professional real estate managers would do a better job. Unfortunately, that hasn’t always proved true.

Housing was — and often still is — dilapidated. Leaks and water damage were common. Worse, mold, rats, lead and other threats made housing unsafe. Complaints and calls for repairs often went unanswered.

Sadly, those living in such squalor were usually the youngest, lowest-ranking enlisted men and women — often with young children — whose low pay meant they had to rely on base housing.

The conditions that prompted reforms would be unacceptable for anyone, but especially in housing provided for those who have volunteered to serve our nation. Decency, compassion and fairness demand that we do better for our troops and their families.

Common sense, practicality and the national defense also demand that we do better. The military branches are struggling to attract volunteers and to make it worthwhile for those who join to remain in the service after their initial obligation is fulfilled.

Dilapidated and unhealthy base housing certainly doesn’t help with recruitment or retention.

The GAO report is a reminder that these reforms are vitally important and must become fully effective as soon as possible. Changes that seem to satisfy the directives on paper but don’t get the job done are not acceptable.

The GAO is calling, among other things, for guidelines to help the services educate residents about their rights, how to get needed repairs and how to resolve disputes with housing agencies. It’s calling for better ways to get feedback from residents and to provide advocates for tenants. It recommends better home-inspection procedures and adequate staffing and training.

The sooner, the better. Those who volunteer to put their lives on the line to protect our nation should at the very least expect comfortable, reliable and safe housing.