I'm a non-smoking, 45-year-long tax-paying resident of Cambridge, currently living in the Cambridge Housing Authority’s Putnam Apartment complex for the elderly and/or disabled, and I've just read with incredible pride last week’s editorial in your paper.

Because of a bout with cancer some years ago which decimated my savings, I found myself in the scary position of needing—for the first time in my adult life—financial help from others for housing, because there is not enough low-income housing available in our city.

I was raised to accept responsibility for my own financial needs and I not only did manage to do this all of my life, but after leaving Harvard I also started a non-profit music production company which supported me and provided employment for many others. I paid all of my federal and state taxes this entire time. It is these taxes that contributed to the CHA support for the same housing of which I now find myself in need.

To say I was grateful that CHA housing existed and that I was eligible to apply for a unit is a massive understatement.  Without this I would have been on the street.  But it was not just the provision of housing that meant so very much to me—it was the unexpected respect and real courtesy from the entire CHA staff that removed any sense of disgrace, any sense of being a second-class citizen, that I may have felt asking for this help.

Then, in June of this year, I received a "Notice of Proposed Lease Amendment" from the CHA informing me of a proposed change to my lease—the addition of a requirement that I accept a "Smoke-Free" policy as a part of my lease or face eviction.  My response was genuine shock.

I have never been able to make enough money to buy my own house, but I have always felt "equal" here in Cambridge—that I was truly contributing to this diverse society which did not determine the value of its citizenry based on their financial status.  And until receiving this proposed "smoking ban" notice I had never felt demeaned by anyone in Cambridge due to my financial situation—not even once.

Now I Do feel, because of my low income (and age, which limits my ability to attend the "discussion" meetings held during the summer due to the intense humidity and heat) that I really am a "second-class" citizen,and it is an awful feeling.

I personally no longer smoke but my brother (who is my only living relative and only regular visitor) does—and among other concerns, I worry that I will lose the comfort and support he has provided, a scenario which would cause me great distress. And I cannot avoid feeling that being told that my guests or I cannot smoke if we wish to in my own home is both a frightening invasion of my (and other CHA tenants') privacy—and a monumental infraction of our basic civil rights.  Further, I cannot help but feel that this smoking ban is a truly opportunistic discrimination the poor and elderly.

Nancy Talbott

Cambridge, MA