Second thoughts on who handles discrimination

By Timothy Pratt

Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2008 | 2 a.m.

The state agency that handles job discrimination complaints will ask Nevada’s Legislature for the power to confront housing discrimination, too. That sounds like a good idea, but some experts say it could be a mistake.

The Nevada Equal Rights Commission hopes for a state law equal to the federal ban on housing discrimination. Currently most complaints go to the federal Housing and Urban Development Department’s San Francisco office because the state commission can offer little more than mediation in response to complaints.

The bill would bring Nevada into alignment with 37 states and the District of Columbia, which have local agencies authorized to go to court and levy fines against landlords found guilty of discrimination.

But the ACLU of Nevada and Christopher Brancart, a California housing discrimination attorney licensed in Nevada, say the bill could end up weakening protections even while apparently offering more on-the-ground help to Nevadans.

“It would be a bad deal for Nevada,” Brancart said. “This is one case where Nevadans are best served by allowing the federal government to continue” with the job of fighting housing discrimination. Brancart testified when the commission offered a similar bill to the 2005 Legislature.

The attorney said the state would have a hard time matching the decades of experience and resources HUD commands when it comes to investigating discrimination claims and the Justice Department has in litigating the issue.

Most states that have passed laws similar to the one sought in Nevada see “a loss of expertise,” he said.

Additionally, Gary Peck, executive director of the ACLU of Nevada, said the idea could expose the housing issue to partisan politics and the effects of shrinking state budgets.

“It’s a fine idea ... but in the midst of a real economic crisis ... the agency’s budget is likely to be slashed,” Peck said, affecting its ability to take on the task of confronting housing discrimination.

But Dennis Perea, Equal Rights Commission administrator, thinks those warnings are off the mark. He notes that the federal agency would pay the state $2,400 to $2,900 per housing discrimination case and offer money for in-depth training.

“There’s a well thought out capacity-building process,” Perea says. “They don’t just shovel the cases onto you.” Also, Perea plans to add an investigator if the bill becomes law.

Larry Bush, spokesman for HUD, said states with laws equivalent to the federal government’s benefit from being able to draw from both state and federal provisions on discrimination.

For example, if Nevada passes the bill and chooses to expand protections beyond the federal law, then a wider range of complainants would benefit from the additional enforcement, Bush said. The state could pass a law to ban discrimination based on sexual orientation or age, for example — two categories not included in federal law.

Also, he says, “anything that brings people closer to the government serving them is a plus.”

Nevada’s legislators should learn from other states before voting on the issue. That could provide clear information about whether the arrangement really benefits the people it is meant to benefit.