HOUSING:

U.S. strikes at landlord bias against children

HUD gets payments to families, message to apartment owners

Monday, Nov. 24, 2008 | 2 a.m.

HUD in Nevada

The federal government recently settled a complaint against the owners of Las Vegas apartments who allegedly discriminated against families, the third such case in the valley in two years.

The repeated cases involving hundreds of apartments mean “there definitely is discrimination against families with children” in the Las Vegas Valley, said Chuck Hauptman, a representative of the Housing and Urban Development Department’s San Francisco office of fair housing and equal opportunity.

He said the agency wants valley landlords to be on notice that this is illegal, a message that’s especially crucial when families with children are among the many seeking rental housing in the wake of the valley’s foreclosure crisis.

In the most recent case, which was settled in October, HUD, rather than the victim, had filed the complaint, indicating the alleged discrimination was flagrant and easy to prove.

The case involved Sativa Johnson, a 32-year-old mother of an infant son, who moved to the area in October 2007 from North Dakota. A $10-an-hour Wal-Mart employee at the time, she found the $465 monthly rent at Desert Rose apartments on 28th Street ideal. But when the manager told her she couldn’t move in with her son, Johnson decided to leave the boy in the care of her mother, who lives in Sacramento.

Six months later, that arrangement — calling six times a day, driving nine hours to visit her son on weekends — proved too much to bear. She left Las Vegas in June.

By that time, HUD had discovered Desert Rose’s policy and informed Johnson it was launching an investigation.

According to Bryan Greene, general deputy secretary assistant at the agency’s office of fair housing and equal opportunity, the federal government has been more aggressive in carrying out “secretary-initiated complaints” in the past three years. The idea is to take on cases that seem easier to prove and affect a lot of people.

“If we want to make wide-ranging change, we want to take on cases that can help the greater community,” Greene said. “These are cases where ... if you’re a large apartment complex owner and you’re seeing hundreds of tenants, you ought to know better.”

Desert Rose has about 240 apartments, he said. Management at the complex said only the regional manager for the limited liability corporation that owns Desert Rose could speak about the case. The regional manager could not be reached for comment.

In the past three years, HUD has initiated 28 cases nationwide; only six were filed in the two years before that. Those cases are based on alleged discrimination on the basis of religion, race, nationality — and families. Two of the Las Vegas Valley cases, including the one against Desert Rose, were filed in the fiscal year that ended Sept. 30; one was filed the year before.

The first one, concerning Summer Place apartments, also on 28th Street, was settled in January. The owners agreed to pay $75,000 total to four families the apartment management evicted or attempted to evict. Some of the settlement money was set aside to compensate any victims who come forth in the future. The owners also agreed to stop advertising the apartments as an “adult community.”

Similarly, at Desert Rose, the owners agreed to pay Johnson $30,000 and to set aside money for any other victims, as well as to stop the policy of not renting to children.

As for housing discrimination complaints made by tenants to the federal government, the share involving families has increased during the past three years, going from about 8 percent of all cases to 19 percent.

Greene said the federal Fair Housing Act allows owners or landlords to provide housing to seniors only, but in that situation, 80 percent of the apartments or houses involved must include at least one resident over 55. This was not the case in Summer Place or Desert Rose, HUD found.

Johnson now lives with a brother in Arlington, Texas, where she says, she is reconnecting with her 22-month-old son.

She said landlords who don’t rent to children “really affect people’s lives ... because it’s hard to separate kids from families for no reason.”

Kim Kendrick, the assistant secretary for fair housing and equal opportunity who initiated the complaint, said “40 years after the Fair Housing Act, a family with children should not have to move out of state to find housing.”

Hauptman said the issue is especially important in the current economic situation, with Nevada leading the nation in foreclosure rate 22 months running.

“The rental housing market has gotten tight and anything that puts up a barrier to families will only make things more difficult.”

Discussion: 5 comments so far…

By AbleTim

11/24/08 at 8:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

Outstanding! its about time someone set the bottom feeding landlords straight!

http://www.privacy.de.tc
By RBlackhawk

11/24/08 at 9:05 a.m.

Suggest removal

I worked for HUD Hqtrs DC for years. I could see that sort of thing could happen, it hard to enforce Adult Communities apts properties to allow families to rent apts. The property owners know the laws, tennants always lose out. I guess some property owners misunderstood the laws, and figured the adult communities properties are allowed to not rent to families with kids. since there were enough families apts, and section 8, and senior apts available in clark and Henderson Counties, I guess they assumed wrong, I assume the property owners will challenge the rulings based on they complied with the Zoning laws,and met the Percentage goals for clark and Henderson County for available apt rentals properties.
I assume owners are resistant to open rentals to minority families. I would think they may have the right to deny prospective tennants to rent if they cannot meet certain incomes or have a bad credit report number? But due to politcal correctness, counties will ignore that enforce opening rentals to families, section 8s etc?
By azsk8fan

11/24/08 at 9:45 a.m.

Suggest removal

I don't see anything wrong with Adult Only Communities and I also don't see why any homeowner, be they private or as in this case an Apt. Complex should be forced to rent to anyone they don't want to rent to. If I had a home to rent I wouldn't want to rent it to anyone with kids either - I still see the evidence of kids in the home I've been renting for the past 8 yrs - as much as I paint the closet doors the crayon still comes thru.
By TSCLV

11/24/08 at 9:47 a.m.

Suggest removal

As being familiar with this case. It should be known that these units are quad studios where residents share kitchens and bathrooms with strangers. The policy of the property had nothing to do with descrimination against children as the owners operates units all over the valley. It was a safety issue as the owners and management belive it was dangerous to have young children share a restroom with adult strangers. HUD interviewed every current and previous tenant and found one individiual who said they were descriminated against after she was told she could join a lawsuit and get a settlement. The case was settled as a business decision as the legal bill to fight the accusation would of been three or four times the amount to settle.
By Rebz

11/26/08 at 11:11 a.m.

Suggest removal

It's unfortunate that the Regional Manager could not be reached for the article, but then I wonder how much effort was really put into reaching this person. This article is a prime example of a writer playing on emotion and presenting a side that shows how our government, the savior of this country, is sticking it to these rich, elitist landlords and putting them in their places. However, knowing this case, the properties involved, and many of the owners, I can tell you first hand that it's simply not true.

Expanding on TSCLV's statement, Quad units are essentially four bedrooms that are rented. A bathroom is shared between two units/bedrooms, and a kitchen is shared between four units/bedrooms (thus the "quad" term). These are people who are renting a bedroom, not a full apartment unit or even studio. As TSCLV stated, it was a decision based on safety. Had the properties' management or owners not had this policy, I am sure you would have read way before this article how they had neglected the tenants' safety and put a parent and kid in a room next to some pedophile. The bathroom is not only the problem, but what if the kid went to the kitchen, which is shared with three other tenants to get some food and was lured into one of the other rooms. Then another lawsuit or lawsuits would have been presented.

This article is a prime example of government programs trying to justify themselves, enriching others at another's expense, and biased media propaganda pulling at our emotions without presenting all the facts. So good job HUD. With your ever-growing government power, you're well on your way to creating a Stalinist government that will protect the people from themselves. And thank you Las Vegas Sun for illustrating the greatness of our government programs and showing how, one by one, we can take down these landlords. Maybe we'd be better off with the gov't running low-cost housing and taking the landlords out of the equation. Oh, wait, we already have those - they're called The Projects - and we all know how successful those have been.

« Previous Ten Next Ten »

Live chat: Tuesday, noon PST; Chat with Krista Creelman; Problem Gambling Center executive director Krista Creelman will answer questions about gambling addiction from Las Vegas Sun readers from noon to 1 p.m. Tuesday, Nov. ... Submit question