Being White Was Not an Issue in This Ohio Race Case

Most of the time, housing discrimination cases based on race involve complainants who believe they were treated differently because they're not white. But a recently announced Ohio case reminds us that the Fair Housing Act isn't so limiting; this particular dispute actually arose because the complainants aren't black.

According to a recent press release from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), owners of a three-bedroom house in Warrensville, Ohio allegedly discouraged an Hispanic prospect — as well as a fair housing tester — from renting after asking her why she would "want to live in a black neighborhood." The owners, who are black, explained they've had "problems" renting to tenants of other races, and eventually rented the house to a black family.

The owners will now have to defend themselves against a discrimination charge before a HUD administrative law judge.

Common But Illegal: Bedroom-Sharing Restrictions Limit Families' Housing Choices

On Monday, I wrote an article for About.com on bedroom-sharing restrictions that violate the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) ban on familial status discrimination. The point of the article is that while landlords may need to enforce state or local occupany requirements, they must leave the details of children's sleeping arrangements to their parents.

Yesterday, a CBS report on housing discrimination in southern Florida reveals that this form of familial-status discrimination is alive and well.

According to the report, a mother with a two-bedroom housing voucher wanted to rent such an apartment at a complex in North Lauderdale. But the landlord allegedly insisted that she rent a three-bedroom apartment instead. Letting the mother and her two children occupy a two-bedroom apartment would mean either the children would have to share a bedroom with each other or the mother would have to share a bedroom with one of her children, arrangements which the landlord presumably wanted to prevent.

A local fair housing agency investigating the case noted that several apartment complexes in the area have attempted to impose such bedroom-sharing restrictions on new tenants. While not as direct as an outright refusal to rent to families with children, these restrictions are discriminatory because they limit families' choices, leading them either to pay more for an apartment or delay their search.

Government Fair Housing Report Shows Disability Continues to Top Complaint List

On Friday, the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced the release of its first annual report on the state of fair housing since President Obama took office. More fair housing complaints again have been filed based on disability than on any of the Fair Housing Act's (FHA) other protected classes, according to the report's findings.

Of the 10,242 complaints filed with HUD and its fair housing partners, nearly half (44%) alleged disability discrimination. The next most common basis for discrimination was race (31%), followed by familial status (20%).

In addition, the report noted that:

• This is the fourth consecutive year in which the number of fair housing complaints rose about 10,000.


• The most common issue (alleged in 55% of complaints) was discrimination in the terms or conditions of the sale or rental of property. The next most common issue was refusal to rent (in 24% of complaints), followed by failure to make a reasonable accommodation to allow a person with a disability an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling (in 22% of complaints).


• Aside from injunctive and other nonmonetary relief, HUD and Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) agencies obtained more than $8 million as a result of their enforcement efforts. In addition, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) recovered more than $850,000 in damages and civil penalties in Fair Housing Act cases that were investigated and charged by HUD.

Federal law requires HUD to report on its fair housing findings and progress each fiscal year. HUD offers a complete copy of its new report, entitled "The State of Fair Housing: Annual Report on Fair Housing FY 2009" through its Web site.

Inching Toward a Majority of Minorities

A couple of years ago, I blogged about how a U.S. Census Bureau report projected that a rising minority population will become the majority in the United States by the middle of this century.

A new Census report released yesterday shows that such a significant demographic shift is indeed still on track.

According to reporting from the Associated Press, the nation's minority population now comprises 35% of the total. As white baby boomers have aged, younger Hispanic parents are having children, driving population growth by accounting for more than half of total U.S. population gains last year, the report notes.

What effect will this demographic shift have on the need for laws such as the Fair Housing Act (FHA)? Will there be more or fewer fair housing complaints?

What do you think?

Interracial Marriage and Fair Housing

Interracial or interethnic marriage is reportedly at an all-time high in the United States.

According to a report published last week by the Pew Research Center, roughly one in seven U.S. marriages (14.6%) in 2008 were between spouses of different races or ethnicities. Among all newlyweds that year, 9% of whites, 16% of blacks, 26% of Hispanics and 31% of Asians married someone of a different race or ethnicity.

As the rate of interracial or interethnic marriage has more than doubled since 1980 (when it was at only 6.7%), most Americans (over 60%) reportedly say they approve — even when such marriages occur within their own families.

Landlords, property managers, and other housing professionals who discriminate against tenants or prospective tenants because they married or are dating someone of a different race or ethnicity than their own are violating the Fair Housing Act (FHA). (See, for example, "New HUD Charge Shines Spotlight on Interracial Dating," December 23, 2009.)

Have you ever been turned away from an apartment, been threatened with eviction, or otherwise felt discriminated against because of your significant other's race? If so, what have you done about it?

HUD Adds Certain State and Local Protections to Federal Grant Programs

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced Monday that it will require grant applicants in 2010 to comply with any state and local fair housing laws that protect against sexual orientation and gender identity, as well as lawful source of income. (Note: HUD later formally announced the source of income in a separate release issued June 11.)

(For a scrollable list of additional protected classes in the 50 states plus the District of Columbia, check out the "Protected Classes Tool" at fairhousingresources.com.)

In the past, HUD has required grant applicants to comply only with applicable federal fair housing and related civil rights laws, including the Fair Housing Act (FHA), Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act.

For more details on the new grant requirements, read HUD's official notice.

On Memorial Day, Considering Military Status Protection

Today is Memorial Day, a federal holiday when we remember the sacrifice of servicemembers who died protecting the United States. As some are surprised to learn, federal law doesn't protect servicemembers when it comes to housing discrimination.

A number of states and cities have enacted human rights laws to cover this gap in recent years. For example, Washington protects tenants and prospective tenants against discrimination based on "honorably discharged veteran or military status." Illinois, Cook County, and Chicago all go a step further and include military discharge status as a protected class.

Is it time for the Fair Housing Act to be amended to protect against discrimination based on military status? If so, would you be in favor of limiting the coverage only to current servicemembers and those who have been honorably discharged? Or is it best to leave these decisions up to individual states and municipalities?

What do you think?

Fair Housing Report Describes 2009 Efforts As 'Step in the Right Direction'

In an annual report issued Wednesday, the National Fair Housing Alliance (NFHA) announced that housing discrimination in the United States remained at a near-historic level in 2009, with the number of complaints surpassing 30,000 for the second year in a row. The number of actual violations per year, however, are estimated at four million.

Although the report concludes that greater efforts need to be undertaken to combat unfair housing, it also acknowledges government programs and initiatives that are "a step in the right direction." For example, the report notes a landmark settlement requiring that Westchester County, N.Y. build new affordable housing in segregated neighborhoods, and it points out that the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) filed its highest number of FHA lawsuits since 2002.

The NFHA also reported that 93 private non-profit fair housing organizations had nearly twice the caseload in 2009 as the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), the DOJ, and over a hundred state and local government agencies combined.

Read more about these trends and others in the NFHA's 2010 Fair Housing Trends Report, "A Step in the Right Direction."

Preferences Are Troublesome, Even if Implied

Apartment advertisements can run afoul of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) if they show a preference for a certain type of tenant — even if that preference is implied.

A Buffalo, New York landlord just learned this lesson after placing a Craigslist ad for an apartment in a "nice Irish neighborhood." He didn't write "Irish only" (clear discrimination) or "Irish preferred" (direct preferential discrimination), but his decision to use the language he did implies he would give tenants of a certain national origin, people of Irish descent, favorable treatment. Stated differently, people reading the ad who aren't of Irish descent may feel discouraged from applying, expecting that they wouldn't be welcome.

According to a report today from The Buffalo News, the landlord, without admitting liability, signed a settlement agreement with the New York State Division of Human Rights agreeing to pay $1,000 for the alleged bias in his ad.

Interesting to note:

• While under investigation for the offending ad, the landlord reportedly made discriminatory statements to testers in violation of the FHA's ban on race and familial-status discrimination. One white tester claims the landlord told her "there are no coloreds here... I hope your husband isn't black," and two testers reported that the landlord asked about their children.

Fair Housing Month: Compliance Training for Multifamily Professionals

Too often, good landlords, property managers, and other multifamily professionals are unfairly accused of housing discrimination when they did nothing wrong. Other times, housing professionals with the best of intentions make costly mistakes that could have been avoided with a greater understanding of fair housing compliance.

Fair Housing Helper addresses these situations with an online fair housing compliance training program aimed at helping multifamily professionals avoid violations — so they can focus their time and money on growing their business.

Fair Housing Month may be coming to an end, but compliance concerns last all year round. Sign up (with no obligation) at fairhousinghelper.com to be among the first to learn about the new training when it launches and receive special notification of savings.

That wraps up this special "Fair Housing Month" feature at Fairhousingblog.com. Hopefully, you found the series interesting and thought-provoking. You can read the press release for more information, if you wish, or access all blog posts in this series.

Fair Housing Month: Why Not Everyone Is Celebrating

It's Fair Housing Month, but not everyone is celebrating. There's no question that the Fair Housing Act (FHA) has proven itself over the past 42 years as a landmark piece of legislation that has helped thousands of victims of illegal housing discrimination across the United States. But, even after two significant amendments, the FHA protects people based on only seven protected classes — race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability, and familial status.

If you think that covers a lot of situations, you're right. But many individuals, advocacy groups, and politicians argue that the law doesn't go far enough. Several states, cities, and towns have succeeded in extending fair housing protection by including additional protected classes in their own anti-discrimination laws, such as:

• sexual orientation;
• age;
• marital status;
• source of income;
• military status;
• personal appearance; and
• political affiliation.

(For a scrollable list of additional protected classes in the 50 states plus the District of Columbia, check out the "Protected Classes Tool" at fairhousingresources.com.)

Do you believe the FHA should be amended to include additional protected classes? If so, which protected classes would you like to see added? How fair is fair housing if many types of housing discrimination are still legal under federal law?

What do you think?

Return tomorrow for the thirtieth and final part of this special "Fair Housing Month" feature at Fairhousingblog.com.