Bazelon Successfully Advocates for Federal Medicaid Dollars to Go to Community Integration, Not Segregated Settings

On December 16, 2024, the Judge David L. Bazelon Center applauded the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) for prioritizing community integration, quality healthcare, and oversight in considering California’s recent proposal to use federal dollars provided through Medicaid to build and operate segregated, residential settings that do not meet the state’s legal requirement to provide services to people with disabilities in the most integrated setting.

On August 30, 2024, Bazelon had filed comments with CMS expressing deep concerns about California’s proposal to use Medicaid dollars to build congregate settings, referred to as “enriched residential settings” (ERS), that would be populated exclusively or primarily by people with disabilities whose activities would be regulated and other restrictions imposed. The ADA and Olmstead v. L.C. (Lois Curtis) require that individuals with disabilities be served in the most integrated setting appropriate and not unnecessarily provided institutional care. 

Bazelon's comments argued that California has not made and is not making mainstream housing, subsidized and with appropriate supports, available to those it proposes to serve in ERS. In Bazelon's experience, these individuals could be served in such settings, like “supported housing,” with better results. Evidence and research also was cited that showed that a step-down model or “linear continuum of care” - where people with mental health disabilities are moved through temporary congregate settings before they are transitioned to independent housing - is not necessary nor effective. At a minimum, CMS was urged to impose guardrails limiting the use and size of these segregated, residential settings.

There was immediate progress. This month, in responding to the state’s application for funding, CMS denied California’s request for federal funding of ERS and instructed California to first develop, seek public comment on, and submit additional details on critical related issues such as how the proposed pilot will ensure people are placed in the least restrictive setting and how it will confirm service settings are committed to being truly integrated, with independent choice. Bazelon has praised CMS for its active and crucial oversight to ensure that people with disabilities are not unjustly segregated and instead can live and receive services in their own homes and communities.

Read the Bazelon Center’s comments (submission ID 2367).

Read the December 16 CMS response to California’s proposal.

Court Finds City of Anaheim Violated the FHA when It Blocked Permits for a Transitional Housing Development.

 

The ruling rebuked the City of Anaheim, California for imposing different standards on a local nonprofit, Grandma's House of Hope, aimed at providing transitional housing for women with mental health disabilities who recently experienced homelessness, an act labeled by the court as discriminatory. Despite the city's insistence on a conditional use permit (CUP) for the nonprofit to house 16 women, the court sided with the state and the nonprofit in a decision that signaled an end to tolerating such exclusions

The California Department of Housing and Community Development brought the case in 2022, after Anaheim officials rejected an application from local service provider Grandma’s House of Hope to open a new 16-unit facility for homeless women suffering from abuse and mental health issues. Although the city’s staff experts had recommended the permits be approved, city planning commission members voted the proposal down following a public meeting where people from the surrounding neighborhood railed against Grandma’s House. This February, a court found in favor of Grandma’s House. The Orange County Superior Court’s decision to overrule Anaheim’s denial and allow Grandma’s House of Hope is celebrated as a significant victory for fair housing in California, signaling that discriminatory practices and NIMBY (Not In My Backyard) attitudes will not be tolerated. Governor Gavin Newsom emphasized the importance of transitional homes in addressing homelessness and appropriately warned that communities refusing to allow housing for all Californians will face consequences.

Its original plan was to host up to 21 women at an 8-bedroom house in a single-family neighborhood on West Street near Anaheim's downtown. They would receive therapy and other services from seven House of Hope staff members, several of whom would be on-call 24/7 to respond to emergencies. The plan would be to move these women into permanent housing within 18 months.

The next steps in the legal process are now anticipated, as discussions venture toward potential remedies beyond the court's order. 

Read the February 3, 2024 Hoodline article.

 Fair Housing Enforcement News:

HUD CHARGES CALIFORNIA LANDLORD WITH SEXUAL HARASSMENT & DISCRIMINATION

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has charged the owner, property manager, and maintenance worker of a single-family property in Bakersfield, California, with sexually harassing a female tenant and retaliating against her when she complained about it, in violation of the Fair Housing Act. Read HUD’s Charge. The Act prohibits housing providers from discriminating because of sex, including sexual harassment - unwelcome sexual advances and comments, requests for sexual favors, and other verbal or physical behavior that is sexual in nature.

HUD’s Charge of Discrimination alleges that the maintenance worker harassed the tenant because of her sex, including daily sending her graphic sexual text messages and groping her in her home. After the tenant told him that the conduct was unwelcome and complained to the property manager, saying she planned to go to the police, the landlord allegedly refused to make critical repairs to her heating appliance, leaving her without heat and gas for a month. The tenant's daughter fell ill from the lack of heat. As the tenant was vacating her home, the landlord changed the lock on her door to prevent her from getting her belongings and refused to return her security deposit.

A U. S. Administrative Law Judge will hear HUD’s charge unless any party elects to have the case heard in federal district court. If an administrative law judge finds, after a hearing, that discrimination has occurred, the judge may award damages to the tenant for losses as a result of the discrimination. The judge may also order injunctive relief and other equitable relief, to deter further discrimination, as well as payment of attorney fees. The judge also may impose civil penalties. If the federal court hears the case, the judge may also award punitive damages.

People who believe they are the victims of housing discrimination should contact HUD at (800) 669-9777 (voice) 800-927-9275 (TTY) or the Department of Justice at (800) 896-7743 or 202-514-4713. Additional information is available at www.hud.gov/fairhousing and www.justice.gov.

Read the July 11, 2023 HUD release.

 Predatory Payday Loans

California to Regulate Fintech Payday Loans After Study Finds Exorbitant Rates

Some states are fine-tuning their financial regulations to regulate so-called "junk fees" from payday predatory loans that add up to hundreds of dollars a year, draining wealth from communities of color and other vulnerable users of fintech payday loans, many with less than $25,000 income.

To this end, the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (DFPI) has proposed new state regulations governing disguised fintech credit. It basically has widened the definition of fintech loans subject to stringent regulation. DFPI also has released new data showing the high costs for consumers who use earned wage advances and other fintech payday loans. Advocates have praised the proposal as a rejection of claims that these payday loans are not loans.

The resulting "junk fees" add up to hundreds of dollars annually, significantly draining wealth from communities of color and other vulnerable users of these loans, many making less than $25,000.

With this proposed regulation, California has officially recognized that earned wage advances and other fintech payday loans are loans, and that ‘tips,’ instant access fees, and other fees resulting in triple-digit interest rates are subject to state rate limits. Its data found that fintech payday loans, whether employer-based or direct to consumer, have exorbitant triple-digit APRs and force borrowers into the a debt trap cycle like traditional payday loans.

The study utilized data that DFPI has been collecting from earned wage advance providers and other fintech payday lenders, and found that: (1) Tips were included in 73% of the more than 5.8 million advances made to California consumers, and the APRs varied between 328% and 348%; (2) The APRs for advances from companies not accepting tips were between 315% and 344%; and (3) The APRs for companies that accept tips and those that do not are similar to the average APRs for licensed payday lenders in California.

DFPI proposed regulations that require providers of income-based advances, whether employer-integrated or not, to register with or obtain a license from DFPI; and comply with the fee and interest rate limits of the California Financing Law, which caps the interest rate on loans up to $2,500 at 30% or lower, depending on the size of the loan, plus lenders may charge an administrative fee that cannot exceed 5% of the advance. 

DFPI stated that by treating tips as charges, lenders who rely on tips and payday lenders and others who do not can compete on a level playing field.  Despite claims that ‘tips’ are voluntary, companies have ways of pushing people into paying. DFPI’s data evidences that workers pay heavily, with costs virtually identical to those of traditional payday loans. 

The regulations cover several types of fintech payday loans, such as earned wage advances that access employer time and attendance records (i.e., DailyPay, PayActiv, Even) ; cash advances that purport to be earned wages but have no connection to an employer or its payroll system (Earnin); and cash advances offered by nonbank banking apps (i.e., Money Lion, Dave, Brigit). 

Legislation recently introduced in several states, including Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, Nevada, and Vermont, would exempt fintech payday lenders from interest rate limits and other consumer protection laws. Many are based on a model law proposed by the conservative American Legislative Exchange Council.

The proposed rule also adopts requirements for education financing (including income share agreements (ISAs)), debt settlement, and student debt relief providers. ISAs are most often used to finance higher education by requiring the borrower to pledge a share of their future income, but costs can be obscured and can add up to far more than traditional student loans.

*****

Read the March 17, 2023 NCLC release.

Tue, Jul 23, 2019 at 3:26 PM

FAIR HOUSING NEWS

HUD Press Release: HUD Settlement regarding California Rental Discrimination

Dear Colleague,

WASHINGTON- The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) announced today that it has approved a $10,000 Conciliation Agreement between a California fair housing group, CADO Real Estate Group and LCG Harrington, LLC, the agents and mortgage company for Boardwalk Townhomes in Corona, California. This agreement settles allegations that Boardwalk Townhomes discriminated against African American home seekers. Read the Agreement.  

The Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to impose different terms or conditions on the sale of a dwelling based on race, color, national origin, religion, sex, familial status, or disability.

“A person’s race should never be a factor in determining whether they have the opportunity to obtain the housing of their choice,” said Anna María Farías, HUD’s Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. “Today’s settlement represents HUD’s ongoing commitment to ensuring that individuals in positions to affect access to housing meet their obligation to comply with the Fair Housing Act.”

The case came to HUD’s attention when The Fair Housing Council of Riverside County (FHCRC), a HUD Fair Housing Initiatives Program agency, filed a complaint alleging that fair housing tests it conducted showed that real estate agents for CADO Real Estate Group treated testers posing as African-American home seekers less favorably than testers posing as white home seekers. Specifically, FHCRC alleged that its tests showed that African-American testers were told that there were no homes available when there were and were required to meet tougher pre-qualification requirements than white testers. CADO Real Estate Group, LCG Harrington, LLC, and their agents deny having engaged in any discriminatory behavior.   

Under the terms of the agreement, CADO Real Estate Group will pay $10,000 to FHCRC, and its agents will attend fair housing training.

People who believe they have experienced discrimination may file a complaint by contacting HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at (800) 669-9777 (voice) or (800) 927-9275 (TTY). Housing discrimination complaints may also be filed by going to hud.gov/fair housing, or by downloading HUD's free housing discrimination mobile application, which can be accessed through Apple and Android devices. 

HUD's mission is to create strong, sustainable, inclusive communities and quality affordable homes for all. More information about HUD and its programs is available on the Internet at www.hud.gov and http://espanol.hud.gov. You can also connect with HUD on social media  or sign up for news alerts on HUD's Email List.

You can follow Secretary Carson on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram.

Fewer Homeless Veterans Using Shelters, Study Finds

A Quarter of Homeless are Veterans

Among the various findings in a just-released government report entitled "Veteran Homelessness: A Supplemental Report to the 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress" by the U. S. Department of Housing & Urban Development (HUD) and the Department of Veteran Affairs, as reported in the New York Times - are:

• Homeless veterans are most likely to be middle-aged white men with a disability.
• Younger veterans are more than twice as likely to be homeless than non-Veterans in the same age group.
• California has the most homeless veterans of any state, about 25% of the total.
• The number of veterans who used emergency shelters or transitional housing for the homeless in 2010 dropped 3% from the year before, to 144,842, from 149,465.
• Veterans continue to be overrepresented in the nation’s homeless population. They are 13% of all homeless adults in shelters, although just over 9% of the total adult population. Once veterans fall into poverty, a higher percentage of them become homeless, about one in nine.