The Maryland Commission on Civil Rights & White Marsh Mall Successfully Conciliate Accessibility Complaint

 

November 13, 2024

In a landmark moment for accessibility and inclusion, the Maryland Commission on Civil Rights (MCCR) has successfully resolved an accessibility case at White Marsh Mall, highlighting its commitment to equal access for all patrons. In 2019, a mall visitor seeking access to the food court discovered that parking spaces designated for people with disabilities had been replaced by electric vehicle charging stations, forcing her to go more than 100 feet from the nearest reserved space. She reached out to MCCR. Guided by MCCR’s Advanced Lead Investigator Ryan Murray, the Commission conducted a thorough investigation, issuing a finding of Probable Cause. Through understanding and empathy, White Marsh Mall then agreed to reinstate accessible parking close to the food court and to address additional barriers, to ensure a welcoming environment for all visitors. “This successful conciliation is more than a solution; it’s a testament to the power of collaboration, advocacy, and a respect for all Marylanders,” said Cleveland L. Horton II, Executive Director of MCCR. “Accessibility is not just a compliance issue; it is a reflection of our commitment to equity and inclusion. By working together, we’re building a state where every resident and visitor can fully participate in public life without barriers.” Murray, who played a pivotal role in this case, expressed admiration for everyone involved. “I am grateful for the courage of the Complainant, who spoke up not only for herself, but for the countless others who may face similar challenges. Her actions demonstrate the importance of standing up for accessibility and inclusivity.” This positive resolution represents Maryland’s dedication to creating spaces that honor the diversity and dignity of all its residents. MCCR's mission is to make Maryland a place free of any unlawful discrimination and where everyone feels they belong.

Victim of Discrimination? Training & Partnerships

HOME      ABOUT MCCR      SERVICES      PUBLICATIONS      EVENTS      PRESS      CONTACT US

Read the November 13, 2024 MCCR press release.

HUD Approves $115,000 Settlement with the City and County of Denver, Colorado, Resolving Claim of Disability Discrimination

 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has entered into a Voluntary Compliance Agreement / Conciliation Agreement with HUD grantees, the City and County of Denver, Denver’s Office of Community Planning and Development, and Denver’s Board of Adjustments. This Agreement resolves findings related to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and the Americans with Disabilities Act and the remaining allegations of violations under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, Section 109 of Title I of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and the Fair Housing Act. Read the Agreement, the Letter of Findings of Noncompliance, and the Revised Formal Determination of Noncompliance.

The Agreement resolves allegations that the Respondents violated the Fair Housing Act and were in noncompliance with Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (Section 504), Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), Section 109 of the Housing and Community Development Act of 1974, and Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, by denying a Denver, Colorado, household a variance to the Denver Zoning Code to construct an Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) to meet the disability-related needs of a household member. Federal nondiscrimination laws prohibit disability discrimination against homeowners without disabilities who live or are associated with individuals with disabilities.

The agreement stems from a complaint that was filed by a same-sex, mixed race couple who applied to the City of Denver for a variance to the City’s ADU zoning code to construct an ADU with necessary accessibility features - a reasonable accommodation for the disabled mother of one of the Complainants. The complaint also alleged that the City’s reasonable accommodation request denial was based on the Complainants’ race and sexual orientation.

HUD conducted an investigation and issued a Letter of Findings in 2022 which found that the Respondents were in noncompliance with Section 504 and the ADA with respect to the City’s zoning processes. HUD found that the City violated its obligations under Section 504 and the ADA by failing to provide a reasonable accommodation to the Complainants and by lacking sufficient mechanisms to ensure compliance with its obligations to provide reasonable accommodations, resulting in discrimination against individuals with disabilities under Section 504 and the ADA.

Under the terms of the agreement, the Respondents will: (1) pay $115,000 to the Complainants; and (2) create a reasonable accommodation policy and guidelines within the City of Denver’s Office of Community Planning and Development, including tracking reasonable accommodations requests, and complete training requirements. As a result of the complaint, during the investigation the City revised its Zoning Code, which required a ballot initiative to amend the City of Denver’s Charter to change the Zoning Code to comply with the Fair Housing Act, Section 504, and the ADA.

Read the November 8, 2024 HUD release.

HUD Charges Macon, Georgia, Property Owner, Property Management Company, and Property Manager with Disability Discrimination

 

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has charged Macon, Georgia, property owner, property management company, and property manager, Macon MF, LLC, Active Property Management LLC, and Michael Bailey, with discrimination against a tenant because of her disability. HUD also charged them with retaliating against the tenant. Read HUD’s Charge.

HUD’s Charge of Discrimination alleges that the Respondents did not grant required reasonable accommodations when the Complainant requested an assistance animal and an alternate bathroom while the Respondents were renovating the sole bathroom in her unit. The Charge also alleges that the Respondents terminated her tenancy in retaliation for requesting the reasonable accommodations.

HUD's charge will be heard by a U.S. Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) unless any party to the charge elects to have the case heard in federal district court. If an ALJ finds after a hearing that retaliation has occurred, they may award damages to the complainant for harm caused by discrimination, injunctive relief, other equitable relief, payment of attorney fees, and fines. If the Charge is decided in federal court, punitive damages may also be assessed.

People who believe they are the victims of housing discrimination should contact HUD at (800) 669-9777 (voice) or (800) 927-9275 (TTY). More info: www.hud.gov/fairhousing. Housing providers and other interested persons can learn more about their responsibility to provide reasonable accommodations and reasonable modifications to individuals with disabilities here. Materials and assistance are available for persons with limited English proficiency. Individuals who are deaf or hard of hearing can contact HUD using the Federal Relay Service at (800) 877-8339.

Read the November 7, 2024 HUD release.

HUD Charges Owner & Operators of New Hampshire Apartment Buildings with Disability Discrimination

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has charged Good Team Realty LLC, Jack O Cohen Revocable Trust, and Jack Cohen, owners and operators of more than 40 rental apartments in New Hampshire, with discriminating against potential tenants because of disability. The Charge alleges that the Respondents violated the Fair Housing Act by refusing to negotiate for and show an available apartment to prospective tenants who used assistance animals for their disabilities. Read HUD’s Charge.

“In 1988 the Fair Housing Act was extended to protect persons from discrimination in housing because of a disability, yet people with disabilities continue to be subjected to discriminatory treatment,” said Diane M. Shelley, HUD’s Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary for Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity. "Today's action demonstrates HUD's ongoing commitment to take appropriate action when housing providers fail to comply with the Fair Housing Act."

HUD’s Charge of Discrimination alleges that the Complainants spoke with property owner, Jack Cohen, about renting an apartment and that during the conversation the Complainants revealed that they had an assistance animal. The Charge further alleges that the Complainants arranged to meet Mr. Cohen to view the apartment but that Mr. Cohen refused to allow the Complainants inside the apartment because they did not have medical documentation verifying their need for the assistance animal with them at that time.

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

Go to HUD Fair Housing.

HUD Settles Tennessee Apartment Violations of Americans with Disabilities Act and the Violence Against Women Act

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) has entered into a Voluntary Compliance Agreement with HUD-funded Tennessee housing providers Alco Greenbriar Partners LP, Alco Properties, Inc., and Alco Management, Inc., requiring the respondents to pay $50,000 in compensation to the aggrieved parties. The VCA resolves findings of noncompliance related to Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 and Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act, as well as findings of noncompliance related to the Violence Against Women Act (VAWA). Read the Agreement, Letter of Findings and the VAWA Memo.

The case began with a limited compliance review initiated by HUD in 2022 regarding Greenbriar Apartments, a 208-unit development in Tennessee. HUD found that the respondents effectively denied multiple reasonable accommodation/modification requests, as well as instances of VAWA noncompliance regarding two households that experienced incidents of sexual assault and/or domestic violence and were not provided the requested VAWA transfers or take any additional action to process the requests.

HUD also found that the respondents were unwilling to transfer residents from one Alco property to another when a vacancy that met the need of the requesting tenant was unavailable at Greenbriar, that 5% of the units were not accessible to individuals with mobility impairments, and 2% more of the units were not accessible to individuals with hearing or vision impairments.

Under the 2023 Agreement resolving the Section 504 findings and VAWA issues, the respondents agreed to: pay $50,000 in monetary compensation for the five aggrieved parties; amend its reasonable accommodation transfer log; revise the transfer policy; revise its VAWA policies; construct or convert 10 UFAS-accessible units, with an additional 4 units for the hearing and visually impaired and accessible common areas; designate a VAWA Coordinator; respond to VAWA-related grievances and transfer requests within 10 days; and attend VAWA training.

Anyone who feels they have experienced discrimination in housing may file a complaint by contacting HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity at (800) 669-9777 (voice) or (800) 877-8339 (Federal Relay Service). Housing providers' responsibilities to provide reasonable accommodations and reasonable modifications to individuals with disabilities are available here.

Read the January 25, 2023 HUD release.

HUD Charges Hawaii Condominium Association with Disability Discrimination

The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) is charging individuals and entities associated with a Kailua-Kona, Hawaii, condominium complex, including the condominium association, employees of the condominium association, the property management company, an employee of the property management company, the condominium unit’s owners, and the owners’ real estate broker with discriminating against a resident because of disability. Read HUD’s Charge. HUD’s Charge of Discrimination alleges that the property’s condominium association and its employees, the property’s management company and its employees, and the condominium unit’s owners and their real estate agent, prevented the resident from using a temporary ramp to safely access his unit, from accessing a parking space that would allow him to load and unload his wheelchair, and from replacing a toilet at the resident’s own expense to allow him complete use of his unit. Because they failed to do so, the resident was often unable to access or use his unit and forced to sleep in his vehicle. Ultimately, their actions resulted in the resident’s decision to revoke his offer to purchase the unit and move out of the unit, which he was renting while the sale was in escrow. 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 the Administrative Law Judge finds, after a hearing, that discrimination has occurred, the judge may award damages to the resident for his losses as a result of the discrimination, order injunctive relief and other equitable relief to deter further discrimination, and payment of attorney fees. In addition, the judge may impose civil penalties to vindicate the public interest. If the Federal court hears the case, the Judge may also award punitive damages to the resident. In related news, the Pacific ADA Center recently noted that the U. S. Department of Justice just settled with some Hawaii apartment builders over disability discrimination. The developer and others were accused of not designing and building five multifamily housing complexes with the required accessible features. The agreement requires the companies to pay a fine and make changes to their properties, such as adding ramps, accessible parking, and making apartments easier for people with disabilities to enter and use. Read more about the lawsuit that is making these rental properties accessible.  Read the October 30, 2023 Pacific ADA Center article. Read the December 18, 2023 HUD press release.