D.C. Sues Landlord Alleging Housing Discrimination Against Non-Voucher Holders

In a first-of-its-kind lawsuit, the D.C. attorney general’s office has accused the major developer Petra Management Group of skirting rent control by renting only to voucher holders. In a lawsuit filed January 30th in D.C. Superior Court, the office of Attorney General Brian Schwalb contends that Petra is guilty of source-of-income discrimination at three D.C. buildings with over 100 apartments. This is the first time the city has sued a landlord for discrimination against non-voucher holders. At the three buildings cited in the lawsuit - just a portion of Petra’s portfolio - Petra rents exclusively to tenants with vouchers, the suit alleges. Rashid Salem, Petra’s founder and a named defendant in the suit, did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Petra’s alleged scheme follows a shift in D.C.’s incentives for housing vouchers, under which low-income residents pay 30% of their income toward rent and the government covers the balance. A decade ago, in an effort to deconcentrate poverty, the D.C. Housing Authority began raising the rent limits for homes subsidized with vouchers - allowing many voucher holders to move to neighborhoods with better schools and less crime. But not only was the Housing Authority frequently overpaying for apartments, D.C.’s rent-control law granted an exemption for units rented to voucher holders, so landlords could get out from strict rent caps and collect far more money.

Petra began buying up residential buildings and filling them with as many voucher holders as possible, a Washington Post investigation found. As some of the buildings filled with people struggling with addiction or mental illness, neighbors complained of a lack of case workers and security and drug dealers operated out of the properties. Upscale apartment buildings along Connecticut Avenue NW managed by one property company began filling up with formerly homeless voucher holders, leading some residents (both longtime tenants and new voucher holders) to complain that there was not adequate support or security services.

Rent control in D.C. typically applies to all apartment buildings constructed before 1976. In 2020, the median rent was $1,442 per month in rent-controlled units, compared with $2,554 for units not subject to rent control. That makes these apartments substantially more affordable to residents of moderate means, but it also makes them less profitable for landlords.

A landlord can get an exemption from rent-control caps for voucher holders only after getting city approval, according to the attorney general’s office. But at the three Petra buildings, the suit alleges, Petra advertised the higher, non-rent-controlled rate both to lenders and to prospective tenants, violating the law and making the apartments unaffordable to many people without vouchers. At one of the buildings, the Adams on North Capitol Street NE, one three-bedroom unit would be capped at $1,000.25 under rent control, but Petra advertised and rented it at $3,131 per month, according to the attorney general’s office.

Read the January 30, 2025 Washington Post article.

Charles Person, Youngest of the Original Freedom Riders, 82

Charles Person was the youngest of the 13 original Freedom Riders who traveled from Washington to Birmingham, Alabama, in 1961 in an effort to integrate interstate bus terminals across the South - and who were nearly beaten to death for doing so. He was an 18-year-old freshman at Morehouse College, although he had been accepted at MIT, when he first became involved in the civil rights movement, joining the thousands of students across the South who were marching against Jim Crow laws and sitting in at segregated lunch counters.

His first arrest, during a sit-in at an Atlanta restaurant, was in 1961. When he returned to campus, he saw an ad from the Congress of Racial Equality looking for volunteers for a trip by commercial bus from Washington to New Orleans. Along the way, the ad said, they would test the December 5, 1960 US Supreme Court decision (Boynton v. Virginia, 364 U.S. 454) banning segregation in bus terminals serving interstate travelers. 

After training in nonviolent techniques, he and the others - including the future congressman John Lewis - left from Washington’s Greyhound station aboard two buses. Person was paired with an older white rider, James Peck. Their job was to enter the terminals so Person could try to use the white restroom while Peck entered the Black restroom. Then they would order food at the designated white and Black lunch counters. Their first test, in Fredericksburg, Virginia, just drew ugly stares from white people in the depot. In Charlotte, N.C., Person was almost arrested when he tried to have his shoes shined in a white part of the terminal.

The next stop was Anniston, a small town in eastern Alabama. The station was closed, but the driver stopped anyway. Another bus had been firebombed outside town, he said and if they wanted to proceed, the Black Riders would have to move to the back. When they refused, the driver left the bus. The white men who had boarded in Atlanta, members of the Ku Klux Klan, then viciously attacked the Riders; knocking Person and Peck unconscious before being dragged to the rear. “They threw us to the back of the bus,” Person said in a 2021 interview on the podcast “Book Dreams.” “One eyewitness said they stacked us like pancakes.”

In Birmingham, Alabama, on Sunday, May 14, a crowd of white people, including scores of Klansmen, awaited the Riders. After the bus driver refused to carry them further, the Riders left the bus. In the station when Peck said the two of them were friends, several men pulled him into a hallway and began beating him with a pipe. Somebody grabbed Person, too, but after awhile he was able to escape. By then the Klansmen were beating up the Riders with abandon. Person managed to catch a city bus, and finally reached the home of the Rev. Fred Shuttlesworth, a leader in the city’s civil rights community. More Freedom Riders, including Peck, eventually made it to the home. Though most doctors did not want to treat them for fear of retribution, they eventually found medical care.

Around 400 people joined the bus campaign in total, many facing beatings and prison. But it worked: In November, 1961, President John F. Kennedy’s administration ordered the desegregation of all interstate bus terminals. "It really was the template for citizen politics in the 1960s,” said Ray Arsenault, the author of Freedom Riders: 1961 and the Struggle for Racial Justice (Oxford University Press, 2011. 320 pages. Paperback $18.99). “A lot of what came after - the antiwar protests, the women’s movement - all drew on these ordinary people doing extraordinary things.”

After settling in Atlanta in the 1980s, Person became locally involved in civil rights activism. In 2022, he wrote Buses Are a Comin’: Memoirs of a Freedom Rider with Richard Rooker (304 pages. St. Martin's Press, 2021. Paperback $19.00).

Read the US Supreme Court summary of Boynton v. Virginia.

Book Review: "The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for Racial Justice in the North" by Michelle Adams

 

The Containment: Detroit, the Supreme Court, and the Battle for Racial Justice in the North by Michelle Adams. 528 pages. $35.00 hardcover.

"Splendid . . . Adams’s book explores class as well as race, with a richness and sophistication that recall J. Anthony Lukas’s 1985 masterpiece, Common Ground." - Jeffrey Toobin, New York Times Book Review.

This book relates Detroit's struggle to integrate schools in its suburbs and the associated struggle for desegregation in the North. In The Containment, Michelle Adams, the Henry M. Butzel Professor of Law at the University of Michigan, tells the history of the attempts to integrate Detroit schools, and the problems that followed when this effort collided with Nixon-appointed justices committed to a judicial counterrevolution. The book includes brief bios of the activists who tried to help Detroit's students during this period of riots, Black power, and white flight. In 1974, Federal District Judge Stephen Roth ruled that integration was not possible within the city's boundaries and ordered a new plan to include 53 of the 85 surrounding, mostly white, school districts. 

This metropolitan desegregation remedy could have remade the future direction of racial justice. Instead, the US Supreme Court on July 25, 1974 overruled the lower courts in ruling that the federal courts "could not impose a multidistrict, area-wide remedy upon local districts in the absence of any evidence those districts committed acts causing racial discrimination." The decision seriously impeded the struggle for forced desegregation both in Michigan and throughout the North, and limited the scope of the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision that declared state laws establishing separate public schools for black and white students unconstitutional.

Read the State Bar of Michigan's Michigan Legal Milestones historical article.

Read the full text of the Milliken v. Bradley decision.

Justice Department Files Civil Rights Lawsuit Against Iowa Landlord for Sexually Harassing Tenants

 

The US Department of Justice (DOJ) has filed a lawsuit against Kurt Williams and Gearhead Properties LC, of Davenport, Iowa, for sexually harassing female tenants in violation of the Fair Housing Act (FHA). Williams has managed residential rental properties in Davenport since at least 2010.

The lawsuit, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa, alleges that, since at least 2010, Williams subjected female tenants to unwelcome sexual contact, exposed his genitals to female tenants, made requests for sex in exchange for reduced rent or other housing benefits, and evicted tenants when they did not give in to his sexual advances.

“Landlords who target vulnerable women by repeatedly demanding sex for themselves and their friends and retaliating against those who refuse with eviction actions and refusals to make repairs show an egregious abuse of power,” said Assistant Attorney General Kristen Clarke of the Justice Department’s Civil Rights Division. “The Justice Department remains committed to protecting tenants’ right to live in and access housing free of sexual harassment. We encourage survivors of sexual harassment to speak out so that we can vindicate their fair housing rights.”

The lawsuit seeks monetary damages to compensate persons harmed by the alleged harassment, civil penalties to vindicate the public interest, and a court order barring future discrimination. The lawsuit is the result of a joint investigative effort with the Department of Housing and Urban Development Office of Inspector General (HUD-OIG).

The FHA prohibits discrimination in housing based on race, color, religion, national origin, sex, disability and familial status. It also prohibits sexual harassment, a form of sex discrimination. Individuals who believe that they may have been victims of sexual harassment or other types of housing discrimination at rental properties owned or managed by Kurt Williams or Gearhead Properties LC, or who have other information that may be relevant to this case, may contact the Justice Department by calling the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Southern District of Iowa at (515) 473-9300. Individuals may also email the Justice Department at fairhousing@usdoj.gov or submit a report online. Reports also may be made by contacting HUD at 1-800-669-9777 or by filing a complaint online.

Read the January 17, 2025 DOJ press release.

The Mortgage Firm to Invest $1.75M to Settle DOJ Redlining Housing Discrimination Case

 

The Mortgage Firm, a Florida-based mortgage lender, has agreed to invest $1.75 million to settle a redlining case with the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), the parties announced. The DOJ accused the company of discrimination against predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Miami-Fort Lauderdale-West Palm Beach metropolitan area. The company ‘significantly underperformed’ its peers in generating applications from majority-Black and majority-Hispanic neighborhoods during 2016-2021. The complaint, filed in the Southern District of Florida, alleges violations of the Fair Housing Act and Equal Credit Opportunity Act. DOJ opened an investigation into The Mortgage Firm’s lending practices after receiving a referral from the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. 

A spokesperson at The Mortgage Firm told HousingWire that “throughout its 29-year history, the company has been committed to providing equal credit access to all communities within its lending footprint. The complete absence of legal or regulatory violations on The Mortgage Firm’s record speaks for itself.”

The company received 9,375 mortgage applications during 2016-2021, of which 30.4% were from residents of majority-Black and majority-Hispanic neighborhoods. Its peers’ share was 59%. The complaint also pointed out that the company had its offices located predominantly in white neighborhoods and took inadequate steps to market to and develop referral networks within Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.

The proposed consent order, which awaits court approval, would require The Mortgage Firm to:

• Conduct a Community Credit Needs Assessment to identify the credit needs of residents of predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Miami MSA and to consider the results in developing future loan programs, marketing campaigns, and outreach efforts.
• Provide $1.75 million for a loan subsidy program to offer affordable home purchase, refinance, and home improvement loans in predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Miami MSA. The program may provide lower interest rates, down payment assistance, closing cost assistance, or payment of initial mortgage insurance premiums.
• Conduct a detailed assessment of its fair lending program in the Miami MSA regarding fair lending obligations and lending in predominantly Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.
• Enhance its fair lending training and staffing to ensure equal access to credit is provided across their market area, including by employing a Director of Community Lending.
• Expand its outreach and advertising efforts by having an office location in a majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhood in Miami-Dade County, translating its website into Spanish, and requiring all of its loan officers in the Miami MSA to market to majority-Black and Hispanic neighborhoods.
• Bolster connections with the community and build referral sources in predominately Black and Hispanic neighborhoods by providing four outreach events annually, six financial education seminars per year, and partnering with at least one community partners to increase access to credit in predominately Black and Hispanic neighborhoods in the Miami MSA.

A copy of the complaint, proposed consent order, and information about DOJ’s fair lending enforcement work, is at www.justice.gov/fairhousing. Anyone may report lending discrimination by calling DOJ’s housing discrimination tip line at 1-833-591-0291 or submitting a report online.

Read the January 9, 2025 HousingWire article.

Read the January 7, 2025 DOJ press release.

Housing Rights Initiative Files Massive Discrimination Case After Testing Finds Rampant Housing Discrimination Across Chicago Area

 

The Housing Rights Initiative (HRI) has filed a series of 176 complaints against 165 real estate agents, brokerages, and landlords in Chicago. The group claims that this is the largest housing discrimination case in Illinois history. The lawsuits are the result of an undercover investigation conducted by HRI. In total, the housing watchdog group filed 176 complaints against 165 defendants with the Illinois Department of Human Rights. Defendants in the suit include major brokerage companies such as Coldwell Banker, Christie’s International Real Estate, Keller Williams, and Berkshire Hathaway Home Services Chicago.

HRI is represented in these complaints by two public interest law firms, Peter Romer-Friedman Law PLLC and Handley Farah & Anderson PLLC, and by Disability Rights Advocates (DRA), a national nonprofit disability rights legal center with offices in Chicago, Berkeley, and New York.

An HRI testing project found that real estate professionals often declined to rent Chicago-area properties to investigators posing as low-income families. The HRI claimed that real estate agents, brokerage firms and landlords discriminated against prospective renters who sought to use vouchers provided through the federal rental assistance program known as Section 8. A group of investigators went undercover last year as prospective tenants, contacting hundreds of brokers and landlords by text message to determine whether they were complying with the Illinois Human Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination against people with housing vouchers. The group found that voucher holders were explicitly discriminated against about 36% of the time, according to a statement issued by the HRI. A range of real estate heavyweights were among the firms that allegedly broke the law.

Gov. JB Pritzker signed the Illinois Human Rights Act in 2022 (HB 2775), making it illegal for landlords, brokers, and agents to discriminate against housing applicants looking to use Section 8 or disability vouchers to help pay their rent. This historic filing builds upon that foundation by holding discriminatory real estate companies accountable and sending a message that landlords cannot refuse to rent to qualified low-income families in Illinois.

Peter Romer-Friedman, founder of one of the law firms (PRF Law) that filed the complaints, said the measure was drafted to “fill the gap” of the Fair Housing Act, a federal law that does not protect against so-called source of income discrimination. He said some of the complaints could be brought to court.

Emily Roznowski, DRA Staff Attorney, commented: “People with disabilities make up a disproportionate share of housing choice voucher holders. HRI’s investigation and the complaints filed today will ensure that people with disabilities in Illinois have access to the decent, safe, and accessible affordable housing of their choice. No one should be turned away from renting an apartment based on their source of income, whether that income comes from a voucher or Social Security Disability Insurance.”

Read the January 20,2025 WBEZ Chicago article.

Read the January2025 PRF Law article.

HUD's Evaluation of the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) Choice Mobility Option Finds Residents More Satisfied with New Neighborhoods

 

In a 2023 report, researchers examined residents’ experiences with the Choice Mobility option, which allows residents of public housing undergoing a RAD conversion to request a tenant-based (rather than project-based) voucher in order to move to a private rental market unit. Researchers found that although overall use of the Choice Mobility option is low, the program succeeds in providing the opportunity for residents to move to neighborhoods and into units that better serve their needs. 

To better understand the perspectives and experiences of residents, the study included a survey administered in 2022 of a representative sample of former RAD residents who chose to use the Choice Mobility option and a representative sample of RAD residents who were eligible to move using the Choice Mobility option but did not. Respondents completed 704 surveys in English and 16 surveys in Spanish, with an overall response rate of 49.6%. The study also used HUD administrative data and Census data to understand the demographic, neighborhood, and housing market characteristics of Choice Mobility use and resident outcomes.

Researchers found that both residents who move and residents who remain in their units are generally satisfied with both their housing and their neighborhood. Movers, however, were more satisfied than non-movers, with 70% of movers reporting that they were very or somewhat satisfied with their current neighborhood, compared to the 56% of non-movers. 

Movers reported that the amenities in their new neighborhoods - such as parks, schools, transit, and grocery stores - were at least the same as (40%) or better than (47%) the amenities at the RAD-converted properties. By contrast, only 7% of movers reported that the amenities in their new neighborhood were worse than those in their former neighborhood. These results reinforce the finding that neighborhood characteristics were the most commonly cited factor influencing resident use of the Choice Mobility option. The appeal of a neighborhood that better fits a household's needs was strong enough to overcome some increased costs; movers reported higher rent and utility costs than did non-movers, because movers tended to relocate to neighborhoods with lower poverty rates than the neighborhoods where their RAD unit was located. About two-thirds of movers and non-movers rated their current unit's physical condition as excellent or good and 10% or less rated the condition as poor.

The study results also reveal that more residents could potentially benefit from improved communication from public housing authorities (PHAs) about the Choice Mobility option, especially in RAD project-based rental assistance (PBRA) properties, and from more housing mobility-related supports.

Read the January 25, 2025 HUD User PD&R Edge article.