NATIONAL FAIR HOUSING TRENDS REPORT FINDS DISCRIMINATION CASES HAVE INCREASED
Fair Housing Trends Report 2022 |
|
Info about Fair Housing in Maryland - including housing discrimination, hate crimes, affordable housing, disabilities, segregation, mortgage lending, & others. http://www.gbchrb.org. 443.347.3701.
Fair Housing Trends Report 2022 |
|
MCCR MEILP Session |
|
MCCR CRLP Program |
|
Curtis was the lead plaintiff in a landmark 1999 U.S. Supreme Court decision that gave people with disabilities the right to seek care services in their own homes and communities instead of living in institutions.
As a young woman, she had been diagnosed with schizophrenia and developmental disabilities. By her late 20s she had lived over half her life in state institutions. Isolated and angry, she chain smoked to pass the time and prayed to God at night, asking to be rescued from the Georgia Regional Hospital in Atlanta.
Sue Jamieson, an Atlanta Legal Aid lawyer, filed a lawsuit on behalf of Curtis and one of her friends, Elaine Wilson. When the case came before the Supreme Court, it ruled that gave people with disabilities have the right to receive care and support services in their own homes and communities, not just in state institutions. The case, called Olmstead v. L.C., empowered the disability rights movement because it set a legal framework for people with disabilities to secure the right to live, work, and study in their own communities. Some called it the movement’s Brown v. Board of Education. Read the Supreme Court's majority opinion
The effect has been significant. Additional court cases extended the legal reach of the decision, applying it to not just to psychiatric hospitals but to nursing homes and other institutions receiving state and federal funding. Advocates used the decision to fight for people with disabilities’ right to learn in the same classroom as other students and to work in the same workplace as other employees. Most state disability services were then provided in institutions, but now “the vast majority of services” is now “provided to people in their own homes and in their own communities.”
Through her legal advocacy and appearances at disability rights conferences, Curtis became a nationally recognized figure, admired for her optimism and tenacity.
Read the November 8, 2022 Washington Post obituary.
At its November 17th Baltimore City Council meeting, everyone agreed that the city’s existing inclusionary housing ordinance isn’t working. Passed in 2007, the law requires developers of market-rate housing to set aside affordable units for people with lower incomes, but it has led to the creation of only 37 affordable units. Instead, developers have paid into an offset fund or sought waivers.
A bill now proposed by Councilwoman Odette Ramos and co-sponsored by a majority of the council would eliminate the loopholes allowed by the previous law, while also reducing the percentage of affordable units required. Instead of developers building 30 or more units to set aside 20% as affordable for residents earning less than the Baltimore area’s median income, developers receiving a city subsidy to build a 20+ units project would need to set aside 10% of units as affordable for low-income households (earning 60% of area median income). Developments getting an additional city subsidy would be required to add at least 5% more affordable units for residents who are very low or extremely low income. These units would have to remain affordable for 30 rather than the current 20 years. Developers would be required to submit an inclusionary housing plan to the city before receiving any project permits. That proposal, which also would require plans to market affordable units to residents who have historically been excluded from new developments, would have to be approved by the city’s Inclusionary Housing Board.
Some city housing and finance officials proposed some changes to Ramos’s proposed bill based upon recommendations from a 2021 study that analyzed the city’s real estate market and the feasibility of inclusionary housing. The study, conducted by Enterprise Community Partners, found that only the city’s strongest housing markets could support an inclusionary housing requirement. As a result, city officials have recommended applying the legislation to only “core” areas such as around the harbor and other select development-rich neighborhoods.