More-equal Housing | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: biow (biow![]() |
|
Date: Mon, 23 Jan 95 10:01 CST |
In <950120120144_7790980 [at] aol.com>, Bpaiss [at] aol.com wrote: >Over the past few months, I have been involved in a series of discussions >with a homebuilder marketing consultant for the Highline Crossing >community here in Colorado. There seems to be some inherent conflicts >with the way CoHousing communities recruit potential members and the Fair >Housing Law. In a conventional neighborhood of homes for sale, residents >would not be talking about each other, asking new neighbors about their >maritial status, families, jobs, etc. One thing that you quickly learn from involvement with Equal Opportunity and Fair Housing questions is that the law is so broadly written that, no matter what you do, someone can find fault under the law, complain, and trigger a government investigation that may bankrupt you. Horror stories are legion in the press. For one example, the Washington_Post recently reported on a small newspaper that was charged with religious discrimination because it had an Easter Bunny on the same page as its real estate ads. As I recall, a non-Christian charged that it implied discrimination against him--though I suppose one could equally well have charged that such a pagan religious symbol as the Bunny discriminates against Christians. The Fair Housing authorities had reason to believe that the complaint was spurious and made in bad faith (a personal grudge against a classified advertiser), but they nonetheless claimed that they were required by law to conduct the full investigation, at significant expense to the newspaper. In such investigations, the accused is generally required by law to produce evidence that demonstrates innocence. Similarly, the lawyers who specialize in scaring people about Equal Housing warn against the use of terms such as "walk-in closet" (what if a buyer cannot walk?) and "beautiful view" (what if he can't see?). In fact, for almost every favorable adjective you can find, someone can find a disability that prevents appreciation of that quality. So what do we do in CoHousing? Avoid pissing people off so much that they decide to resort to such vandalism-by-proxy. Don't needlessly taunt or antagonize those whom your political worldview makes you see as opposed to you (e.g. builders, bankers, or agents). Be as courteous as possible in rejecting people and always have a legitimate legal basis for doing so. And *don't* engage in any direct violations of Equal Housing law--any requirements having to do with presence or lack of children will do so, in flagrant fashion. Rob Sandelin followed up: >One way to select membership from a particular set of humanity is to >advertise in ways which will attract the set you are looking for. For >example, if you are looking for families with kids, then advertise in >parenting magazines and such. Our local baby diaper service has a >newspaper on parenting which accepts advertising. Rob, I know you didn't really mean what you said. But please don't even say that--at least not without an anonymous account. Advertising in such a way as to implicitly select against a protected group of people *is* a direct violation of Fair Housing law. Virtually the only remaining general exception is for discrimination in favor of the elderly. And I don't even know if we could do that in a community that is not exclusively for the elderly. Talking about this sort of thing out loud in public can be dangerous. (Forget the First Amendment--it is effectively suspended in these areas.) See recent press accounts of what happened to a neighborhood group in Berkeley which engaged in otherwise-legitimate political action to oppose the location of a halfway house in their area. They were investigated for (if I recall correctly) criminal charges pertaining to conspiracy to obstruct housing for the disabled. The stink in the press about this action finally caused Undersecretary Achtenberg to stop it, given the obvious misapplication of the law. However, if your goal really *is* to discriminate in favor of families, you will be subject to this sort of enforcement and will be rejected by all Right Thinking people. Better yet, try in good faith to observe a reasonable interpretation of the spirit of the law and then hope that the bureaucrats in your area will bend the letter of the law to protect you. Usually they will. Don't keep written records that you don't need to keep, which might later be twisted into substantiation for charges against you. Keep just enough to prove yourself innocent. If you are investigated, be courteous with the bureaucrat--most of them are devoted people trying to do a good job. But get a lawyer, also. Bottom line--if you are involved in housing or employment, there is risk. But if you manage that risk intelligently, co-housing is worth it, IMHO. ----------------------------------------------------------------- Chris Biow There are nine and sixty ways biow [at] cs.umd.ecu of making tribal leis, and every one of them is right. -- Kipling -----------------------------------------------------------------
-
More-equal Housing biow, January 23 1995
- RE: More-equal Housing Rob Sandelin, January 23 1995
- Re: More-equal Housing SPINTUS, January 26 1995
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.