Reconstructing Fair Housing Release
November 6, 2001, National Press Club, Washington, DC

Remarks and Presentations by Marca Bristo, Dave Brown, Ophelia Basgal, Becca Vaughn; HUD Statement

WELCOMING REMARKS BY MARCA BRISTO

Good morning. I am Marca Bristo, chairperson of National Council on Disability (NCD). I am delighted you all could be here today for the release of NCD's Reconstructing Fair Housing report.

The National Council on Disability is an independent federal agency consisting of fifteen members. The Council's members are appointed by the President and confirmed by the U.S. Senate and are all individuals with disabilities or parents of individuals with disabilities. Many of our board members are here today. If the NCD board members would please stand or raise your hand so everyone can see who you are. Thank you.

Before we get under way this morning, I think it's appropriate to tell you that my role today will be quite abbreviated. In addition to being the NCD chairperson, I am also president and CEO of Access Living of Metropolitan Chicago, a nonresidential independent living center. Since Access Living is currently receiving a federal grant from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, I chose to recuse myself from any substantive involvement in the preparation and delivery of this report. Today, I will limit myself to my opening remarks and I will help direct questions during the question and answer period, but I will not answer questions. I hope you understand.

Shelter is a basic human need. The ability to seek and have shelter without discrimination is the law of the land. The ability to choose a home without discrimination, to live in a home without interference, to seek and be granted reasonable accommodations where these are necessary, and to find and acquire accessible housing these are essential first steps for people with disabilities to live in the mainstream of our country. When discrimination intervenes, it stigmatizes, isolates, and removes free choice and the opportunity to live as part of the community of all Americans.

NCD's report Reconstructing Fair Housing, which is the fifth report in a series of independent analyses by NCD of federal enforcement of civil rights laws. The series grew out of NCD's 50-state tour, where we solicited input from people with disabilities and a 1996 national policy summit, which was attended by more than 300 disability community leaders from diverse backgrounds who called upon NCD to work with federal agencies to develop strategies for greater enforcement of existing disability civil rights laws.

This series of reports, which we call "Unequal Protection Under Law," has examined enforcement and implementation of civil rights legislation, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Air Carrier Access Act, the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, and various federal laws dealing with electronic and information technology accessibility. The enforcement reports to follow in this series will be on Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act and the Civil Rights of Institutionalized Persons Act.

We are joined here today on the panel by civil and disability rights advocates to discuss the report and describe their efforts to enhance fair housing for people with disabilities. Unique and innovative collaboration strategies between these three key stakeholder groups are key to properly enforcing fair housing for people with disabilities and we are pleased to include representatives of all of these groups on our panel today.

First, we will hear from Dave Brown, our Council member who has provided leadership on this report. After Dave summarizes this report, Becca Vaughn, a housing activist with the Topeka Independent Living Resource Center and a coordinator with the Disability Rights Action Coalition for Housing, will provide a consumer's perspective. Next, Ophelia Basgal, a commissioner with the Millennial Housing Commission. Then, we will hear from Wade Henderson, executive director of the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights. And finally, Milton Little, executive vice president and chief operating officer from the National Urban League. After these comments, we will begin the question and answer session for the media, where we will be assisted by the other people at the table today. They are Michael Allen, senior staff attorney and director of housing programs at the Judge David L. Bazelon Center for Mental Health Law; Dan Kessler, board of directors from the National Council on Independent Living; and Dr. Kathleen H. McGinley, co-chair of the Housing Task Force at the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities. They, too, will help us respond to questions from the media.

In addition, I would also like to thank the researchers who assisted NCD with this study. They are Sara Pratt, Michael Allen, and Bonnie Milstein. They did a great job. On behalf of NCD, thank you.

I would like to close with something from Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Writing in The Nation Magazine in February, 1961, Martin Luther King Jr. said: "There is hardly any area in which executive leadership is needed more than in housing. Here the Negro confronts the most tragic expression of discrimination; he is consigned to ghettos and overcrowded conditions. And here the North is as guilty as the South. Unfortunately, the federal government has participated directly and indirectly in the perpetuation of housing discrimination."

Dr. King's words on fair housing are as true today as they were in 1961. Fair housing allowing all people of all backgrounds to be treated equally and to live wherever they can afford is an important part of an America free of prejudice. The Fair Housing Act was passed just days after Dr. King's assassination.

Now, I present Dave Brown. Dave was appointed to NCD by President Clinton in 1997 and, since that time, has led the Council's efforts to provide policy guidance to the Administration and the Congress on a number of issues, including fair housing.

Thank you. Dave.

Written Remarks by Dave Brown
November 6, 2001

Introduction and Background

Thirty-three years ago Congress established a national policy that it was not acceptable to discriminate in housing practices against people from diverse cultures. America made a commitment to eliminate discrimination in housing by enacting a major piece of civil rights legislation, the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Yet 20 years later, housing discrimination in American cities was still an ugly reality.

From 1968 to 1988, landlords routinely thumbed their noses at the Fair Housing Act, confident that victims of discrimination would have neither the time nor the money to enforce their rights in court.

From 1968 to 1988, because the fair housing law was a toothless tiger, African Americans, Hispanic Americans, and other groups were condemned to live in segregated homes and divided neighborhoods whose very existence was an insult to the American dream and the founding principle of this nation, "that all persons are created equal."

In the course of the two decades of the fair housing debate, the nation learned that separate was never equal in America-not in schools, not in jobs, and not in housing. America tolerated separate but not equal housing for too long. America tolerated a situation in which bias and discrimination against people with disabilities infected the housing markets of the nation.

Between 1968 and 1988, Congress and many stakeholders took note of increasing discrimination in society against families and people with disabilities. It was difficult to believe, but it was increasingly so. Every year, millions of Americans suffered flagrant discrimination trying to buy a home or rent an apartment. From the beginning, the problem had been that the remedies provided by the law are too cumbersome and archaic. In short, they have made fair housing an empty promise.

Under the 1968 Fair Housing Act, HUD had a procedure that enabled a victim of housing discrimination to report a violation. But the Department could do little to stop that violation. No HUD official had authority to issue "cease and desist" orders to those found guilty of discriminating in housing. HUD could only investigate and try to bring the two parties together to conciliate their differences.

The weakness in 1968 Fair Housing Act accounted for much of the failure to eliminate the policies and practices which discriminated against people from diverse cultures, persons with disabilities, and families with children. Landlords were not willing to try to resolve disputes with professed victims of discrimination, because there was little that HUD can do to penalize them. The ineffectiveness of the 1968 housing law was demonstrated by the fact that few housing discrimination complaints were filed with HUD. Yet, there was abundant evidence that housing discrimination still existed.

HUD's own estimates during that period showed that at least 2 million incidences of unlawful discrimination in housing occurred annually. That figure did not reflect the increasing number of overt and even violent acts that were directed against culturally diverse families who moved into all or predominantly white neighborhoods. In addition, during that period, a HUD-commissioned survey, covering 3,000 brokers and rental agents in 40 metropolitan areas, found that African-American families seeking to buy a home stood a 48-percent chance of encountering discrimination, and African Americans looking for a place to rent had a 72-percent chance of encountering discrimination. A similar study in Dallas concluded that Mexican Americans had a 96-percent chance of experiencing discrimination in a typical search for housing. Complaints of housing discrimination against women and Asian Americans are also numerous and increasing. And persons with disabilities continued to be excluded from large segments of the housing market, as did families with children.

In addition, the lack of housing for Americans with disabilities impeded their efforts to secure gainful employment and become productive, tax-paying citizens. Americans cannot achieve economic independence without employment opportunities. And they cannot secure employment without accessible housing. Thus, housing discrimination exacerbated unemployment and severely undercut state and Federal vocational rehabilitation programs and private sector initiatives that sought to promote the independence and economic self- sufficiency of Americans with disabilities. As a Nation, we decided we could not afford to let this vicious cycle of discrimination continue. The legislation for a Fair Housing Amendments Act was an important step in breaking this cycle.

In 1988, the Fair Housing Amendments Act was considered by many members of Congress as the most important expansion of civil rights in terms of protecting individual Americans against discrimination that was successfully passed in the 20 years leading up to the Act's passage. The FHAA's passage was the result of a Democratic Congress working with a Republican administration. It was the result of courageous decisions being taken within the administration. It was result of the persistence of a number of Senators and Representatives who over the years recognized that the Fair Housing Act of 1968 was not the remedy that many in America had hoped for, even at that time to address the types of discrimination that take place in this country against many citizens along lines of race, ethnicity, religion, and color.

The FHAA was designed to remedy some of the defects in the Fair Housing Act of 1968, by providing an expedited administrative enforcement mechanism to assure that complaints are heard and decided in a fair, timely and economical manner. In order to ensure that the Fair Housing Act worked in the way that Congress intended, Congress decided to strengthen the enforcement powers of the Department of Housing and Urban Development.

The FHAA was also historic because it addressed the severe shortage of accessible housing in America. The bill set forth minimum requirements that would assure that future multi-family dwellings would be accessible and useable by people with disabilities. Those provisions resulted from the collaborative hard work of representatives of the homebuilding industry, the disability community and others. The consensus that was reached addressed both the problem of de facto discrimination due to inaccessible housing and the industry's concerns about cost. Those provisions were consistent with the progress that is being made in the building industry and they were ultimately fair to all. Without the provisions that mandated 100 percent of new construction to comply with the minimum requirements in building design, the Nation would have relegated people with disabilities to living only on the ground floor. This would be as discriminatory as if to say the elderly can live on the second floor or allow families to live only on the third floor or to confine any one other group to a specific location in a housing unit.

How far have we come in realizing the promise of the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988?

Key Findings

The primary focus of this report is the way in which HUD has conducted its administrative enforcement of the Fair Housing Act (FHA) and Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act to counter discrimination in housing, and, in particular, HUD's record during the past 12 years in enforcing the rights of people with disabilities under these laws. This study describes HUD's administrative enforcement of the Fair Housing Act and Section 504. It covers HUD's enforcement and compliance work conducted under these laws, with particular emphasis on the rights of people with disabilities during the period roughly beginning with the passage of the Fair Housing Amendments Act in 1988 and ending on September 30, 2000.

The past 12 years of civil rights enforcement by the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) have left America, and in particular people with disabilities, needing more. As mentioned earlier, the late 1980s were characterized by a new commitment to equal housing opportunity: Congress passed the Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (FHAA) and HUD finally promulgated regulations for the enforcement of Section 504 of the 1973 Rehabilitation Act. HUD was empowered to investigate and adjudicate discrimination complaints and to enforce compliance by recipients of federal funds.

By the late 1990s, however, HUD had lost control of its own enforcement process, with investigations taking nearly five times as long as Congress mandated and with scarcely 100 cases annually concluding with findings of discrimination during each of the past six fiscal years. During the 1990s, people with disabilities increasingly filed discrimination complaints with HUD under the FHA, until they became the single largest group of complaints filed in fiscal years 1999 and 2000, amounting to nearly 42 percent of HUD complaints filed nationally.

During the same period, however, HUD's enforcement activities diminished. The number of complaints filed overall dropped dramatically, with the number of complaints in FY 2000 amounting to only 30 percent of their level in 1992. HUD's adoption of a new "claims" process designed to examine more closely potential complaints has resulted in many fewer complaints being filed and significant increases in the amount of time HUD takes to actually begin a complaint investigation.

The length of time HUD took to investigate cases increased dramatically from 1990 to 2000. The average age of complaints at their closure was 497 days in FY 2000, nearly five times the 100-day period that Congress set as a benchmark for projected case completion. There are significant regional variations in the duration of investigations as well.

Administrative enforcement of civil rights laws has been hampered by the failure of Congress and HUD to provide the level of resources that effective enforcement requires. Inconsistent and inadequate funding has caused some specific problems for HUD, especially concerning staffing and special enforcement initiatives. The bigger problem has been HUD's failure to provide consistent national leadership and management of the fair housing enforcement process. As a result, the promises of the fair housing laws have been empty for many Americans, with and without disabilities.

HUD made some progress in its efforts to reduce the number of complaints that were "administratively closed" without a disposition during the mid-1990s. By FY 2000, however, that trend was reversing; about 20 percent of filed complaints were administratively closed, up from 15 percent in the mid-1990s. Between its claims process and its overuse of administrative closures, HUD is failing to deal effectively with many potential complaints.

Conciliations or settlements of complaints amount to close to half of the case resolutions. Investigations with findings of discrimination and decisions to pursue enforcement action can take more than a year and have been decreasing in number after reaching a relatively high point during the mid-1990s. The number of such decisions is only a small percentage of the cases HUD investigates. Decisions to dismiss cases with findings of no discrimination increased during the 1990s as well and often took longer than a decision to take enforcement action.

Overall, complaints involving discrimination based on disability are more likely to be settled by HUD, less likely to result in a finding that discrimination has occurred, and less likely to be dismissed after investigation compared with other cases. There are, however, wide and troubling differences in outcomes among HUD's various regional offices, suggesting that the kind of outcome a particular case reaches may be related to where a complaint is handled.

Even more troubling are the significant and serious deficiencies in HUD's overall history of enforcement. This study concludes that the devolution of case-processing responsibility combined with the leadership's attitude toward management and significant shortfalls in staffing and resources have caused these deficiencies. The last Administration's "hot case" and "doubling" enforcement action initiatives exacerbated these systemic flaws and made no discernable improvement in enforcement.

HUD's enforcement of Section 504 has been even more troubled. HUD had difficulties in adopting regulations implementing the law and its enforcement role. Funding has been limited for enforcement activities, and some significant successes in achieving compliance in individual situations have not been replicated.

There are only limited and inconsistent data by which to judge HUD's Section 504 enforcement efforts. The data that are available, however, show that both enforcement and compliance efforts have been marked by long delays resulting from the diversion of limited resources to other activities.

HUD has developed some important guidance, substantive and legal resources, and examples of good enforcement work. However, this information is not widely disseminated to HUD's own enforcement staff or to HUD program areas that could benefit from the information. In addition, this guidance has not been made available to individuals and entities affected by the law.

Good data collection systems and investigative management technology have been developed for FHA cases. Immediate expansion of these systems to support Section 504 enforcement and compliance work is an important priority for HUD.

The Fair Housing Initiatives Program (FHIP) was established by federal statute to fund private fair housing groups, state and local agencies, and advocates. FHIPs provide important services to and products for people with disabilities.

FHIPs have raised concerns that HUD's management of the program has resulted in significant delays in providing funding to qualified recipients and a lack of focus on supporting the enforcement and education activities external to HUD that are a critical component of successful law enforcement.

Congress funds the Fair Housing Assistance Program (FHAP) to handle cases at state and local enforcement agencies. While regional differences exist, when compared to HUD, the 86 FHAP agencies have lower percentages of cases administratively closed and a higher percentage of complaints resulting in findings that the law has been violated. They are able to process complaints (including disability complaints) considerably more quickly than HUD. Despite reports of gaps in activity in cases and other performance issues, more effective HUD monitoring of FHAP could reasonably be expected to improve performance even more. Unfortunately, HUD has no sustained process for identifying and disseminating important lessons from the success of the FHAP operations.

This study found startling inadequacies in HUD's management operations and resources supporting enforcement over the past years. HUD's Strategic Plan, Annual Performance Plan, and Business and Operating Plan, all of which direct the priorities and activities of the Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity (FHEO), have been seriously deficient in addressing enforcement and compliance activities, FHIP and FHAP performance, and efforts to improve the civil rights of people with disabilities. Significant work in improving the focus and content of HUD's planning is needed to drive the enforcement and compliance improvements recommended in this study.

Congress has failed to give HUD adequate appropriations to fund its enforcement and compliance activities. FHEO was staffed at lower levels in FY 2000 than it was in 1989, and increases in staff-to-manager ratios have impaired effective day-to-day management activity. The lack of financial resources has impaired staff training, travel, the ability to support education for the housing industry and the public, and funding for contracts and new initiatives. NCD concludes that HUD has a major challenge ahead of it to fulfill the promise of civil rights enforcement. Without staffing and funding resources, progress cannot and will not be made. Without strong and effective management of compliance and enforcement activities, combined with monitoring, training, technical assistance, and, if necessary, sanctions, progress cannot and will not be made. Without an organized, focused program, progress will not be made. The law is not the problem; the siting of enforcement activities at HUD is not the fundamental problem. The way in which the law is implemented is the problem confronting HUD and this country, and it is this problem that must be addressed now.

Key Recommendations

This report makes a number of recommendations for improvement of HUD's administrative enforcement and compliance activities. These recommendations can be loosely grouped under five major categories:

• The Administration, HUD, and Congress must improve the enforcement of disability rights guaranteed by the FHA and Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act; ensure compliance by federal grantees; and make enforcement of disability rights laws a priority.
  
  
• The Administration, HUD, and Congress must ensure that current and future HUD budgets are increased so that adequate resources are provided for the enforcement of housing-related civil rights laws and for ensuring compliance by federal grantees.
  
  
• HUD must provide better guidance on the meaning of housing-related disability civil rights laws, including the FHA and Section 504, and must dramatically improve its collection of data about enforcement and compliance activities.
  
  
• HUD must improve its identification and dissemination of best practices concerning education, enforcement, and compliance activities.
  
  
• The Administration, Congress, and HUD (including its Office of Disability Policy and a National Consumer Advisory Committee) must work together to regain public trust in governmental enforcement and compliance activities.

Conclusions: The Road Ahead

The Administration has taken some actions, and HUD has initiated some disability-related changes since October 1, 2000, the end date for the information covered in this report, that suggest support for future improvements in fair housing enforcement.

President George W. Bush, Vice President Richard Cheney, and Attorney General John Ashcroft have indicated support for fair housing enforcement and, in particular, for increased emphasis on disability rights. While it is too early to say whether this renewed support will make a significant difference in improving enforcement, it is a promising start.

HUD Secretary Mel Martinez has demonstrated his recognition of the importance of disability rights early in his tenure by meeting with several major disability rights organizations. He has also taken steps to implement several key aspects of President Bush's New Freedom Initiative, designed to assist Americans with disabilities by increasing access to assistive technologies and promoting increased access to community life. Among the President's initiatives are implementation of the American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000, which provides opportunities for Section 8 voucher holders, including people with disabilities, to use those funds for down payment assistance in the purchase of a home.

HUD has reported that it has engaged in a variety of initiatives to enforce the FHA's design and construction requirements, including completing a review of model building codes and developing, with others, changes to the International Building Code to develop a stand-alone document that publishes access standards for housing. HUD has let a $1 million contract to develop a new training curriculum to provide national training on the FHA's accessibility requirements to a wide audience of builders, developers, architects, and advocates consistent with congressional direction in the FY 2001 budget report language. If Congress approves funding, this project is anticipated to provide accessibility training and technical assistance in an organized way. HUD's Office of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity also reported that it has conducted six new training activities on a variety of accessibility issues, including a session for the National Association of Attorneys General on access issues and one for BANC One on tax credit housing, with particular emphasis on accessibility and Section 504, as well as more general sessions in Honolulu, Hawaii; Providence, Rhode Island; Pinellas County and Clearwater, Florida; and Maryland. In addition, HUD announced that it plans to conduct a self-evaluation, as required by Section 504, in FY 2001.

The lack of management focus and limited staffing and resources remain critical problems in fair housing enforcement. Secretary Martinez's expressed commitments to staffing realignments and increases in management oversight and the use of technology to improve HUD's activities show promise for future enhancements of fair housing work because they have the potential to address problems identified in this report.

FHEO has advised NCD that it intends to revise the HUD Strategic Plan to include the following language: "Enhance Section 504 enforcement efforts through increased guidance and technical assistance to field staff; increase compliance/monitoring activities; and coordinate such efforts within HUD and other Federal agencies." FHEO has also advised NCD that it intends to revise its FY 2002 Annual Performance Plan (APP) to provide specific measures and indicators to reduce housing discrimination against people with disabilities and that it will "incorporate compliance strategies to specifically address Title VI/Section 504 compliance reviews for people with disabilities in the FY 2003 Annual Performance Plan."

These are worthy activities. HUD and its Office of Fair Housing/Equal Opportunity may be turning the corner. As detailed in this report, however, much more needs to be done. HUD needs to work continuously with its various stakeholders to ensure that management and program reforms recommended in this report are implemented. HUD needs to work alongside NCD as part of this process. HUD also needs to ensure that its work in this regard incorporates the knowledge generated by the Interagency Council on Community Living, as well as the groundbreaking work being conducted around the Olmstead Initiative by the Department of Health and Human Services. It is time to restructure fair housing.

Remarks by Ophelia B. Basgal, Executive Director, Alameda County Housing Authority and Member of the Millennial Housing Commission
November 6, 2001

Introduction

The National Council on Disability's Reconstructing Fair Housing report underscores how far we as a nation have to go to insure that persons with disabilities have access to housing that is "user friendly", i.e. housing that allows them to live fully and as independently as possible in communities of their choice--the kind of housing that most of us enjoy. I will not repeat or elaborate on many of the detailed findings of the report that underscore the failures of past housing programs, the problems with fair housing reporting, investigation and enforcement mechanisms, etc. because I find the majority of them irrefutable.

Instead what I would like to focus on the three areas for improvement that in particular stand out for me as a housing provider. I would categorize them as leadership, resources and enforcement.

Leadership

The lack of consistent leadership from Congress and HUD on fair housing policy and goals as they relate to disabled persons has greatly exacerbated the problems that have been outlined in the report. With HUD, in particular, the lack of a clearly articulated fair housing policy in this area has affected what program providers understand are their responsibilities.

The mixed messages sent by HUD through its program funding decisions, resource allocation, monitoring activities and enforcement actions has led too many to believe that discrimination against the disabled is a low priority. Instead documentation of needs of the disabled in a community's Consolidated Plan, Public Housing Agency Plan and/or Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing is too often seen as a required exercise, i.e. another hoop to jump through for funding and guaranteed to use a ream of paper, but of little consequence as no one at HUD seems to review the plans and provide meaningful comments or enforcement. Consequently, local providers often take much the same attitude when they solicit comments from the public on these issues. They dutifully listen, document the comments and then fail to give them serious consideration in planning their future housing strategies.

Local housing providers and other federal departments who provide housing assistance, such as Treasury and the USDA, will take their cues from HUD leadership if they give this area heightened public attention. I am heartened by Secretary Mel Martinez's recent comment that HUD's "mission is to serve people not programs." I interpret that to mean that HUD staff will be focusing on the outcomes of its programs and actions. That is a positive change along with a repeated statement by many HUD leaders that they need to return to HUD's core duties and fair housing certainly falls in that category. In addition, the President's signing of the Olmstead Executive Order makes a further commitment to providing community-based alternatives for individuals with disabilities and "recognizes that such services advance the best interests of Americans."

Now the HUD leadership needs to take the next steps by embracing the principles outlined in Olmstead as it fully informs the public and its partners, both federal and local, of its intent and expectations in this regard. HUD needs to continuously reinforce the message, getting the word out quickly as to what this means for housing in general and HUD programs specifically. Recent actions to broaden Section 8 homeownership opportunities for persons with disabilities is a certainly a step in the right direction and shows how a broader way of thinking can improve housing choice opportunities for families.

Resources

In addition to problems with leadership, HUD needs to change its internal mindset that has for too long thought that the way to meet the housing needs of disabled is through special programs, e.g. Section 811 and 202, Shelter Plus Care, etc. This has led to both housing providers and the general public feeling that the disabled have their "own" programs and lessened the emphasis on general access for the disabled to all housing.

While the housing needs of the disabled are so great that one certainly would not suggest that their special program funding streams be eliminated, the sheer size of other HUD housing programs warrants the continual message that the goal is program accessibility to all of HUD's programs and the general housing market. This goal can only be accomplished through a significant national public education campaign, the required use of all housing resources to meet these needs and strict enforcement of the law.

The supply of accessible housing could be increased, for example, by requiring structural accessibility in Low Income Housing Tax Credit developments or properties developed or rehabilitated with funds from Community Development Block Grant and HOME. HUD could also encourage continued research on the housing needs of the disabled and ways to facilitate the delivery of services, when necessary, to insure that individuals and families with disabilities have a full range of housing choices.

My agency's experience with the HUD HOPE for Elderly Independence Five Year Demonstration Program showed how frail elderly persons could live independently in homes they chose in communities where services could be provided efficiently and effectively at a fraction of the cost of housing in institutionalized setting. Regrettably the demise of this program also showed how a successful program for the disabled could simply fall by the wayside because it was the last Administration's program. HUD cannot afford to squander the knowledge gained from programs like this one in addressing the unmet needs of individual's with disabilities.

Enforcement

Increased leadership and expanded housing resources requires the third prong of effective enforcement of the fair housing laws if we are to be successful in achieving the desired significant improvements. As NCD's report has pointed out and I would like to emphasize, adequate levels of staffing and funding are critical in this area. I would also add the importance of training and education not only for HUD staff but also for all housing providers.

My experience and observation of housing providers-private, public and non-profit has led me to believe that many of the negative and discriminatory actions involving the disabled in housing find their primary root in ignorance. Not only ignorance of the law but also ignorance about the disabled and their housing needs and what accessibility really means. Perhaps if we continually asked persons, "If you or a family member became disabled, could you remain in your home and neighborhood?" they would understand the issue.

The current state of affairs where interpretations of the law and advice on accessibility are as varied as the persons and agencies providing the answers must be changed. HUD staff, not only in Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity but also on the program side, needs to be better trained in this area so that they can be educators for housing providers and the public. In addition, there must be better coordination between the departments that are responsible for enforcement, e.g. HUD and Justice and state departments of fair housing, if we are to eliminate inconsistent and piecemeal enforcement actions.

Millennial Housing Commission

While the Millennial Housing Commission report is still a work in progress, the Commission takes seriously its Congressional mandate to reinforce the goals of the Fair Housing Act in its final report. Towards that end, we have solicited input widely on fair housing issues. In early September, we held a focus group session on fair housing issues and housing for persons with disabilities. That discussion and NCD's report will further inform the recommendations being developed for the final report.

I anticipate that the report will likely address many of the issues of concern raised in the NCD report. Specifically, there may be recommendations in the area enforcement, emphasis on the expansion of accessibility to all HUD programs, architectural accessibility and integration and independence of persons with disabilities to create effective Olmstead housing efforts.

Conclusion

Many of us at some point in our lives will have to figure out how to live with a disability. A suitable housing environment will be a key element in how successfully we are in meeting that challenge. Reconstructing Fair Housing provides a blueprint for how the federal government can help us get there.

Remarks by Becca Vaughn of the National Disability Housing Justice Coalition, Disability Rights Action Coalition for Housing

We waited for 20 long oppressive years for fair housing rights, we believed justice would prevail in the years since 1988, when the 1968 Fair Housing Act was amended to include people with disabilities in it's fair housing protections, (regulations finally issued for Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, only 14 years late) yet we still wait today for that elusive "justice". I guess, who ever said that when those with power, money and stature say the word "just-us", that's just what they mean, it is "just - us" for whom the laws protect. Perhaps today will become a day of reckoning, an hour of "justice", at last.

They said they could help me if I let them control my thoughts, mind and life. I stood before them homeless in the snow. They said they don't rent to people like me. They said I was not entitled to dignity and respect, that only they could "case manage" me to normality. That was how I was treated, standing homeless over 20 years ago, having hard emotions cycling in my head. I had freed people from mental institutions in the late 70's (where I worked as a Mental Health Tech, whatever that meant) because I was the keeper of the keys and the people were screaming for freedom. For freedom and justice from the antiquated and oppressive stereotypical view of mental illness. That was the right thing to do and the human thing to do. Today, it is the right thing to do and the human thing to do, in demanding that those who hold the enforcement "keys" to our fair housing rights, use them! Unlock the past oppressive housing policies, programs, and practices. Release the chains, which have denied us our fair housing rights enforcement.

Housing discrimination threatens the very core of our communities. Even today, with reports of discrimination against people with disabilities, being at a record high, HUD, DOJ and local FHAP agencies continue to ignore our pleas for equality. We have come to believe our rights are not viewed with the same conviction as those of other protected classes, because of the treatment we encounter when exercising our fair housing rights. When an (HUD, DOJ, FHAP) investigator asks the very questions that are prohibited and illegal under the FHAA; when they do not see the non-compliance of builders, as being harmful (it's only a little step); when they support the continued segregation of a "group" of people; and fail to recognize that requiring a person to participate in group therapy, (in order to have a roof) is illegal, ("special terms and conditions" is prohibited by the FHAA), we are assured that our rights have not really ever been, nor are they today, fully recognized or honored in the provision of housing and housing products. Perhaps it is merely a figment of our imagination that these civil rights laws were ever passed, certainly that they should actually ever be enforced must be a dream we all had. Maybe they protest against us louder now, because they know the veil of their secrecy is being torn down, layer by layer. Through continued pressure such as this NCD report, Reconstructing Fair Housing, the layers of non-enforcement and oppression grow dimmer as we speak.

We are our best and most often only, enforcers of fair housing and civil rights. We have educated ourselves, and the disability friendly community. We work with government public servants to assist them in understanding disability housing justice issues, and we are attacked at every turn, with their bias and bigotry. The "gimps", the "crazies", the "drooling", really do belong in institutions, are not deserving of fair housing rights. They have "special needs" (i.e. less than, not the same as, not normal) housing. That's what they really think. I have heard them say it and watched them demonstrate this belief through their actions (or lack of action). You may think I am harsh, or impolite, well I am neither. I am outraged at the lack of equal rights and justice in housing. (In all aspects of society.)

We can not change an individuals prejudices, or tell a person what to think, but we can through legislation, stringent enforcement and prosecution, warn those that would discriminate and exclude a person (solely on the basis of having a disability) from securing a home of their choice, that discrimination does not pay. Like my wise grandfather always said, "hit 'um where it hurts, in their pocket book". Maybe, if the price is too high, they will not repeat their crime. Housing discrimination is a crime, a crime against humanity, creating areas of blight across our great nation.

Imagine that you are sitting at your door, looking out into the bright spring day. The birds are singing, it's just a perfect day to sit outside. You look down at the three rickety steps and know you are a prisoner in your home. For 10 months, you have waited to sit in the sunshine. For 10 months, you have waited for help from HUD because your request for a reasonable modification to have a ramp built was denied (by your landlord). Imagine the quality of your life. Now face the hard cold fact that HUD (the very "protectors" of your fair housing rights) has ruled that "no reasonable cause" exist to believe discrimination has occurred, in your case. You're still sitting at your door, watching the rain.

Imagine you became homeless because you no longer wanted to participate in mandatory group counseling. The people who run the group meetings have control over your home, you are threatened with eviction if you don't agree to their "special terms and conditions". You decide to keep your dignity, the park bench is hard against your back. You turn to HUD for immediate help, they rule "no jurisdiction" and close your case.

What if someone told you when you could and could not see your children. You have not committed any crime, which prevents you from seeing them, unless becoming very ill, being hospitalized for several months (because of your disability) and losing your home is a crime. (Perhaps the crime of disability?) You get homeless assistance, the organization demands you meet with them several times a month, strangers threaten you with eviction if you see your children. Again, you turn to HUD for help, you file a fair housing complaint because the "special terms and conditions" they have forced you to participate in, have caused you to lose a Section 8 Voucher and your relationship with your children. Page 3 Becca vaughn

Again, imagine being discriminated against by the very agency charged with enforcement of your rights (in this case a Fair Housing Administrative Program FHAP) and your case being closed as "no reasonable cause, exist to believe discrimination occurred".

These are but a few experiences of people with disabilities, in recent months. What is the cost of housing discrimination on a human being? The struggle for freedom has many brave and unsung heroes, these people were not afraid to exercise their rights, even in the face of resistance. No one can take your dignity through their practice of discrimination, be it from a private landlord, HUD staff or local FHAP agencies. We will survive, as we have the past 2 decades while waiting for the fair housing enforcement army to tear down the walls of oppression. We prevail, through our celebration of small victories, regardless of the lack of fair housing protections from outside entities, and continue joining together to demand our human, civil and fair housing rights.

Thank you for your attention and sharing in our celebration today.

Becca Vaughn can be reached at the following information.

Becca Vaughn
TILRC Housing Activist/DRACH Coordinator
501 SW Jackson
Topeka, KS 66603
1-785-233-4572-v/tty
1-785-233-0779-fax
DRACHQB@tilrc.org

CLOSING REMARKS BY MARCA BRISTO

Thank you all for coming and participating in the National Council on Disability's Reconstructing Fair Housing news conference. I want to close by repeating myself, shelter is a basic human need. The ability to seek and have shelter without discrimination is the law of the land. The ability to choose a home without discrimination, to live in a home without interference, to seek and be granted reasonable accommodations where these are necessary, and to find and acquire accessible housing these are essential first steps for people with disabilities to live in the mainstream of our country.

We are encouraged by the President's commitment to fair housing in his New Freedom Initiative and his Executive Order on the Implementation of Olmstead. We look to the future in the hope that fair housing will one day be a reality for people with disabilities. Thank you.

HUD Statement on National Council on Disability Report

"While the report focuses only on the work of previous administrations, we do find useful suggestions that support the new direction the department is taking to build upon the President's New Freedom Initiative which is designed to provide support for people with disabilities."

"Through his New Freedom Initiative, President Bush has made it clear that addressing the needs of people with disabilities is a priority. Therefore, Secretary Martinez is rededicating the Department of Housing and Urban Development to that goal.

The Secretary has recently met with various disability advocates who raised concerns regarding the way HUD has handled disability issues in the past. The Secretary is reviewing those actions and looks forward to working with these advocacy groups to determine a course of action to ensure improvements are made throughout the Department. Secretary Martinez recognizes that additional measures are needed to address the housing needs of people with disabilities and in fact has several new initiatives underway. For example, the Department has awarded nearly $2 million for the development of nationwide training and technical guidance programs to ensure that more apartment, condominiums, and other types of housing are built in compliance with fair housing requirements. HUD is also working with HHS and other key federal agencies to carry out the President's Executive Order on Community Based Alternatives for Individuals with Disabilities, pursuant to the Olmstead Supreme Court decision.

Secretary Martinez also plans to maintain an on-going dialogue with disability advocates, housing providers, fair housing enforcement entities and state and local government officials to address the housing needs of persons with disabilities. Secretary Martinez is proud of this Administration's accomplishments, and while realizing there is still a long road ahead, is committed to working with NCD and other disability advocates to assure that fair housing choice is a reality for all people with disabilities."

HOME | FAQs | NEWSROOM | SITE MAP | FEDERAL AGENCIES | RESOURCES