US v. San Francisco Hous. Auth.

No. 4:02-cv-04540-CW (N.D. Cal. filed, Jan. 16, 2004) ; Clearinghouse Number: 55583

Description

To Settle Tenants’ Racial Harassment Claims, Housing Authority Agrees to Pay Victims $200,000 and Modify Civil Rights Policy

Abstract

Defendant San Francisco Housing Authority entered into a consent decree with plaintiff U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to settle a complaint alleging defendant’s failure to protect public housing tenants from racial and religious harassment. Tenants—an interracial couple and other residents “who are white, black, Iraqi, Asian, Hispanic, and residents of the Muslim faith”—complained to HUD that defendant failed to act to end racial, ethnic, and religious harassment directed at them. They claimed that defendant knew that tenants were subjected to verbal abuse, racial slurs, threats, assaults, vandalism, and robbery. HUD found reasonable cause to believe that defendant’s actions or failures to act violated the Fair Housing Act. A subsequent complaint by intervenors alleged that defendant permitted a hostile housing environment and failed to resolve complaints of violence and harassment directed at Iraqi-Muslim residents. In the consent decree, defendant agrees, among other items, to strengthen its civil rights policy to ensure prompt response to complaints, remind tenants of lease provisions that prohibit racial harassment and make racial harassment grounds for eviction, improve and increase security, establish a civil rights complaint hotline with multiple language capability, require civil rights training for employees, conduct community meetings in tenants’ languages to inform tenants of procedures for reporting civil rights violations and the civil rights eviction policy, and implement a computerized tracking system for civil rights complaints. Defendant also agrees to pay individual aggrieved tenants amounts ranging from $3,000 to $22,000. Plaintiff may ask the court to appoint a monitor if plaintiff determines, after one year, that defendant will not have substantially complied with the consent decree.

Additional Information

Attorney Information
Docket Date
2004-01-16 00:00:00+00:00

Files

Filed under: