Raphael Bostic, Assistant Secretary of Policy Development and Research, together with John Trasviña, Assistant Secretary of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity

HUD HOSTS TOWN HALL MEETING IN SAN FRANCISCO ON HOUSING DISCRIMINATION AGAINST LGBT COMMUNITY

By Melanie Nathan 3-1-10; San Francisco;

With thanks to a directive from President Obama, Secretary Shaun Donovan of the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, (otherwise known as HUD) is preparing to launch a ground-breaking national study of housing discrimination against members of the LGBT community in the sale and rental of housing.

Before designing this unprecedented research effort, HUD is conducting a national listening tour with public meetings such as that which began in San Francisco today, to follow with Chicago and New York. In addition, HUD will provide an opportunity for public comment for those living outside these metropolitan areas.

Raphael Bostic, Assistant Secretary of Policy Development and Research, together with John Trasviña, Assistant Secretary of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity hosted the fact finding/discussion Town Hall meeting at the San Francisco LGBT Center. The Assistant Secretaries travelled far to spend a precious three hours hearing from leaders of the LGBT and non-profit communities. The gay, lesbian, bi-sexual and transgender community was invited to explore the issue of housing discrimination and how it impacts individuals and the community.

In attendance were leaders and staffers including the offices of Congresswoman Jackie Speier, State Senator Mark Leno, Nick Panagopoulos, Mayor Newsom’s new LGBT community Liaison and Kenneth Stram, from the San Francisco LGBT Community Center.

I attended in my capacity as Vice President of Fair Housing of Marin, and had the great privilege of providing the Secretaries with a list of a few actual case situations that had been reported to our agency:

From the Fair Housing Notebook Housing Discrimination based on Sexual Orientation Housing Discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is illegal in California. Discrimination on the basis of disability, including HIV disease, is covered by federal and state law. Fair Housing of Marin investigates complaints of suspected discrimination, counsels victims, mediates with

property owners and makes referrals to government enforcement agencies and attorneys.

Our office has received complaints from gays and lesbians who were not considered the stereotypical “family”. Persons with AIDS have been shut out of housing because of unfounded fears of communicability. The following are a few case studies handled for gays and lesbians by our office.

• An apartment complex owner told our office that she would not rent to 3 men, one a minister with a child, because they might give AIDS to everyone in the complex.
• A professional man and his partner’s lease was not renewed after he told the resident manager he was HIV positive. This case was settled by HUD for an undisclosed sum.
• A gay man and his partner, managers of an apartment complex, were fired without notice by the owner of the complex after he learned that one of them had AIDS, thereby losing their housing as well as employment.
• A gay couple living in a 2 DR unit were denied the ability to move to an available I BR unit in the same complex, with questions by the managers as to how they would “manage”.

• A lesbian owner of a rental unit refused to rent to a heterosexual woman because she only wanted lesbians.

What prompted President Obama’s request according to Assistant Secretary Bostic and a common expression by participants, is the hope that TITLE 8 of the Fair Housing Code – to be amended to include sexual orientation. When participants started speaking about HUD redefining a family, to reflect the recognition of LGBT families, Mr. Bostic advised that this was already in the works with HUD “exploring a rule to broaden the definition of Family.”

A well rounded mix of speakers shared the sorry state of resources available to LGBT community and most surprisingly the revelation of the extent of poverty amongst gay men in the city. There is a dire shortage of affordable housing, access to resources a challenge, and a desperate need for improved conditions and increase in the number of Shelters.

The plight of gay youth – those who have been beaten and thrown out of their family homes, making their way to San Francisco, in the belief they are headed to gay safe haven, yet finding themselves amongst the 70% getting beaten up in shelters and many others remaining stuck on the streets.

Mr. Bostic also mentioned that Secretary Donovan had made a pledge to find a way to get rid of homelessness altogether, noting the complications that are derived from the variables involved.

Also of interest was to hear that the Department of Justice has established a new division – A Civil Rights Division of the Justice Department. My concern is that many choose not to recognize gay rights as a civil rights issue.

While discrimination was the subject of the meeting, it soon became apparent that discrimination is tied into the needs of the LGBT community; the availability of resources, with affordable housing in San Francisco at critical levels. With San Francisco the bastion of LGBT culture, historically, politically and socially – it is critical to this LGBT community that they have resources to remain in San Francisco.

Local government has been required to step in where HUD has lost its funding for certain Programs.

One topic that drew interest was the aspect of questioning of LGBT people with disabilities by Landlords. When asking for accommodations for disabilities, the Landlord is entitled to ask for proof of the disability and thereby inquire into medical conditions. However it is clear from some of the stories that this has lent itself to abuse of the HIIPA laws. The Assistant Secretaries took particular note of the need for a rule limiting the extent to which Landlords can go in such inquiries. This invasion of privacy often leads to the HIV /AIDS related discrimination I described above.

Part of the regimen for catching landlord offenders of anti-discrimination laws is to “test” a facility. For example if Fair Housing Group receives a complaint that a person of color suspects discrimination, the Group will send testers. First a person of color will be sent and that person will fill out an application. Then would be told the rental had been taken or there were no available units. A white person would then be sent to the same premises and would be approved.

So how does one test a landlord for HIV/AIDS discrimination? This question was posed by the Department Assistant Secretary – the audience was well versed and able to respond with examples such as when a landlord learns there is a subsidy involved for a prospective tenant, a red flag is raised and the landlord then can presume that the tenant has HIV/Aids.

Certain participants were asked to e-mail Mr. Bostic with examples of that would help develop a testing plan to catch Landlords who are discriminating against tenants with HIV/AIDS.

We will soon feature a separate report about the discrimination suffered by married same-sex couples when applying for a mortgage. A mortgage consultant/ broker provided insight into the mishaps in Title caused by lender ignorance. We are planning an educational article for LGR to follow soon.

Of course, in conclusion how could I not have mentioned the bi-national plight – albeit seemingly out of place? But what the heck… three ears away from the President – I must speak. I referred to one of my Bi-national cases – the one published here about Nancy C. I expressed that when one has no Federal rights and when spouses like Nancy C. are impeded by DOMA, they suffer further untold discrimination. In Nancy C.’s case she experienced an enormous amount of difficulty with her landlord, when they tried to characterize her wife as a “visitor.” The lease terms stated that a visitor could only live at the premises for 14 days. Nancy’s wife would visit for a few months at a time, because Nancy does not have a federal right to sponsor her spouse for a green card.

Nancy and her wife received discriminatory treatment when they tried to put the spouse onto the lease. Of course I told this story in the hope that any forum on LGBT discrimination will always take cognizance of the big picture and the negative impact that DOMA has on all departments, codes and laws.

The ultimate banishment of discrimination must happen at every level.

The community were really grateful for the opportunity to participate and expressed its appreciation to the Secretary and the Department. So my friends, President Obama is working for change. Lets look forward to the results of this research and the ultimate changes that must be made.                     Note: Photo by Melanie Nathan©

Melanie Nathan

Posted by Melanie Nathan©                              all rights reserved to LGR and Melanie  Nathan
nathan@privatecourts.com
www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com
Twitter me at: @oblogdeeoblogda
Civil Rights and Human Rights Advocate;
Owner Private Courts Inc.
Conflict Resolution & Personal Advocacy firm at
www.privatecourts.com
www.fairhousingmarin.org

Visit LGBT Bi-National Column for Immigration equality

Related articles by Zemanta

• Participate in HUD LGBT Housing Discrimination Forums in NY, Chicago & San Francisco (hrcbackstory.org)
• HUD seeks help with anti-gay discrimination study (seattletimes.nwsource.com)
• HUD Wants Help Creating Anti-Gay Discrimination Study (huffingtonpost.com)

Does marriage equality and more specifically same-sex marriage hurt traditional marriage? This most confounding question has yet to be answered by anyone, especially those who expound the rhetoric while seeking to ban same-sex marriage.  The derogatory impact of same-sex marriage on straight marriage has yet to be quantified.  I wonder how one would be able to figure it out.

Could it be that for every 4 gay marriages one straight person will not marry his fiancé; could it be that for every 4 gay marriages one straight couple will divorce?  Could it mean that allowing gay marriages will result in less straight people marrying and thereby reduce the numbers of married people?  I am trying so hard to come up with a formula, can someone please help me?   

Proposition 8 succeeded in California, and effectively removed a fundamental constitutional right, as endorsed by the Courts by way of popular vote – the right for any couple in California to marry regardless of gender was stripped.  Prop 8 was initiated in direct response and its mantra was  to “protect the institution of marriage” by keeping lesbians and gays out.  

After the barrage of voracious advertisements led 51% of voting Californians to believe that gay marriage would by its mere legality threaten straight marriages. Churches poured their money into the advertising coffers, tacitly claiming the interests of their God.   Silly them there is a better way to save the institution of marriage and just think it can be done without stripping other Americans of their inherent rights, as well as the advantage of quantification.  The obvious, unambiguous and only one absolute vehicle to sustain the precept of marriage is clearly the “The outlawing of Divorce.”  We must bring a new proposition to the voters in this earnest quest and that would be  ahh maybe -Proposition 9 – “Repeal of the Legislative Right to Divorce Act.”

Notably, divorce, unlike same sex marriage, can be easily quantified.  I believe in California the divorce rate is approximately 1 in 3. There you go – for every 60,000 marriages ending in Divorce, we can save 60,000 saved – see how easy that was. Not like our difficulty when we attempted to quantify the impact of same-sex marriage on ‘ traditional marriage.’ – that means we would have 60,000 out of every 180,000 marriages saved… How powerful is that!

This is a call to all those who truly believe in the sanctity of marriage. Support the rescue of marriage by ending divorce for good. Here is a safer and better plan – how about making that retroactive.  Anyone who has been divorced consider your good-selves remarried.

Indeed the next obvious step is legislation that prohibits one’s right to divorce.  Divorce is not an inherent right; it is one that is granted by specific statute. For example in California there would be no divorce if the Family Law Code did not deal create it. It gets worse – Divorce involves one spouse suing the other for divorce.  In California the first paper served by a plaintiff spouse on a defendant spouse reads “SUMMONS- You Are Being Sued.”  How bizarre – to separate church and State in this fashion.  It is an abomination to the sacred right of marriage to think that after spouses have said “till death do us part” that one may sue the other for divorce and that our law allows that to happen.

If Maine supports the ban of same-sex marriage tonight, I profess this to be the nest obvious step there too. 

Is this ban on Divorce a joke?  Not according to a Sacramento man, John Marcotte who is collecting signatures to place a new piece of legislation on the 2010 ballot for the people of California to decide on. He wants to make it illegal to divorce in California. Read his petition here.

Why? He contends that this is a natural extension of what religious conservatives did when they voted “Yes” on a ballot measure to ban gay marriage so that they could “protect traditional marriage”.

From John Marcotte’s Rescue Marriage website, here’s the statement announcing the new ballot measure:

“I loved Proposition 8, but felt it did not go far enough. So fresh from the office of our legal counsel, I present the 2010 California Protection of Marriage Act.

No party to any marriage shall be restored to the state of an unmarried person during the lifetime of the other party unless the marriage is void or voidable, as set forth in Part 2 of Division 6 of the Family Code.”

Marcotte has just launched his first couple of PSAs on the 2010 California Marriage Protection Act. Here they are:

Few Choice Quotes From the PSAs:

“My kids are being taught in school that divorce is all right.”

“You said ‘Till death do us part’. You’re not dead yet.”

“Hell is eternal, just like your marriage is supposed to be.”

“If we allow anyone to get divorced, before you know it, people will be divorcing their dogs.”

Lock Step-lock-jaw-Republicans-and conservatives- and those on the right – do not fail – put your money where your mouth is and support the BAN on DIVORCE.

Blogged by MELANIE NATHAN, CEO of Private Courts, Inc. Consulting, mediation & private advocacy ; motivated by injustice, I blog about family law/mediation, politics, news andLGBT equality and anything that ‘tickles my fancy.’ Otherwise blogging as O-blog-dee-o-blog-da. Websites and blogs include: http://www.privatecourts.com; http://www.divorcemediators.us; www.oblogdeeoblogda.wordpress.com. nathan@privatecourts.com