|
Census
David Condon received
clarification from Althea Forrester of HUD concerning a question
about the Privacy Act and the U.S. Census, which came up at HDLI's
2010 Spring Conference Open Forum.
Resident Council Funds
John Heinen's opinion
letter to Housing Authority of the City of Milwaukee in response
to a challenge from the Freedom From Religion Foundation.
Disclosure of Tenant Information
The Dallas Housing Authority received a request from
Fox 4 News for information regarding Section 8 Voucher holders.
The Texas Attorney
General has determined that such disclosure is prohibited by VAWA.
Any listing of Section 8 Voucher Holders that do not include VAWA
recipients may be subject to disclosure. VAWA, however, prohibits
PHAs from maintaining a list of VAWA and non-VAWA voucher holders.
A list containing all voucher holders from a PHA that administers
VAWA vouchers, would not therefore be subject to disclosure. The
same prohibition applies to the disclosure of Public Housing tenants.
Code of Conduct Policies
St. Paul Public Housing Agency Code of Conduct policies
and related materials:
Guide to Conduct
Board
Member and Staff Relationships Policy
Policy of PHA Commissioners on Conflicts
of Interest
Policy for PHA Staff on Conflicts
of Interest
Conflicts of Interest
Annual Reporting Form
Minnesota Statute 10A.07 Conflicts
of Interest
Charlotte
Housing Authority Code of Ethics and Standards of Conduct
Bridgewaters v. Boston Housing Authority
On January 7, 2009 the Supreme Judicial Court of
Massachusetts handed down its
decision in Bridgewaters v. Boston Hous. Author.
involving a case where the housing authority argued, inter alia,
that it did not have a duty to consider whether a mentally disabled
tenant that committed a vicious violent act upon another tenant
was entitled to a reasonable accommodation that would avoid his
eviction from public housing. The tenant argued that he suffered
from bipolar disorder, that he had been unmedicated at the time
of the attack, and that the housing authority had a duty, but failed,
to explore the feasibility of a reasonable accommodation of his
disability before concluding that continuation of his tenancy would
constitute a threat to the safety of other tenants. Reversing prior
court decisions upholding the tenant's eviction, the supreme court
held that, by regulation, prior to moving to evict the tenant, a
housing authority has a duty to make an individualized assessment
as to whether a proposed accommodation will eliminate the direct
threat posed by the tenant. The court held that such an assessment
should be based on reasonable judgment that relies on current medical
knowledge or on the best available objective evidence to ascertain:
the nature, duration, and severity of the risk; the probability
that the potential injury will actually occur; and whether reasonable
modifications of policies, practices, or procedures will mitigate
the risk. It is important to note that this decision does not prevent
a housing authority from evicting a disabled tenant where it can
demonstrate that no accommodation is available that would protect
the health or safety of other tenants. Rather, it underscores the
requirement that housing authorities not automatically reject a
request for accommodation before making the individual assessment
as to whether the proposed accommodation would eliminate the disabled
tenant's direct threat to the health or safety of others.
HDLI's brief
is available here.
Dallas Housing Authority Gets Favorable
Discovery Ruling from Texas AG
On October 27, 2008 the Texas Attorney General issued
a letter ruling to the
Dallas Housing Authority (DHA) that information related to a severance
package paid to an employee of a public housing authority whose
salary and benefits had been paid with de-federalized funds through
the Central Office Cost Center was not public information. Therefore,
DHA was not required to release the requested documents. Though
this ruling is limited to the particular facts of this request for
information under the Texas Public Information Act, it is useful
to other housing agencies with open records laws similar to those
in Texas.
Ohio Civil Rights Comm. v.
Akron Metro. Housing Authority
HDLI submitted an amicus
brief in support of the Akron Metropolitan Housing Authority. The
Supreme Court of Ohio, in a 7-0 decision, rejected the creation
of a “hostile living environment” claim in Ohio. You can access
the decision and HDLI’s
brief.
Please contact HDLI at (202) 289-3400 or hdli@hdli.org
with any questions.
|
