Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Download
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
4Activity
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
JustLandlord SA 1Sept10

JustLandlord SA 1Sept10

Ratings: (0)|Views: 19 |Likes:
Published by Sharon Anderson
Frank Steinhauser etal Landlords sued City St.Paul,MN 2004 RICO Claims, Steve Magner,DSI,Supervisor,Joel Essling et al_Disparate Impact re: Fair Housing Act also at www.sharonswater.blogspot.com and www.sharon4anderson.org Millions at Risk insured by www.lmc.org ie: League MN Cities.
Frank Steinhauser etal Landlords sued City St.Paul,MN 2004 RICO Claims, Steve Magner,DSI,Supervisor,Joel Essling et al_Disparate Impact re: Fair Housing Act also at www.sharonswater.blogspot.com and www.sharon4anderson.org Millions at Risk insured by www.lmc.org ie: League MN Cities.

More info:

Published by: Sharon Anderson on Sep 04, 2010
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial

Availability:

Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less

09/05/2010

pdf

text

original

 
Just A Landlord 
Tim Ballering's Survival Tips for Landlords in an Unjust World
Home 
About «Can/Should I charge extra for parking? 
8th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of landlords
City of St. Paul Inspection Dept to go to trial for Fair Housing violations.
Federal Court of Appeals ruled today that the combined cases of Gallagher, Steinhauser,Harrilal (rentalproperty owners) vs St. Paul will go to trial.This case alleges that St Paul housing inspection programs were used in a racially motivated manner toforce racial minorities out of St Paul and that such actions violated the Fair Housing rights of theoccupants.A very interesting point is a number of city employees including inspectors are on the hook personallyin this suit. From a legal perspective each city employee must defend themselves as they, their co-workers and their employer have disparate interest.For the city to win if the allegations are proven true they must claim rouge employees were actingoutside of the law and contrary to department policy. For the inspectors to win they must argue that theywere following instructions from their supervisors that they believed were legal. And the employee needto name their union as a third party defendant , arguing the union failed to step in and protect them frombad rules enforced by their supervisors The inspectors may have a hard time at this however as theowners had provided the inspectors with documentation that the inspectors’ acts were contrary to FairHousing, yet the inspectors continued with their agenda.From my conversations with two of the plaintiffs over the past five or six years they seem to be just ahandful of hard working landlords who independently found themselves on the losing end of government behaving badly. The current case is a consolidation of three or four cases that startedindependent of each other, but the claims were so similar that the federal court combined them. Most of the cases claimed RICO (racketeering) on the part of the city employees.
Much of this is so similar to what we are seeing in Milwaukee.
Note the vacant building ordinance for example. Our former Commissioner of Neighborhood Serviceshad a number of conversations with his counterparts in MN, and proposed a number of ordinances thatwere based on what was on the books there.Here is an except from today’s ruling
To demonstrate a disparate impact, Appellants have offered evidence supporting the following conclusions:
 
 
Page 1 of 68th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of landlords |Tim Ballering - Just A Lan...9/4/2010http://justalandlord.com/2010/09/01/8th-circuit-court-of-appeals-rules-in-favor-of-land...
 
 (a) The City experienced a shortage of affordable housing. The City represented in its2003 report to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (“HUD”) that “the lack of affordable housing opportunities remains a major issue facing many Saint Paul lower income households, who are also protected class members,” and that “27.6% of Saint Paul’s lower income residents cannot find adequate affordablehousing in the City.” Then, in 2005, the City estimated that 32% of the households inSt. Paul had unmet housing needs (cost burdens, overcrowding, etc.).
 
(b) Racial minorities, especially African-Americans, made up a disproportionate percentage of lower-income households in the City that rely on low-income housing.The district court noted that the parties agree that African-Americans make up adisproportionate percentage of low-income tenants in the City. The City’s 2000 censusdata showed that 11.7% of the City’s population was African-American, whereas data from October 2004 showed that 61% and 62% of those on waiting lists for publichousing and Section 8 assistance, respectively, were African- American. Further, theCity’s 2000 report to HUD showed that 52% of minority-headed renter householdswere in the bottom bracket for household adjusted median family income, compared to32% of all renter households.
 
(c) The City’s aggressive Housing Code enforcement practices increased costs for  property owners that rent to low-income tenants. Appellants produced at least sixaffidavits describing the toll that the City’s aggressive Housing Code enforcement took on their rental business. They reported a substantial increase in costs, resulting inevictions for tenants and “forced sales” of their properties in some cases. Theseallegations are corroborated by an internal memorandum from the City’s fire marshalin 1995, comparing the Housing Code and the HQS and concluding that the HousingCode was more strict in regard to 82% of the examined categories.
 
(d) The increased burden on rental-property owners from aggressive code enforcement resulted in less affordable housing in the City. Documents from the City and the Public Housing Authority acknowledged that any decrease in federally assisted rental housingwould reduce the amount of affordable housing in the City. Those predictions weresupported by the City’s Vacant Buildings Report, which showed that the number of vacant homes listed in the City rose from 367 to 1,466 between March 2003 and  November 2007, which was a nearly 300% increase. Further, Appellants submitted affidavits from three tenants who alleged that they endured hardship when their homeswere condemned for minimal or false Housing Code violations.
 
These premises, together, reasonably demonstrate that the City’s aggressive enforcement of the Housing Code resulted in a disproportionate adverse effect on racial minorities, particularly African-Americans. Viewed in the light most favorable to Appellants, theevidence shows that the City’s Housing Code enforcement temporarily, if not permanently,burdened Appellants’ rental businesses, which indirectly burdened their tenants.
 Read the entire decision here. I have a fairly complete set of pleadings if anyone wishes to study thismore.A lively discussion of the case onAdemocracy I and others were crying tears of joy when we heard this news. It has been a long emotional
 
Page 2 of 68th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of landlords |Tim Ballering - Just A Lan...9/4/2010http://justalandlord.com/2010/09/01/8th-circuit-court-of-appeals-rules-in-favor-of-land...
 
ordeal for many of us.There isn’t a jury in the entire world who could listen to this story and not favor theplaintiffs!ABC News -Landlord Suit Could Cost City Millions A legal battle between the City of Saint Paul and a handful of landlords could force the cityto pay millions.It all centers around code enforcement.Pioneer Presson the lawsuit.A set of lawsuits alleging St. Paul’s housing-code enforcement discriminated against black tenants was given new life Wednesday when a federal appeals panel reinstated a portion of the case.The allegations “reasonably demonstrate that the city’s aggressive enforcement of thehousing code resulted in a disproportionate adverse effect on racial minorities, particularlyAfrican-Americans,” a three-judge panel for the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals wrote inoverturning part of a 2008 dismissal of the case by U.S. District Judge Joan Ericksen.
This entry was posted on Wednesday, September 1st, 2010 at 9:33 am and is filed underCode Enforcement,Fair Housing, Government Behaving Badly. You can follow any responses to this entry through theRSS 2.0feed. You canleave a response, ortrackback from your own site.
One Response to “8th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of landlords”
1.
Sharon Anderson
Says:
September 1st, 2010 at 5:15 pm 
Thanks for posting the brief: Sharon4mnag has trie to bring similar issues of Corruption in theCity of St.Paulhttp://www.taxthemax.blogspot.comThreats against Sharon ie:http://www.sharon4anderson.orghas forced a POA online.http://www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com 
Leave a Reply
Name (required)
 
Mail (will not be published) (required)
 
Website
 Share/Save
 
Page 3 of 68th Circuit Court of Appeals rules in favor of landlords |Tim Ballering - Just A Lan...9/4/2010http://justalandlord.com/2010/09/01/8th-circuit-court-of-appeals-rules-in-favor-of-land...

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Sharon Anderson liked this
Sharon Anderson liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

Download
scribd
/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->