Locked out? City under scrutiny for fair housing

Fair housing concerns put city’s policies under scrutiny

A Northeast Ohio community was recently accused of having “discriminatory housing policies.”

A group of legal and housing experts sent Painesville City Manger Monica Irelan and Police Chief Daniel Waterman a letter stating that the east side city’s Crime Free Housing Program and its Criminal Activity Nuisance Ordinance, Painesville Codified Ordinances 508.20, violates statutory and constitutional law.

The letter was from ACLU of Ohio Staff Attorney Elizabeth Bonham; ACLU Racial Justice Program Staff Attorney Rachel Goodman; ACLU Women’s Rights Project Senior Staff Attorney Sandra S. Park; Fair Housing Resource Center Executive Director Patricia Kidd; Housing Research and Advocacy Center Executive Director Carrie Pleasants and Associate Director Kris Keniray.

“Through the criminal record screening instructions distributed to all Painesville landlords as part of the required Crime Free Housing Program, the Painesville Police Department functionally bars numerous individuals with criminal records from living in Painesville although their criminal records do not indicate any risk to the safety of people or property,” the group states.

“Because Ohioans with criminal histories are disproportionately Black, the policy illegally discriminates under the Fair Housing Act.”

Irelan said between 2007 and 2009, the city made a concerted effort to clean-up rental properties in Painesville.

“The Criminal Activity Nuisance Ordinance was created to make property owners aware of problems with existing tenants with hopes that the owner will address the problems,” she said.

“This legislation was based on a recommendation through the Housing Task Force and created a provision that identified specific activities that would be considered a public nuisance if they were engaged in by an owner, occupant or invitee of the owner or occupant of residential property. The Housing Task Force unanimously recommended the adoption of this ordinance to City Council.”

The Ordinance passed in 2008 to provide the Police Department another means to address nuisance properties within Painesville, she said.

“The Rental Dwelling Registration Ordinance was presented to Council by the Housing Task Force after it was determined that many of the persons that had previously been creating problems in the multifamily units were now moving into single-family or smaller complexes that could not participate in the Crime Free Multi-Housing Program,” Irelan said. “The Police Department presented to the Housing Task Force the Crime Free Rental Housing program which they implemented. It is based on the same principals as the multi-family program but can be applied to any rental property.”

The program assists landlords with appropriate background checks, information on illegal activities on their property and crime free lease addendum which assists with evictions.

“It was also felt that a mechanism was needed to encourage landlords to participate in this program; therefore the rental registration program was implemented,” she said.

“This rental registration requires all properties with the city that are rented, regardless of the number of units involved, to be registered with the City through the Community Development Department.”

The ACLU, Fair Housing Resource Center and Housing Research and Advocacy Center representatives said these policies mean that Painesville and its police force exercise significant, destructive and illegal control over rental housing in Painesville.

“PPD’s criminal history screening instructions ensure that people with criminal records, who are disproportionately people of color, are being barred from rental housing in Painesville and thus, being functionally barred from living in Painesville altogether,” they state in the letter. “And the Nuisance Ordinance, along with PPD’s enforcement of it, serves to penalize women, people with disabilities, and people in crisis in Painesville. These policies are not tailored toward achieving safety in the community. Rather, they are unnecessary and illegal barriers to housing for people with criminal records, people with mental health disabilities, victims of violence, and other vulnerable individuals who pose no risk to the community.”

Overall, the group feels that the policies contribute to the homelessness and housing instability in the city.

City officials and the ACLU met in late March to discuss concerns about the Crime Free Housing Program and the Criminal Activity Nuisance ordinance.

“We offered some immediate solutions along with ways for us to improve,” said Irelan.

“One immediate solution was to put our education programming on hold until our community service officer takes the Certified Crime Free Housing training. Our officer is signed up for the training in June and will bring back information on HUD’s (U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development) interpretation of the Supreme Court decision. This will allow us to update our educational materials. Then we will restart the Crime Free Housing program through the Rental Dwelling Registration Ordinance in Painesville.”

As for the Criminal Nuisance Ordinance, Irelan said the enforcement of that program is on hold.

“I have our legal counsel looking into the concerns of the ACLU,” she said.

“I assure the public we take all civil rights questions very seriously. We will make sure all recommendation are shared with Council on how to meet their goals of minimizing crime in our rental properties while still upholding the statutory and constitutional rights of every human being.”

“Because Ohioans with criminal histories are disproportionately Black, the policy illegally discriminates under the Fair Housing Act.” Letter to the city of Painesville

METRO CREATIVE CONNECTION