Previous coverage: day one.

Monday, 6/9/08

Note: the final update of today is quite late due to continuing problems with the hotel’s T-Mobile HotSpot and a trip to Ben’s Chili Bowl (how can you pass up chili dogs with civil rights history?).

4:53pm: Shanna Smith provides a litany of the failures of enforcement at a federal level, both at the DOJ and HUD. She sums it up thusly, “This failure of the federal government to enforce fair housing law is shameful.”

4:33pm: Perry asks, “How many of you work for private fair housing organizations?” and 80% of the hands in the room go up. He follows up by asking, “How many of you get CDBG funding to do enforcement work?” and about 30 hands go up. He concludes by asking, “How many of you get more than $50k to do that work?” and five hands go up. Many fair housing organizations, including the Chicago Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights Under Law (my day job), receive CDBG funds to conduct outreach, education, and training - but very few receive funds to do enforcement work.

4:30pm: Referencing the actions of St. Bernard Parrish to exclude non-whites with their “you can only rent to blood relatives” policy, Perry jokes, “You violate fair housing laws and get $876m dollars – we might be on the wrong side of this equation.” He calls the lack of enforcement in the CDBG program “an incredible, huge flaw”.

4:25pm: By way of background, Perry explains the history and purpose of the CDBG (Community Development Block Grant) program. The statute that created the program and the Fair Housing Act requires municipalities and counties that receive the funds to “affirmatively further fair housing”. When Perry asks whether anyone in the room believes that their areas actually further fair housing with those funds to raise their hands, no one does. When he asks what happens to those recipients that don’t, crickets – which he says is telling. There is nearly a universal lack of enforcement of this provision of the program.

4:20pm: James Perry begins by pointing out that private fair housing organizations have “picked up the slack” when federal and state enforcement agencies have fallen behind. But despite the important and impactful work on the fair housing movement, Perry also believes that we – as a movement – rely too largely on the financial support of federal and state agencies and the ways in which those monies dictate, often to great specificity, the type of work we do.

4:17pm: McCarthy asks the audience how many work in areas where there is a FHAP agency, and nearly everyone raises their hands. He then asks how many meet with decision makers at their respective FHAP agencies, and at most 10 hands go up. In a room of nearly 250 fair housing advocates, this is a big problem.

Note: Some acronym definitions – FHIP agencies or FHIPs (Fair Housing Initiatives Program) are private fair housing organizations contracted by HUD to do enforcement work: intake complaints, investigate cases, and file complaints with administrative agencies or in court. FHAP agencies of FHAPs (Fair Housing Assistance Program) are municipal or state entities that are deemed “substantially equivalent” under the rules of the FHA. HUD refers cases for investigation and adjudication to FHAP agencies and pays them a per-case fee.

4:15pm: Jim McCarthy begins by pointing out that the panel is not criticizing individuals but rather a system (IMHO largely because there are a few members of the DOJ’s Civil Rights Division in the audience).

4:10pm: Dane requests amicus brief assistance from state attorney generals and the Department of Justice, despite the reality that many state AGs do little to protect fair housing and the current man in charge of the DOJ (you know, the elected one who has thankfully little time left) is no friend of civil rights. He cites an ongoing case in which DOJ declined to file an amicus that would encourage the courts to take a more expansive view of the statute of limitations in design and construction cases (when buildings are inaccessible to people with disabilities). While private enforcement actions face a tight deadline, the DOJ has no such timeline – providing an amicus in this case would have helped lighten the load on the already overworked Civil Rights Division. Despite this, DOJ remained silent on the issue.

4:00pm: Steve Dane is telling stories of amazing fair housing courtroom successes that end up with little real world implications – defendants who are in default and never pay or simply ignore the court’s orders. “From the private enforcement side this is very very difficult work. Attorneys take the risk of not being successful… but even when we win that doesn’t mean private attorneys get paid.” Add to this mix aggressive and time-consuming defense attorney tactics and a sometimes-hostile judiciary and the landscape for the private fair housing attorney is somewhat bleak.

3:50pm: The final session of the day is entitled “Justice Delayed is Justice Denied: The Broken Fair Housing Enforcement System and Public Policy Steps that Must be Taken to Repair It” and features James Perry of the GNOFHAC, Steve Dane of Relman & Dane, Jim McCarthy of the Miami Valley Fair Housing Center, and Shanna Smith of the National Fair Housing Alliance.

3:13pm: Concluding, Wu notes, “Diversity, like democracy, is a process, not an outcome.” Fantastic speech – best of the day.

3:05pm: Exploring why people live where they do, Wu hypothesizes that the overwhelmingly majority of folks make decisions based on “good” and “decent” reasons – easy commute, good floor plan, real estate agent recommendation, etc. Seldom do you hear folks make explicit comments based on race when discussing this decision. “Civil rights now, except in egregious cases, involves showing them that having a good and decent attitude is not enough.” I couldn’t agree with Wu more, but would extrapolate on his comments to say that in the new digital world the question is how we enable people to go beyond their “good and decent attitudes”.

Inserting into the housing decision-making process the specific and unique implications of segregation and opportunity in each situation is one of the goals of MoveSmart.org. Arguing that living in an integrated neighborhood is “good” or “right” won’t get us there – to repeat an oft-used line on this site, until families understand in a way that is meaningful way that living in an integrated neighborhood is not only their right but also frequently a good decision for their family our severe racial and economic segregation will continue.

2:55pm: Wu notes, “Other than a few fringe groups and a few people here and there everyone embraces diversity… they say they want their children to grow up prepared for a global economy… We all at least pay lip service to belonging and equality. We’ve convinced people that racism is wrong, the new battle is to convince them that it still exists.” Wu’s point, that nearly all of us now have a “black friend” or “watch Oprah” and convincing this new diverse-yet-discriminatory reality is increasingly challenging, is one that has enormous implications for fair housing advocates and litigators

2:50pm: “There have been victims and villains, but I wonder if by framing the story in this manner we have done our cause a disservice.” Wu’s point is that there are many who are neither victims nor villains, and the narrative that only speaks to those two roles leaves most out of the equation, it becomes “someone else’s struggle”. He challenges excitement about the “post racial” future that some believe is upon us, arguing that the reality is far more ambiguous. (Note: Wu is a fantastic public speaker and seems to be going w/o notes, even when quoting folks at length.)

2:46pm: Wu’s first major point is that we as fair housing advocates must place our work in a larger context. He notes, “Race is more complicated, but by understanding this complexity… we can enhance the opportunities for all of us. It should not be understood as subtracting from any cause but elevating the goals that we all share.” We must look beyond the simple black-and-white.

2:41pm: Wu is remembering W.E.B. du Bois, one of the first and most legendary “race men”. That’s always been one of my favorite early-era civil rights terms, one that has been lost to time. Does anyone out there still use or refer to themselves as “race man” or “race women”?

2:36pm: Late making it to “40 Years in the Wilderness: The Nature and Extent of Housing Discrimination”. Professor Frank Wu of Wayne State University Law School is discussing his book Yellow and addressing the unique and new intersections of race, racism, and civil rights. The lack of information on Asian Americans in the current body of civil rights literature inspired him to write.

1:54pm: NFHA gives the “President’s Award” to Relman & Dane for their support and advancement of NFHA’s staff and mission. Relman & Dane are currently representing NFHA in their complaints against NRT (race-based sales steering; NRT is the parent company of Coldwell Banker), Guideone Insurance (religious discrimination), AG Spanos (design and construction), Steiner Corporation (design and construction), and Ovation (design and construction). Steve Dane accepts the award to a standing ovation. Dane jokes that when Smith took him to lunch to inform him of the award, he wondered, “Why does President Bush want to give us an award?” Dane’s partner John Relman is currently in the midst of a lengthy trial in Cincinnati representing a group of African American families in Zanesville, Ohio who were denied municipal water service for 50 years while neighboring, mostly white communities were provided with said service. He did send a video message (which hopefully we’ll post later) in which he notes, “I think fair housing is the most important civil rights issue… Fair housing bring all the other civil rights we work on together.”

1:47pm: Barbara Rabin, who presided over HOME (Richmond, VA) during the Havens Supreme Court case, is recognized for her years of fair housing work – including her vital role in the formation of the National Fair Housing Alliance. She receives a lengthy, standing ovation as she makes her way to the podium.

1:37pm: Liam Garland of the Housing Rights Center (Los Angeles) is recognized by NFHA for resurrecting the Fair Housing/Fair Lending Reporter under the mantle of Equitas Media. After being published for decades the Reporter ceased publication for about a year. Garland managed to convince the previous publisher to donate the rights to the name and was able to pick up where they had left off. If you don’t subscribe and are involved in fair housing litigation, you should – it is a fantastic resource.

1:34pm: McCarthy concludes by calling the entire NFHA staff to the front for a round of applause. (64 powerpoint slides in less than 30 minutes – must be some kind of a record.)

1:31pm: NFHA and Allstate Insurance have launched a website promoting the benefits of living in integrated neighborhoods, ARicherLife.org.

1:29pm: In April 2007 NFHA along with LCCR, NAACP, NCLR, and the Center for Responsible Lending become the first organizations (sorry Sen. Clinton – they beat you to the punch) to call for a six month moratorium on foreclosures.

1:28pm: In response to Katrina, NFHA members donate $20,000 to the Greater New Orleans Fair Housing Center, files multiple complaints on behalf of victims, and launches the Hurricane Relief Project, and supports fair housing organizations across the Gulf Coast.

1:23pm: Since 200 NFHA has operated “Fair Housing School”, training more than 800 fair housing professionals in all areas of advocacy and investigation. When McCarthy asks those who have attended the School to raise their hands, nearly half of the room does.

1:20pm: McCarthy highlights NFHA’s work on ‘linguistic profiling’, when landlords discriminate against prospective tenants based on their accents and dialect.

1:15pm: NFHA’s first office opened in 1989 in Washington D.C. with the help of an anonymous donation of $20,000. Shanna Smith, who still directs the Alliance today, drove back and forth from Ohio to work 2 weeks per month in D.C. The Washington Fair Housing Council, Washington Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, National Council of LaRaza, and NAACP LDEF all support NFHA during these months with administrative services and free office space. In 1990, NFHA receives a $1m grant from HUD to launch a national media campaign, and HUD receives a record 110,000 calls in just 6 months (compared to 13,000 the previous 6).

1:10pm: Lunch has just concluded (surprisingly good for these kinds of events – the chicken was not rubber) and NFHA board president Jim McCarthy, who also directs the Miami Valley Fair Housing Center, is presenting on the history of the now 20-year old National Fair Housing Alliance. Trivia: the Alliance was founded in Lombard, Illinois (a suburb of Chicago) in 1988.

11:40am: Exploring the previous anniversaries of the FHA, Prof. Dark explains that on the 10^th, 20^th, 30^th, and now again on the 40^th celebrations articles and conferences note that despite fair housing laws discrimination and segregation continued (and continue).

11:32am: Prof. Dark wonders whether “private choice and integration goals are sometimes in conflict?” She briefly discusses the factor of “tipping points” in neighborhoods, with the caveat that there are a handful of places – like Oak Park – where there is stable diversity, but says that despite this conflict we must still strive for integration.

11:31am: Are those who dream of integrated neighborhoods are “visionary” or “living in la la land”?

11:25am: Prof. Dark jokes that she is ready to riot over the current price of gas and then more ominously wonders whether the circumstances outlined in the Kerner Commission report are again present in American cities.

11:15am: Prof. Okianer Christian Dark begins by thanking the Richmond, VA-based Fair Housing Center that represented her successfully in a fair housing case and, “saved my life.” For those with a background in fair housing, you’ve likely seen Prof. Dark’s story in a fantastic training video by Bernie Kleina.

11:10am: On the slide entitled, “What Must We Do”, Prof Lipsitz concludes by writing we need to “win increased damages; change fair housing laws; create new fair and affordable housing units; link to environmental justice, education equity, and labor campaigns; and demonstrate that discrimination injures individuals and communities, misallocates resources, undermines productivity, and makes injustice and inequality appear to be natural, necessary, and inevitable.”

11:06am: “We can’t fix a 2008 housing discrimination problem with a 1968 fair housing law.” –Prof. Lipsitz

11:04am: Disturbing statistic – 98% of FHA loans between 1934 and 1968 went to whites, who in turn acquired assets that appreciated in value and were passed down from generation to generation. The powerpoint slide calls it a “reward for racism”.

11:00am: Highlighting the interesting work of folks applying hate crime and anti-trust law to fair housing cases, Prof. Lipsitz exhorts us to think innovatively and expansively about the tools available to promote fair housing.

10:53am: Prof. Lipsitz’s powerpoint notes, “People of different races in the US are relegated to different physical locations by housing and lending discrimination, by school district boundaries, by policing practices, by zoning regulations, and by the design of transit systems. The racial demographics of the places where people live, work, play, shop, and travel expose them to a socially shared system of exclusion and inclusion.”

10:42am: Prof Lipsitz is up first and states that a friend of his once told him that supporting civil rights in this country “is like being in love with someone who doesn’t love you back.”

10:40am: NFHA vice president Cat Cloud introduces a panel discussion “Forty Years of Fair Housing: The Good, the Bad, and the Downright Ugly” with Profs. Okianer Christian Dark and George Lipsitz of Howard University School of Law and UC Santa Barbara, respectively. 10:15am: NFHA’s Shanna Smith announces that NFHA along with the Leadership Conference on Civil Rights, Lawyers’ Committee for Civil Rights, and NAACP LDEF has formed a National Commission on Fair Housing. There will be four hearings around the country this summer, the first one tentatively planned for July in Chicago, exploring the current state of fair housing.

10:05am: The theme of this morning’s keynote was clearly that fair housing advocates must place their work in the larger context of building and sustaining “healthy communities”, exploring the connections among fair housing and issues of education, crime, health, etc. I couldn’t agree more. One of the driving forces behind MoveSmart.org is our opinion that the fair housing movement, on the whole, focuses too much on ensuring the right of individuals to live where they want, sometimes forgetting to encourage families to make integrative moves. No matter how long we struggle to ensure that our fair housing rights are preserved, they don’t mean that much if we don’t exercise them.

9:57am: Categorizing the Louisville school desegregation plan that was recently blocked by the Supreme Court as a “tremendous success”, Payton says that the message from the Court was “outrageous”, explaining that we need to figure out how to use the tools currently left in our toolbox to make “healthy communities.”

9:54am: Payton says, “The real question is, ‘How do we help build healthy communities?’”

9:48am: Payton notes, “Many of you are aware of the aspects that I’ve just discussed, many outside of this room are not.” Exploring the issue of awareness, Payton discusses the ignorance of the Lower 9^th Ward in New Orleans (my hometown) among most Americans, saying that most of us ignore severe urban poverty.

9:36am: Payton references the new report Cities in Crisis from America’s Promise, Colin Powell’s organization. This new report challenges how schools account for test scores and dropout rates when calculating graduation rates. The research, funded by the Gates Foundation, is described by the speaker as “sobering”. Incorporating this additional data, NYC’s drop out rate becomes 54%, Detroit’s 76%.

9:30am: The first and keynote speaker of today is John Payton, the new president and director-counsel of the NAACP Legal Defense and Education Fund (LDEF). Payton begins a little history, referencing the “direct zoning” laws enacted in response to the Great Migration and the 1917 Supreme Court case that outlawed these exclusionary zoning practices. Always crafty, racist whites responded by adopting restrictive covenants – a practice that would remain legal through the 1940s (and continue illegally through the 1970s). The LDEF would successfully challenge these covenants in the Shelley v. Kraemer case and later go on to champion school desegregation in Brown. Their contribution, as a team, to civil rights is truly awe inspiring. (Note: CLCCRUL executive director and MoveSmart.org board member Clyde Murphy is a former director of NAACP-LDEF Voting Rights Project.)

9:18am: NFHA CEO Shanna Smith kicks off the first official session of the conference by summarizing the recent history of fair housing enforcement at a federal level, calling it a “dismal failure”, and explaining that the focus of this conference – unlike in years past – is to reflect upon and develop for the future a comprehensive fair housing policy. Given the 40^th Anniversary of the passage of the Federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) in April of this year, the conference this year promises to be a mixture of reflections on the past, recognition of those who came before, and an honest assessment of where we currently are as a movement.