- Attorney/Advocate Resource Center
- What's New
- Assisted Housing Preservation
- Public Housing
- Section 3 Program
- Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers
- Domestic Violence and Housing
- Foreclosure Crisis
- Language Access to Housing (LEP)
- Reasonable Accommodation for Persons w/ Disabilities
- Utility and Energy Issues
- Low Income Housing Tax Credit
- Re-entry
- Resident Engagement
- Choice Neighborhoods Initiative
- Publications, Trainings, and Webinars
- Housing Justice Network
- Help for Tenants, Homeowners, and Homeless
- Support NHLP
- About NHLP
- Contact NHLP
Chicago Acorn v. HUD
N.D. Ill. No. 05C-3049 (filed May 23, 2005)
Summary:
Current residents of Chicago project-based Section 8 property seek to prevent HUD from terminating Section 8 contract for 1,240 unit property after foreclosure.
1. Complaint with exhibits (PDF)
# Counts include: Violation of MHPDRA;
# Failure to preserve contractual obligations in transfer of ownership;
# Failure to ensure project will remain in decent, safe, sanitary condition;
# Failure to conduct market study;
# Failure to limit voucher replacement to 10% of units;
# Disparate impact on African Americans, women, and children;
# Failure to affirmatively further fair housing;
# HUD actions were arbitrary and capricious, etc., within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act.
# Failure to preserve contractual obligations in transfer of ownership;
# Failure to ensure project will remain in decent, safe, sanitary condition;
# Failure to conduct market study;
# Failure to limit voucher replacement to 10% of units;
# Disparate impact on African Americans, women, and children;
# Failure to affirmatively further fair housing;
# HUD actions were arbitrary and capricious, etc., within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act.
Includes exhibits:
o Report: Paul B. Fischer (Lake Forest College), Section 8 and the Public Housing Revolution: Where Will the Families Go? (2001).
o Report: Paul B. Fischer (Lake Forest College), Where Are the Public Housing Families Going? An Update (2003).
o Report: Chicago Fair Housing Alliance, Putting the "Choice" in Housing Choice Vouchers (2004).
o Report: Janet Smith, Status of Section 8 project-based development and CHA housing in Chicago (2005).
o Report: Paul B. Fischer (Lake Forest College), Where Are the Public Housing Families Going? An Update (2003).
o Report: Chicago Fair Housing Alliance, Putting the "Choice" in Housing Choice Vouchers (2004).
o Report: Janet Smith, Status of Section 8 project-based development and CHA housing in Chicago (2005).
2. Motion for preliminary injunction (PDF)
Plaintiffs want HUD to fulfill obligations under MHPDRA, National Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, and Executive Orders 11603 and 12892. Plaintiffs seek to enjoin HUD from:
* Implementing a foreclosure plan on or otherwise selling property;
* Issuing housing choice vouchers to or relocating residents;
* Failing to provide the same number of subsidized units before and after foreclosure.
3. Memo in support of motion for preliminary injunction (PDF)
# Expanding on motion for preliminary injunction: HUD's statutory obligations under MHPDRA, National Housing Act, Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, and Executive Orders 11603 and 12892;
# Plaintiffs entitled to PI because:
# Plaintiffs entitled to PI because:
* Fair Housing Act Violations result in presumption of harm;
* Irreparable injury in the form of 1) loss of stable tenure and 2) loss to community of more than 1000 affordable units;
* Reasonable likelihood of success on merits of MHPDRA claim, Fair Housing disparate impact cliam, and claim that HUD has failed to affirmatively further fair housing.
# Plaintiffs should not have to post bond.
4. Class certification -- motion (PDF)
5. Class certification -- memorandum (PDF)
* Class meets numerosity, commonality, typicality, and adequacy of representation standards.
* Defendants' actions make declaratory and injunctive relief appropriate for class as a whole.
* Exhibit attached -- Report: City of Chicago, Lawndale Restoration Summary of Tenant Characteristics
6. Memorandum in support of motion to dismiss (PDF)
* Lack of subject matter jurisdiction: citing Mays v. Cuomo, 12 USC 1701z-11 does not govern; HUD may use Disposition Act, but has express congressional grant of "flexible authority" under 12 USC 1715z-11a.
* Failure to state a claim: "Notwithstanding any other provision of law" language in 12 USC 1715z-11a(a) negates any rights plaintiffs may have claimed under statutes, regulations, and executive orders.
7. Amended complaint (PDF)
# Counts include: Violation of MHPDRA;
# Failure to preserve contractual obligations in transfer of ownership;
# Failure to ensure project will remain in decent, safe, sanitary condition;
# Failure to conduct market study;
# Failure to limit voucher replacement to 10% of units;
# Failure to dispose consistent with goals of National Housing Act [NEW IN AMENDED COMPLAINT]
# Disparate impact on African Americans, women, and children;
# Failure to affirmatively further fair housing;
# HUD actions were arbitrary and capricious, etc., within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act.
# Failure to preserve contractual obligations in transfer of ownership;
# Failure to ensure project will remain in decent, safe, sanitary condition;
# Failure to conduct market study;
# Failure to limit voucher replacement to 10% of units;
# Failure to dispose consistent with goals of National Housing Act [NEW IN AMENDED COMPLAINT]
# Disparate impact on African Americans, women, and children;
# Failure to affirmatively further fair housing;
# HUD actions were arbitrary and capricious, etc., within the meaning of the Administrative Procedure Act.
Includes exhibits:
o Report: Paul B. Fischer (Lake Forest College), Section 8 and the Public Housing Revolution: Where Will the Families Go? (2001).
o Report: Paul B. Fischer (Lake Forest College), Where Are the Public Housing Families Going? An Update (2003).
o Report: Chicago Fair Housing Alliance, Putting the "Choice" in Housing Choice Vouchers (2004).
o Report: Janet Smith, Status of Section 8 project-based development and CHA housing in Chicago (2005).
o Report: Paul B. Fischer (Lake Forest College), Where Are the Public Housing Families Going? An Update (2003).
o Report: Chicago Fair Housing Alliance, Putting the "Choice" in Housing Choice Vouchers (2004).
o Report: Janet Smith, Status of Section 8 project-based development and CHA housing in Chicago (2005).
8. Plaintiff-tenants' Response to HUD Motion to Dismiss (PDF)
9. HUD's Reply on Motion to Dismiss (PDF)
10. Memorandum and Order (PDF)
Dismisses complaint for failure to state a claim, finding that Flexible Authority statute, 12 U.S.C. Sec. 1701z-11, overrides any other statutory restrictions governing HUD's disposition activities, including 12 U.S.C. Sec. 1701z-11 or the Fair Housing Act.
