The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development has charged a Ponce Inlet condo association with discriminating against a disabled retired sanitation supervisor who spent 400 days removing debris after 9/11.
|
|
The couple received
their first rules violation notice on Oct. 27, 2017,
according to the charging document.
One of the community's rules reads: "Personal items may not
be left at your front door, such as shoes, chairs, towels,
fishing poles, boogie boards, skateboards, etc. A doormat
and wreath are the only items allowed at your front door."
A second violation notice was posted on Jan. 24, 2018. A
week later, the condo association took the couple's shoes,
placing them in the association's office.
The couple filed a complaint with Ponce Inlet police, who
helped them retrieve their shoes.
The same scenario — shoes taken, a call to police — played
out the next month.
According to the Ponce Inlet police report, on Feb. 22,
2018, police advised the retiree to move the shoes from
outside his door "to avoid any future incidents."
Police also advised a condo board member to have the board's
attorney send a letter to the retiree, the Ponce Inlet
report states.
A letter from a lawyer was sent to the retiree the next
month, advising him to "cease and desist placing personal
belongings outside of their unit and that their continued
violation will result in filing an injunction."
Inside local housing:Volusia, Flagler housing market is red
hot. What you need to know.
Affordable housing:Realtors pour millions into effort to put
affordable-housing initiative on 2022 ballot
In April, the retiree and his wife requested a reasonable
accommodation to allow them to leave their shoes outside of
their unit because of allergies. A back and forth of
correspondence followed, with the retiree and his wife
providing documents. A doctor wrote a recommendation to not
track allergens indoors and a physician's assistant wrote a
request "to allow the retiree to leave his shoes or work
boots outside due to allergies."
The retiree and his wife also provided documents referencing
a shoeborne pathogen study and a letter from the World Trade
Center Health Program outlining his conditions.
The condo association, in May, responded that the
documentation "did not establish a causal relationship
between the complainants' shoes to 'an undefined allergy or
disability.'" The association sought to inspect and
photograph the retiree's unit "and examine all shoes and
vegetation within the unit and balcony."
The association also requested medical records, including
prescriptions, any test results of the unit for allergens or
molds and more.
The retiree responded with records, including a letter from
his allergist's office stating: "Although issues may or may
not occur when shoes are inside, some potential allergens
and pesticides could cause extreme or even life-threatening
respiratory distress or gastrointestinal inflammation that
are hard to recover from. All caution should be taken to
avoid these high-risk outcomes. It would be beneficial to
make an arrangement for shoes to be stored outside of the
home."
'Risk of
inflammation, difficulty breathing or swallowing'
The condo association replied on May 30, stating the
allergist's letter did not establish a nexus between the
retiree's allergies or other disabilities and his shoes, as
well as "the medical professional's opinion must satisfy the
definition of disability."
The association lawyer questioned whether placing the shoes
in a sealed container inside the home would be a solution.
Bad idea, according to the retiree's physician. In a letter
the next year, the doctor wrote that "allowing contaminated
objects to remain in a small enclosed space does not allow
allergens, bacteria, and pollutants to dissipate, creating a
greater chance of contamination, reaction and inflammation."
That letter further noted "bringing his recently worn shoes
indoors puts (the retiree) at unnecessary risk of
inflammation, difficulty breathing or swallowing, a possible
complete inability to breathe or swallow." Leaving the shoes
outside was one of many strategies for the retiree to
minimize exposure, the letter stated.
The condo association responded: "The doctor's letter does
not connect the dots by stating specifically the nexus of
such allergies to the specific substance presumably on his
shoes."
That letter also asked whether lab tests had been performed
on the retiree's shoes, how he should deal with shoes inside
his vehicle and whether they had any peer-reviewed medical
articles substantiating the correlation between the
allergies and shoes.
Fair Housing Act's
accommodations
HUD officials are making a case that the condo association's
actions violate the Fair Housing Act, specifically making
reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities.
A message left with Harbour Village management was not
immediately returned.
Jeanine Worden, HUD's acting assistant secretary for fair
housing and equal opportunity, explained the decision to
pursue the case.
“It is critically important that individuals with
disabilities be granted the reasonable accommodations they
need to use and enjoy the place they call home,” Worden
stated in a prepared statement. “When a person with a
disability requests a reasonable accommodation, a small
exception or modification to a housing provider’s rules can
make a big difference in the health and well-being of an
individual with a disability.”
“Refusing to grant reasonable accommodations for individuals
with disabilities is simply illegal, and so is making
repeated requests for unnecessary documentation,” said Damon
Smith, HUD’s general counsel. “HUD is dedicated to
eliminating barriers that prevent persons with disabilities
from having an equal opportunity to enjoy their homes.”
The case next goes before an U.S. administrative law judge.
If the judge finds discrimination has occurred, the judge
may order the condo association to allow the retiree to
leave his shoes outside his door, award damages to the
complainants and payment of attorney fees, and impose civil
penalties.