Discriminatory practices found among Oak Park’s biggest housing providers, report shows  – Wednesday Journal

Investigation Reveals Fair Housing Discrimination in Oak Park

An investigation into fair housing practices of some Oak Park’s biggest housing providers showed evidence of discrimination in their rental processes.

The investigation largely focused on whether those housing providers violated county, state, or federal fair housing laws by discriminating against applicants based on income or criminal history. One incident involved racial discrimination.

Evidence of Non-Compliance with Source of Income Protections

Investigators found evidence that six housing providers were not compliant with laws related to source of income protections. Seven providers could not explain to an investigator acting as a prospective tenant how an arrest or conviction record could affect their application.

“Most of the housing providers told our independent investigators, or testers, that they don’t know the policy,” said Michael Chavarria, executive director of the civil rights advocacy organization HOPE Fair Housing Center, which the village hired to conduct the investigation. “[They said] ‘We use a third-party screening company, and they set the policy. They make the decisions.’ We know that’s not true.”

Trustees on Oct. 1 called the findings “alarming,” “disturbing,” and “troubling.” The report appeared to come as a surprise to a village that commits itself to diversity, equity, and inclusion.

But the trustees also appeared determined to push the village’s housing providers toward full compliance with fair housing laws. Some asked to implement enforcement measures, including fines or supporting legal action when necessary.

“As a society, we have to make discrimination too expensive to continue,” Chavarria said. Trustees agreed.

Trustees Chibuike Enyia, Brian Straw, and Cory Wesley said they would like to explore enforcement provisions related to fair housing violations.

“These kinds of violations are the kinds of things that prevent people from moving into Oak Park, and it’s just unacceptable,” Straw said. “The only way, in an industry that’s driven by dollars and cents, to make sure that we get discrimination out of the industry, is to look at the dollars and cents of it.”

Wesley said there’s an imbalance of power between landlords and potential tenants because housing is a constrained resource in Oak Park. That can allow for discrimination, he said.

“We owe it to ourselves here at the board, but also to our village, to live the values that we preach,” he said.

Reviewing Housing Provider Practices

The project began in 2023 after the village contracted HOPE to look into anti-discrimination protections among Oak Park housing providers. All housing providers tested were kept anonymous in the report, but they have some of the biggest market shares in Oak Park, Chavarria said.

As part of the 13 investigations, HOPE sent independent testers to act as applicants, gather information about a housing transaction, and inquire about policies related to income requirements or criminal records. Testers’ experiences were later compiled and reviewed.

Illegal housing discrimination, Chavarria explained, is when a prohibited act is taken against a protected class. A prohibited act, Chavarria said, is when a person is treated differently in a way that denies them housing or the ability to enjoy it.

Federally protected classes include race, disability, sex, national origin, color, religion, and familial status. Illinois takes it a step farther by protecting people from discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, ancestry, marital status, gender identity, arrest record, age for 40 and up, order of protection status, military status, source of income, and immigration.

Both the Illinois Human Rights Act and the Cook County Human Rights Ordinance prohibit housing discrimination based on source of income, which is protected as long as it’s legal and verifiable, Chavarria said. Source of income discrimination could manifest as preferring tenants with certain types of income, refusing applicants with housing choice vouchers, or screening out applicants receiving government assistance.

Landlords often require renters to have an income that’s at least three times the rent per month. For example, a rent that’s $1,500 a month would require an income of $4,500 per month. For voucher holders, it’s different, Chavarria said, because someone who earns three times the rent wouldn’t qualify for a voucher.

“So, if you apply a policy of ‘You must earn three times the full rent amount’ to a voucher holder, you are categorically excluding every single voucher holder in Oak Park,” Chavarria said.

When considering an applicant who has a voucher, that metric can only be applied to the tenant’s payment portion, he explained. If, in the same example, a voucher holder paid $500 out of pocket and the housing authority covered the other $1,000 toward rent, a housing provider could only require the tenant to earn $1,500 per month, three times their portion, not $4,500.

The Cook County Human Rights Ordinance also prohibits discrimination based on “covered criminal history,” which means “information regarding an individual’s arrest, charge or citation for an offense; participation in a diversion or deferral of judgment program; record of an offense that has been sealed, expunged, or pardoned in accordance with applicable law; juvenile record; and conviction.”

To deny a person based on a criminal record, Chavarria said, the housing provider would have to prove that person poses a risk to the tenants or property and give them a chance to explain why they do not.

“The ways that discrimination can manifest are endless,” Chavarria told the village board. “We anticipate that there will be new forms of discrimination arising each and every day.”

When it came to income, HOPE investigators looked at whether an Oak Park housing provider accepted vouchers or imposed barriers that prevented voucher holders from accessing housing. All six providers tested revealed some level of discrimination on this basis.

Some of the violations found included income requirements that would prevent voucher holders from being accepted and discouraging certain callers from applying based on voucher program questions. At least one included race-based discrimination.

As for the seven Oak Park housing providers who were tested to see whether policies violated the Just Housing Amendment, HOPE investigators found none could explain how their policy on arrest/conviction records would affect an applicants’ chances of being accepted for a lease.

Wesley said that housing providers appear to be “selectively confused about fair housing law,” considering they have no problem articulating the benefits of their units or the neighborhoods. Chavarria agreed.

“If you know the restaurants that are around your housing units, you should know the law as well,” Wesley said.

According to Jonathan Burch, the village’s neighborhood services director, Oak Park received more than 300 complaints from tenants about related to housing per year in 2021, 2022, and 2023. However, no formal complaints have been filed in that time against Oak Park housing providers on the basis of fair housing discrimination, he said. Whether that was due to a lack of understanding about how to do so or because not all rose to the level of a formal fair housing complaint is not clear.

If someone had independently reported the discrimination HOPE testers uncovered, formal legal action could have been taken, Chavarria said.

Toward a Solution

HOPE recommended that the village require housing providers to be transparent with potential tenants about qualifications, increase education and outreach on fair housing laws for housing providers and tenants, and invest in fair housing enforcement.

“It is important that when people’s civil rights are violated, that they have opportunities to stand up for themselves,” Chavarria said.

Village staff recommendations include amending the residential rental license requirements, to include broadening the definition of who is required to attend the village’s housing provider training and how soon they must take the training. Burch recommended it be within three months of acquiring a license.

They could also increase the frequency of the village-provided required training, and Burch said village staff plan to update the training’s content based on HOPE’s testing results. Burch also said Oak Park wants to move the trainings back in person, after being taken online during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Another step could be to require housing providers to provide information on source of income protection and the Just Housing Amendment, Burch added, potentially through provided documents to tenants.

Burch said village staff is also recommending starting a Fair Housing Coalition, similar to the Oak Park Homelessness Coalition, which could consist of 12 to 15 individuals who meet to address fair housing issues.

Trustee Lucia Robinson said she’s not sure about a Fair Housing Coalition because she doesn’t want to decentralize housing issues and would rather focus on the Housing Programs Advisory Committee, which is already accountable to the village board. Village President Vicki Scaman also said she could see the work being done by HPAC instead.

Burch said the village also aims to hold trainings about discrimination based on source of income in November and arrest and conviction records in December.

Further recommendations are expected to come back to the board at a later date before implementation.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

SDGs Addressed or Connected to the Issues Highlighted in the Article

1. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities
2. SDG 11: Sustainable Cities and Communities
3. SDG 16: Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions

Specific Targets Based on the Article’s Content

• Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion, or economic or other status.
• Target 11.1: By 2030, ensure access for all to adequate, safe, and affordable housing and basic services and upgrade slums.
• Target 16.3: Promote the rule of law at the national and international levels and ensure equal access to justice for all.

Indicators Mentioned or Implied in the Article

• Indicator 10.2.1: Proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, by age, sex, and persons with disabilities.
• Indicator 11.1.1: Proportion of urban population living in slums, informal settlements, or inadequate housing.
• Indicator 16.3.1: Proportion of victims of violence in the previous 12 months who reported their victimization to competent authorities or other officially recognized mechanisms.

Table: SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Based on the article, the issues highlighted are connected to SDGs 10, 11, and 16. SDG 10 addresses reduced inequalities, which is relevant to the investigation into fair housing practices and the discrimination faced by certain applicants based on income or criminal history. SDG 11 focuses on sustainable cities and communities, specifically ensuring access to adequate, safe, and affordable housing. The investigation revealed violations of housing providers’ policies related to income requirements and criminal records. SDG 16 relates to peace, justice, and strong institutions, and the investigation highlights the need for equal access to justice and the promotion of the rule of law in housing practices.

The specific targets identified based on the article’s content are Target 10.2, which aims to empower and promote the social, economic, and political inclusion of all individuals, and Target 11.1, which aims to ensure access to adequate, safe, and affordable housing for all. Additionally, Target 16.3 focuses on promoting the rule of law and equal access to justice.

The indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets are Indicator 10.2.1, which measures the proportion of people living below 50 percent of median income, Indicator 11.1.1, which measures the proportion of the urban population living in slums or inadequate housing, and Indicator 16.3.1, which measures the proportion of victims of violence who report their victimization to competent authorities or recognized mechanisms.

Source: oakpark.com