to sell or rent . . . or otherwise make a vailable or deny,
a dwelling to any person because of race, color,
religion, sex, familial status or national origin." 42
U.S.C. § 3604(a). Or, "to discriminate against any
person in the terms, conditions, or pri vileges of sale or
rental of a dwelling . . . because of race, color, religion,
sex, familial status, or national origin." 42 . U.S.C.
§ 3604(b). District and circuit courts ha ve interpreted
this language to encompass both a disparate treatment
and a disparate impact theory of liability.:33
Case No. 09-CV-01996 (JNE/AJB)
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENTDISTRICT OF MINNESOTA
ZELAIDO RIVERA GARCIA, MAURA
GONZALES SALINAS, ADRIAN RAMIREZCUEVAS,
CAMERINA CUEVAS LOPEZ,
METRO GANG STRIKE FORCE, RON
RYAN, former Metro Gang Strike Force
Commander, DOE OFFICERS 1-34,
individually and in their official capacities,
OTHER UNKNOWN DOE OFFICERS, CITY
OF WEST ST. PAUL, a municipal corporation,
HENNEPIN COUNTY, a direct political
subdivision of the State, DAKOTA COUNTY,
a direct political subdivision of the State,
RAMSEY COUNTY, a direct political
subdivision of the State, CITY OF ST. PAUL, a
municipal corporation, CITY OF
MINNEAPOLIS, a municipal corporation,
WASHINGTON COUNTY, a direct political
subdivision of the State, CITY OF
MAPLEWOOD, a municipal corporation, CITY
OF LINO LAKES, a municipal corporation,
CITY OF BROOKLYN PARK, a municipal
corporation, CITY OF RICHFIELD, a
municipal corporation, METROPOLITAN
COUNCIL, METRO GANG STRIKE FORCE
ADVISORY BOARD, MANILA (“BUD”)
SHAVER, Chief of the West St. Paul Police
Department, KEN SCHILLING, Inspector at
the Hennepin County Sheriff’s Office, DAVE
BELLOWS, Chief Deputy of the Dakota
County Sheriff’s Office, BOB FLETCHER,
Sheriff of the Ramsey County Sheriff’s Office,
JOHN HARRINGTON, Chief of the St. Paul
Police Department, ROB ALLEN, Deputy
Chief of the Minneapolis Police Department,
BILL HUTTON, Sheriff of the Washington
County Sheriff’s Office, DAVE THOMALLA,
Chief of the Maplewood Police Department,
DAVE PECCHIA, Chief of the Lino Lakes
The Attached USSC Brief titled
To: St.Paul City Attorney:Sara Grewing et al and St.Paul Police Chief Tom Smith
|Chief Tom Smith oversees all department operations. The Assistant Chiefs of the three divisions report directly to Chief Smith, as well as the Police Civilian Internal Affairs Review Commission, the Inspection Unit, Internal Affairs Unit and the Communications Director.
Contact Chief Smith CN: 11025318
you have already contacted Class Counsel about participating in this settlement you should be receiving a notice through first class mail after October 14, 2010. You may also download a copy of that Settlement Notice and the Claim Form from this site.
400 City Hall and Courthouse
15 Kellogg Blvd., West
Saint Paul, MN 55102
Ph: (651) 266-8710
Fx: (651) 298-5619
On December 16, 2010, the Court granted Final Approval of the Metro Gang Strike Force Settlement. The time period for appeals have now passed. Pursuant to the Master Settlement Agreement, the final day for class members to submit a claim form to Liaison Counsel is February 2, 2011. No claims postmarked later than February 2, 2011 will be accepted into the settlement.
If you have questions about your eligibility please feel free to contact Class Counsel at
1-866-211-0079 or by email at MGSFSettlement@zimmreed.com.
Sent: 2/23/2011 1:23:36 A.M. Central Standard Time
Subj: Just A Landlord
Posted: 22 Feb 2011 03:50 AM PST
It is a sad reality that many communities use code enforcement to promote an illegal racially motivated agenda. The ACLU outlines their view of the problem in an article, Renting While Black.
We see it here in Milwaukee where at least one Alderman appears to use Aldermanic Service Requests in a way that only the ku klux klan would be proud of.
Even if so called community leaders are not actively involved in the racially motivated inspections, a complaint based code enforcement that permits anonymous exterior complaints opens the door for neighbors to promote their biases through code enforcement
There have been a number of federal lawsuits over the years alleging racially motivated code enforcement. A list of some of those cases can be found here.
Typically if a case gets to the point that the property owners may win the municipality quickly and quietly settles. Usually not for the full compensation for the harm caused by the racially motivated enforcement. But lets face it, it takes a lot of financial and mental tenacity for a small landlord to slug it out against cities with seemingly endless resources to defend their bad behavior.
However there is one such case that the landlords have held on for something like eight years now. After the Federal Eighth CIrcuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion favorable to the landlords, the city of St Paul has petitioned the US Supreme Court for review (link to petition for review). You can read the amended original complaint that started this case here.
If the Supreme Court hears this case it will have a huge impact on all landlords who follow fair housing practices, i.e. don’t reject tenants tenants simply because they are a different color, nationality, religion, etc than their neighbors. One must really respect these property owners for the amount of sacrifice they have made to get this far.
The case alleges that St Paul housing inspection programs were used in a racially motivated manner to force racial minorities out of St Paul and that such actions violated the Fair Housing rights of the occupants. A very interesting point is a number of city employees including inspectors are on the hook personally in this suit. From a legal perspective they must defend themselves as they and their employer have disparate interest; for the city to win if the allegations are proven true they must claim rogue employees acting outside of the law. For the inspectors to win they must argue that they were following instructions that they believed were legal. The inspectors may have a hard time claiming ignorance however as the owners had provided the inspectors with documentation that the inspectors’ acts were contrary to Fair Housing, yet the inspectors continued with their agenda. At some point the inspectors will have to name their union as third party defendants as the union failed to stop management from allowing/forcing them to violate the rights of the tenants and owners
From my conversations with two of the plaintiffs over the past six or seven years they seem to be just a handful of hard working landlords who independently found themselves on the losing end of government behaving badly. The current case is a consolidation of three or four cases that started independent of each other, but the claims were so similar that the federal court combined them.
Most of the cases claimed RICO (racketeering) on the part of the city employees. The RICO elements were dismissed due to procedural errors. I’m certain that some future case will go to trial on that issue, whether in St Paul or somewhere else.
You are subscribed to email updates from Just A Landlord
To stop receiving these emails, you may unsubscribe now.
Email delivery powered by Google Google Inc., 20 West Kinzie, Chicago IL USA 60610
THEREFORE: PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, COMPLIMENTS TO THE CITY ST.PAUL TO RESOLVE AND SET PRECEDANT WITH THE UNITED STATE SUPREME COURT. http://www.angelfire.com/mn3/andersonadvocates/PDFedem2006/file8.pdf
LEGAL NOTICE: /s/Sharon4Anderson@aol.com ECF_P165913Pacersa1299 telfx: 651-776-5835:
Attorney ProSe_InFact,Private Attorney General QuiTam Whistleblower, Candidate AG2010 www.sharonagmn2010.blogspot.com Blogger: www.facebook.com/sharon4anderson www.twitter.com/sharon4anderson Homestead Act of 1862 neopopulism.org - Pro Se Dec Action Litigation Pack Sharon4Anderson Scribd Document's are based on SEC filings, Blogger: Dashboard Home www.slideshare.com/sharonanderson www.taxthemax.blogspot.com www.sharon4anderson.org
FAIR USE NOTICEThis site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are makinknowledge gained as financial journalists , securities they recommend to readers, affiliated entities, employees, and agents an initial trade recommendation published on the Internet, after a direct mail publication is sent, before acting on that recommendations, and may contain errors. Investment decisions should not be based solely on these or other Public Office documents expressly forbids its writers from having financial interests in g such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of whistleblower protection issues, MY FindLaw SharonsWritProA06_1150_30Jun06_26
The CAN-SPAM Act: Requirements for Commercial Emailers
Sharons-Psychic-Whispers: Sharons Gypsy Curse-Court-Cop Corruption 3Apr0http://www.givemeliberty.org/RTPlawsuit/courtfilings/Docket.htm Sharon4Council: DLJ Management v. City St. Paul A06-2118,Money LaunderinNo direct un-apportioned tax confirmed by the US Supreme Court rulings in CHAS. C. STEWARD MACH. CO. v. DAVIS, 301 U.S. 548, 581-582(1937) g andFCC Complaints - http://sharons-copywrite.blogspot.com