Fair Housing Needs Fairness Itself
At the risk of being sued for politically incorrect speech, we would like to suggest that the fair housing advocates who’ve been badgering local landlords and Realtors lately are hurting their own cause.
Their heavy-handedness is a perfect example of the regulatory excess that makes people applaud proposals to eliminate the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.
That’s unfortunate. Spokane does need fair and affordable housing. But assaults on small business people who provide it can make the housing shortage worse by driving would-be rental houses off the market.
The problems stem from a bad attitude at the Northwest Fair Housing Alliance. Taxpayers help fund this non-profit agency’s work. In addition it appears to have other fund-raising methods including a legal - and outrageous - campaign to wring money from the local real estate industry.
This began two years ago when Florrie Brassier moved to Spokane, took charge of the alliance and decided the community was rife with discrimination and needed a good clubbing with the heaviest tools at her disposal. What a way for a newcomer to inspire cooperation and support.
Brassier sent fake tenants to area landlords in an effort to catch them violating a 1989 federal law that bars landlords from turning away would-be tenants with children. Her agency’s lawyer bragged about bullying a record $76,000 settlement - from an apartment landlord who declined, reasonably, to rent upper floors to families with kids because they might play on high railings and fall. The landlord also would have been sued if a kid had moved in and fallen.
Next, Brassier filed 17 complaints against Realtors who used words such as “empty nester’s delight” in real estate advertising. Federal housing law is vague, and depending on how silly enforcers are, it can be interpreted to ban numerous “discriminatory” words. For example: Non-smokers. Adult living. Couples only. No drinkers. Quiet tenant. No unemployed. Handyman’s dream. No children. Stable.
Brassier says she will drop her complaints if users of such words pay cash settlements to her agency. That stinks.
Words don’t discriminate, people do. Words inform. Advertisers ought to enjoy wide latitude in telling would-be buyers or tenants whether a particular property will suit their needs. If words are regulated, misunderstandings will increase and serious discrimination, if it’s present, actually will be harder to detect.
Brassier’s latest crusade not only creates animosity where cooperation is needed, it also clashes with the plain meaning of the First Amendment.
She ought to back off, and Congress ought to revise the laws on which her shenanigans are based.
, DataTimes The following fields overflowed: CREDIT = John Webster/For the editorial board