Legal Services of Central New York Just Hearsay-Spring 2019 edition

J U S T

HEARSAY

T h e Qu a r t e r l y Ne w s l e t t e r o f L e g a l S e r v i c e s o f C e n t r a l N e w Y or k — S pr i n g 2 0 1 9

LSCNY and Urban Jobs Task Force Call for Racial Equity in I-81 Project

By Andrew Croom, Staff Attorney

Clinton Plaza Progress

3

New Utica Office Pictures

4

Book Review by Dennis

5

Housing Sessions Continue

7

Save The Date!

8

Asset Challenge Success

9

PULP Training and Advocacy

10

Youth Court Confidentiality

11

Upcoming Events

12

The upcoming I-81 Viaduct Project is an opportunity for Syracuse City residents, especially residents of color, to obtain construction jobs, but only if equitable opportunity is made available to them. Construction jobs are well-paying and provide career paths for many, but access has been historically restricted for people of color. Urban Jobs Task Force (“UJTF”) – a local grassroots organization that advocates for local job Andrew Croom presenting the creation – saw the need for proactive advoreport’s findings at the Hotel cacy to ensure jobs on the I-81 project are Syracuse on March 14, 2019 given to local, minority residents. The problem was that there was a dearth of data and information that could be utilized for this advocacy. This is why in the fall of 2017, UJTF and LSCNY began our collaboration to create a report providing an educational and data-based tool to advocate for more equity in the construction trades in advance of the start of the I-81 project.

On March 14, 2019, LSCNY and UJTF released a report concluding 18 months of investigation into the local construction trades. The report “Building Equity in the Construction Trades: A Racial Equity Impact Statement,” was presented at an event hosted by UJTF at Hotel Syracuse, and attended by nearly 100 people from differing sectors connected to the construction industry.

We had representatives from elected officials and governmental agencies to construction developers and workforce trainers, all there to hear about our findings. The report and its findings – which are discussed briefly below – are found on both the LSCNY and UJTF websites.

Public construction projects in the Syracuse area are far from representative of the racial makeup of the county and city where they occur.

LSCNY and UJTF created the report to be a comprehensive review of the construction trades in the Syracuse area. The report includes a review of the history of racially discriminatory policies in Syracuse, the current state of the workforce in the Syracuse area, the regulatory schemes that will impact the I-81 project and what other communities have used to create equity around similar projects, and suggestions from local leaders which were gathered after conducting 20 interviews. The report also contains data on local construction worksite demographics that had never been analyzed before.

2

When investigating the construction trades, we knew that data would be important. Through data we believed we would be able to show what construction worksites currently look like demographically, as a way to show what the I-81 workforce will most likely be. To do this, we obtained employment records from five large, public construction projects in the Syracuse area: the Hancock Airport Renovation Project, the Lakeview Amphitheater Project, the State Fair Expo Center Project, the I-690 Highway Project, and the Joint School Construction Board Project. From thousands of pages of records we were able to compile nearly 4,000 data points, and using these data points were able to perform an analysis on the demographics on these construction projects.

Route 81 under construction in October 1966.

87.05%, 89.17%, and 87.00%, respectively. From this data we were able to conclude that public construction projects in the Syracuse area are far from representative of the racial makeup of the county and city where they occur.

What we found was that construction projects in the SyraBased on our findings in the report, it is very unlikely that cuse area are overwhelmingly white, do not represent the the I-81 workforce will be local city residents of color undemographics of Syracuse or Onondaga County, and that less racial disparities in the construction trades are adcurrently existing minority hiring initiatives are insufficient dressed now with collective advocacy from key players. alone to create workforce equity. The racial demographics of Syracuse are about 50% white and 50% minority, and This report is a new type of advocacy work at LSCNY and a Onondaga County is around 77% white and 23% minority. type that may have many different applications to address The demographics on the construction projects we investi- some of the larger systemic issues in our service area. Colgated are vastly different, with minorities being greatly laboration is key to ensuring that community based, invesunderrepresented. tigatory advocacy works effectively. Not only did UJTF and LSCNY partner to create the report, but we were fortunate As an example of our findings, on three of the projects – to be able to use the expertise of academics at Syracuse the airport, amphitheater, and I-690 project – we were University and find a pro bono data analyst. Without the able to identify 936 unique workers by race. Of these 936, work of this large team the creation of our report would 823, or nearly 88%, were white. Individually these projects not have been possible. had similarly excessive white workforce participation at Now that the report is done the real advocacy work begins. With Artist’s rendering of a Community the release of the Draft EnvironGrid, one of the three options on mental Impact Statement on the the table for Route 81 I-81 project, the Syracuse community must work diligently to ensure that the jobs on this multi-billion dollar project are filled equitably with local city residents of color. Hopefully, our report will help assist in that community advocacy and be utilized to create equity within the construction trades.

(Interested in learning more?

Read the report here.) 

3

Changes for the Better at Clinton Plaza

By Susan Griffith, Managing Attorney A high rise, 306-unit, mostly subsidized apartment building anchors the edge of downtown Syracuse. 550 South Clinton Street has gone through many changes over the years, and while its name has also been through a few changes, it is commonly known as Clinton Plaza. It is home to 306 households, making it a hub of activity on downtown’s southwest corner.

Legal Services works with tenants who are facing evictions, and through reasonable negotiation with Clinton Plaza and their counsel, have been able to keep many families in their homes. Perhaps more importantly, Legal Services assists tenants who may be having temporary but critical problems due to loss of employment, denial or sanction from the Department of Social Services, or problems managing a Section 8 subsidy. Resolving these problems can

Clinton Plaza had been an area indicator of housing instability in our area for many years, plagued with too many evictions, complaints about crime, and substandard housing conditions.

But times are changing. Over the last year or so, a concerted effort has been made by Clinton Plaza management, the City of Syracuse, Salvation Army and Legal Services of Central New York to improve and stabilize this important and necessary community asset.

Clinton Plaza Management, now led by site manager Dana Natale, is working effectively and compassionately with tenants. The Salvation Army is present at the property regularly to check in with tenants having trouble. Legal Services of Central New York is involved with the Tenants Association, and welcomes referrals from the Association, Management and Salvation Army. The role of Legal Services is to be available to tenants to advocate not only on legal issues concerning their homes, but also to be readily available to represent tenants with legal issues that may impede their ability to pay Clinton Plaza Apartments rent.

Susan with her client, Otis Simmons, who currently lives at Clinton Plaza. Otis says, “I always know that Susan’s got my back.”

prevent the need for eviction altogether.

This is a new model for dealing with low income housing that shows great promise for all. By stepping back from a traditional landlord-tenant adversarial relationship, and working together to look at a broader goal of housing stability, everyone benefits. A landlord finds that the high cost of eviction and apartment turnover can be avoided by working humanely with tenants, and making arrangements that will result in full payment, if only they are willing to work with tenants. The community benefits by avoiding repeated and costly demands on emergency social services, alleviating housing instability and its

4

corrosive effects.

And most important to us at Legal Services, individual tenants and families are not easily displaced. Tenants can stay in their homes, not be shuffled from place to face, keep their children educationally stable, and avoid the economic crisis that happens every time a move is forced. Housing stability is critical to improving a low income tenant’s economic and social success.

This is a step in the right direction. 

New Utica Office Legal Services of Central New York’s Utica office has moved to a new building! Our new address is 120 Bleecker Street, Utica. The office is located in downtown Utica, near Genesee Street and Centro Hub bus station. LSCNY’s offices are on the second floor.The rest of the building is filled by Legal Aid. Our new offices give us more space, including a large conference room, that will be usable for larger events in Utica. Look for an announcement soon, as we are planning an Open House so everyone can see our new digs!

5

BOOK REVIEW The Stubborn Facts of History:

The Color of Law: The Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America

by Richard Rothstein

By Dennis Kaufman, Executive Director Not so long ago nor far away, constitutional law classes approached racial segregation as either de jure (segregation by law) or de facto (segregation resulting from private practices). Why? Because the U.S. Supreme Court said so and continues to say so. The Court reinforced that distinction in a challenge to public high school desegregation plans in 2007. The Court saw a bright line between de jure and de facto segregation, repeating the admonition from a 1973 decision that our constitution has nothing to say about de facto segregation. The line is not so bright.

In The Color of Law, Richard Rothstein erases the line. He asserts that federal, state, and local law and policies, initiated in liberal and conservative administrations alike, in the South and the North, are antecedents of today’s persistent racial segregation in housing, suppressed income opportunities, and loss of asset accumulation prospects. Government actions are part of forgotten or, in many instances, unlearned history.

Their effects persist. Much of Rothstein’s narrative focuses on the crucial role of governmental efforts to segregate housing, not just in parts of the country where the history is well known. Housing on Long Island is an example.

Characterized as the model for suburbia following World War II, Rothstein recounts the promise of the American Dream for thousands of families in Levittown on Long Island. Single-family homes in a quiet neighborhood, a 30 minute commute from New York City, were affordable because of low-interest, no down-payment, federally insured loans. The 17,500 Levittown homes sold for $6,990 with payments of $60 a month; less than rents in New York City. Built quickly to meet the post-war housing shortage, the homes had modern conveniences like installed major appliances, a built-in television, and radiant heat. Some questioned the concrete-slab foundation, but few questioned another foundation – restrictive covenants in deeds preventing sale or rental to African Americans.

The covenants did not spring organically from private practices. The Federal Housing Administration (FHA), followed by the Veteran’s Administration (VA), required housing subdivision developers using federally insured construction loans to include sale and rental restrictions in deeds. The restrictions were not compelled by statute, but were adopted as policy during Franklin Roosevelt’s presidency. In 1948, the Supreme Court held it was unconstitutional to use the courts to evict African Americans from homes they rented or bought with restrictive covenants in the deeds. The FHA ignored the Court. Why? The FHA concluded the value of the homes it insured would decline if African Americans lived in or near them, thereby making the loans risky. No empirical evidence supported the conclusion. Restrictive covenants in Levittown continued to be enforced. In 1951, a white family renting from Levitt & Sons unsuccessfully challenged a refusal to renew their lease on a Levittown home because they “invited Negro children to play with their children.” Discrimination in federally Homes in Levittown

6

As Legal Services looks to being more purposeful and intentional in taking on race equity work, we need to understand and sometimes dig out the history of government involvement in segregating our communities, schools, and workplaces.

of the 1930’s though 1950’s have stubbornly persisted for potential African American buyers.

Levittown is one example of many in The Color of Law. Other significant governmental actions include: IRS tax exemptions for churches, universities, and neighborhood associations promoting racial segregation; concentration of new public housing in undesirable areas of cities; public works programs shutting out African Americans; and protecting the bargaining rights of unions that denied membership to African Americans. Rothstein concludes with sections on “fixes” and “frequently asked questions.”

Some fixes are well known, like banning zoning ordinances that prohibit multifamily homes or require large residential lots and using Section 8 to integrate neighborhoods.

More novel ideas include inclusionary zoning schemes, supported housing programs did not end until a 1961 ex- federal subsidies for African American families to purecutive order. By then, the damage was done. chase homes in the suburbs, and the federal government purchasing homes in segregated communities for sale to What is the legacy of the FHA’s policies? During the early African Americans. The “frequently asked questions” sec1950’s no African American families lived in Levittown. tion is well done and concise, sometimes reading like a Today, African Americans account for less than 1.5% of manual for replying to your conservative uncle’s musings the population. Considering inflation, the Levittown home about the state of race relations at the Thanksgiving Day selling for $6,990 in 1950 would sell for $85,000 in today’s table. dollars. The housing market, however, has now pushed the median selling price for a Levittown home to As Legal Services looks to being more purposeful and in$435,000. White Levittown families benefitted from the tentional in taking on race equity work, we need to underaccumulation of wealth in their homes, allowing them to stand and sometimes dig out the history of government buy bigger houses, buy cars and consumer goods, and involvement in segregating our communities, schools, and send their kids to college. The covenants no longer exist, workplaces. The Color of Law is a place to start. To view a but buying a Levittown home to start asset accumulation 17 minute author narrated video on the book, please go is now much more difficult than in 1950. The FHA policies to https://www.segregatedbydesign.com. 

Aerial view of Levittown

7

LSCNY Hosts Housing Co-Design Session With Mayor Walsh and City Office of Innovation

By Wendy Rhodes, Director of Development and Communications Building on the success of the 2018 “Evicted” City-wide book club initiative, on March 27, 2019 Legal Services of Central New York and the City of Syracuse reconvened the group of 40 local nonprofit organizations and government agencies who had previously joined us for an October 2018 housing stability policy session with Dr. Matthew Desmond. The March 27th event held in the Central New York Community Foundation ballroom included a press conference from Mayor Ben Walsh and City leaders regarding 11 new initiatives they are launching to improve housing quality and stability. Participants heard a round of “Lightening Talks,” where non-profits and city agencies shared briefly about programs they have recently launched to improve housing stability. Finally, “Housing Co-Design” discussion groups envisioned a path forward regarding four key issues: Tenants’ Rights, Affordable Housing Development, Data Collection, and Property Improvements.

Mayor Ben Walsh highlighted that 25% of Syracuse residents move at least once a year, damaging people’s financial and physical health, disrupting children’s education, and destabilizing communities. Growing out of dedicated work by the City of Syracuse Office of Innovation over the past year, Mayor Walsh announced eleven new initiatives as part of a strategy to improve housing stability by improving housing quality, reducing evictions, and connecting residents with resources. Below is a diagram of the programs:

The full list of programs can also be viewed here.

Highlights of new initiatives include the launch of the Bureau of Administrative Adjudication (BAA), which will allow the city to improve compliance with property codes; eviction prevention case management pilot programs with Syracuse

8

Housing Authority and Clinton Plaza Apartments, offering proactive intervention when tenants are within days of eviction or falling behind on their rent; and Healthy Housing 101 events, educating service providers, tenants, and landlords on housing quality. Additionally, the City will begin proactive Rental Registry Inspections, a Property Improvement Project Recognition program, and a Healthy Housing Information Campaign with the Syracuse City School Department.

ditions, are a partner in the pilot eviction prevention program at Clinton Plaza Apartments, and are actively working to organize and empower tenants around a tenants’ union and childhood lead poisoning prevention. We pursue broad based advocacy including impact litigation to create meaningful change for people and communities.

Our recent class actions related to housing included Winston v. City of Syracuse (a decision in the 2nd Circuit Court of Appeals prohibiting municipalities from shutting of a tenant’s water when the landlord does not pay the water Initiatives currently in development and planning include a bill,) and a case addressing horrific housing conditions for Rent Escrow Account Program (REAP), whereby tenants refugees. could pay their rent to an escrow account at the City until a code violation is corrected, a platform to support Crowd- To learn more about our work preventing evictions, infunding for Emergency Housing Expenses, a Rental Proper- creasing housing stability, and facilitating thriving commuty Grading System, and development of a strong tenant’s nities, visit www.lscny.org or sign-up at www.lscny.org/ union. Additionally, city and local stakeholders are explor- evicted.  ing mechanisms to require valid rental registration before filing for eviction.

Legal Services of Central New York is committed to reducing evictions, creating safe stable homes, and strengthening communities. We provide individual representation for eviction defense and housing con-

9

LSCNY, Empire Justice Foster Fairness in Automobile Exception

By Julie Morse, Staff Attorney Tricia Stewart, a single mom of two young children, had worked at a nursing home for 10 years. When she lost her job, she applied for public assistance with Onondaga County Department of Social Services (DSS) in order to support her family. She had no income, and her only asset was a 2011 Hyundai Tuscon SUV with a fair market value of $12,113. DSS denied Ms. Stewart’s application, claiming that the market value of her car was $2813 over the allowable auto resource limit of $9300 to qualify for public assistance. DSS insisted that social services law dictated that the difference between the fair market value and the $9300 was considered a resource available to her.

The $2,813 difference put Ms. Stewart above social services’s $2000 resource limit, disqualifying her from receiving benefits.

However, Ms. Stewart’s car was not a resource that was available to her. She owed more than $13,000 for the car, putting her more than a thousand dollars “under water” on the vehicle. Despite such obvious debt, New York State social services guidance instructed local departments like Onondaga to disqualify applicants who had cars valued at more than two thousand dollars above the allowable limit, regardless of how much the owner owed to the finance company. But the law is also clear that the resource must be available to the individual in order to disqualify someone from public assistance. Since Ms. Stewart’s car loan was higher than the value of her car, if she had tried to sell her car in order to qualify for public assistance, she would have had no car and simply plunged further into debt.

Ms. Stewart contacted LSCNY for assistance. Staff Attorney Rob Lukow researched the law, consulted with other public benefits experts at the Empire Justice Center, and determined that DSS’s denial of public assistance was incorrect. Staff Attorney Julie Morse helped Ms. Stewart bring a fair hearing challenging the decision, arguing that a car with negative equity could not be considered an “available resource” for public assistance eligibility. The State affirmed the County’s denial. Tricia Stewart and her

family were not alone in being cut off from needed assistance based on the value of a car with no equity. In fact, families all over New York State were suffering from the same incorrect interpretation.

LSCNY’s Julie Morse, together with Empire Justice Center, filed Stewart v. Roberts, a class action lawsuit, in New York State Supreme Court. In 2016, Albany Supreme Court Justice Francis Collins issued a decision giving the plaintiffs most of the relief they were seeking. The Judge reversed the fair hearing decision on Ms. Stewart’s case, declaring that the State is violating Social Services law when it instructs the county departments to consider only the applicant’s equity interest in their vehicle. It sent Ms. Stewart’s case back to the State for a calculation of the benefits she was owed. However, the Court denied class certification, finding that relief unnecessary.

The State appealed the Court’s decision to the Appellate Division, and Ms. Stewart cross-appealed the denial of class certification. In June 2018 the Appellate Division issued a decision largely agreeing with the Supreme Court order, but reversing the denial of Plaintiff’s motion for class certification. Ms. Stewart’s lawyers have now renewed her motion for class certification, and are waiting to find out whether the relief won for Ms. Stewart’s family will be applied to all families like hers throughout New York State. 

10

PULP and LSCNY Keep The Juice Flowing In Central New York

By Sam Young, Director of Advocacy On February 6, the Public Utility Law Project came to Central New York for a day of training and legal advocacy on public utilities. Executive Director Richard Berkley and Staff Attorney Laurie Wheelock came from their Albany offices to Syracuse, to provide training and help in an important but often overlooked area of legal services. The Public Utility Law Project advocates for universal service, affordability and customer protections for New York State public utility customers. The organization represents low income utility customers, and advocates with the Public Service Commission to require services throughout the state and combat rate increases for public utilities.

The day began with a continuing legal education session taught by Richard Berkley entitled “Getting and Keeping Utility Service.” Over 40 attorneys attended the session hosted by LSCNY in the Lowe Center’s classroom space, including lawyers from LSCNY, Hiscock Legal Aid, Volunteer Lawyer’s Project, and the private bar. Richard Berkley discussed in the ins and outs of opposing utility shut-offs, and keeping needed services like electricity, gas and water coming into the homes of low income consumers. Meanwhile, Laurie Wheelock conducted a parallel training for approximately thirty human services staff at the Park Central Presbyterian Church, hosted by the Syracuse Tenants Network. Utility customers have many rights under the Home Energy Fair Practices Act, and PULP’s mission for that day was to educate and empower advocates and customers to enforce those rights.

After the trainings were over, Richard Berkley and Laurie Wheelock regrouped in the community room for a public utilities clinic. For weeks in advance, LSCNY, PULP and the Syracuse Tenants Network had organized, advertised and arranged the opportunity for central New York consumers to speak with these legal experts about their public utilities issues, and have their problems addressed in real time.

In addition to Richard and Laurie, the clinic was staffed by representatives from National Grid, Verizon, Spectrum, the Public Service Commission and Onondaga County Department of Social Services. LSCNY’s own Sam Faduski also assisted clients with their legal problems.

Approximately twenty families were assisted over the course of this four hour clinic. According to Mr. Berkley, many of the clients who attended the clinic facing shut-offs were eligible for the Home Energy Assistance Program, but did not know it, or were paying too much for their cable, internet and phone, and were eligible for more affordable packages. After assessing the problems and providing advice, Richard and Laurie referred the new clients to the utility and government employees who were present, so that many of their problems could be solved while the clients were there in the room. Reflecting on the day, Laurie Wheelock said in an email: “We truly enjoyed presenting to both groups and having the opportunity to provide direct help to people who really needed it. We look forward to working together again soon.” LSCNY Director of Advocacy Sam Young agreed: “We truly benefited from the training and expertise which PULP brought to us and our clients, and look forward to more collaboration in the future.”  Richard Berkley

11

LSCNY Advocates for Confidential Meeting Space in Youth Court

By Sam Young, Director of Advocacy

LSCNY has filed a federal class action lawsuit challenging the Onondaga County Sheriff’s Office policy of remaining in the room when 16 and 17 year old felony defendants meet with their criminal defense attorneys. The suit, JB v. Conway, was filed on February 1, 2019 in the Northern District of New York. The civil rights suit seeks to require the county to provide a private and confidential place for teenaged defendants to consult with their defense attorneys, and to prohibit Sheriff’s Officers from accompanying the young defendants into the interview room during meetings with their lawyers.

The problem arises in Onondaga County’s Youth Part, a court which was set up in the wake of New York’s “Raise the Age” laws to handle the criminal cases of 16 and 17 year-olds who are accused of serious crimes. This Court is held in the basement of the Onondaga County Criminal Courthouse, in a courtroom which does not have secure attorney visiting rooms. When a teenager is detained and brought to court, the teen is permitted to confer with his or her counsel in a small conference room off of the courtroom. This is when criminal defense lawyers often meet with their clients for the first time, and discuss issues such as the charges being brought and bail applications or conditions for release.

The Onondaga County Sheriff’s Office has taken the position that when such meetings occur, the teenage defendants must remain handcuffed, and accompanied by a law enforcement officer, often the arresting officer. “This policy makes it impossible for Plaintiffs to meaningfully communicate with their attorneys,” the suit alleges.

The Complaint, filed by LSCNY Staff Attorney Josh Cotter, begins with the following: “The ability of an individual charged with a crime to consult privately and without inhibition with his or her attorneys is fundamental to the right to counsel under the Sixth Amendment and indispensable to a fair and equitable justice system.”

LSCNY brought the lawsuit on behalf of two 16 year olds, identified by their initials J.B. and J.M. LSCNY is requesting class certification, and has brought a motion in the case to certify a class of all defendants below the age of 18 who are in law enforcement custody when they appear before the Onondaga County Youth Part. Onondaga County has not opposed the motion for class certification, which is scheduled to be heard by the Court in May. The named Plaintiff, J.B., is a 16 year old girl who was detained for several hours on a felony charge. When her attorney arrived in The Onondaga County Courthouse Youth Part to speak with her, two officers remained in the interview room and refused to leave. Although one of the officers told the attorney he had no information about the case, the same officer spoke up during arraignment, to state that the injuries of the alleged victim could be more serious than originally alleged. The defense lawyer was unable to refute the officer’s statement, because she could not meaningfully speak with her client due to the officers’ presence in the interview room. The teenaged defendant was held in custody, over the defense counsel’s request for release.

A motion for a preliminary injunction has been filed, seeking to require the County to provide a room in which teenaged defendants can have private consultations with their defense attorneys, outside of the presence of law enforcement. It also seeks to prohibit Sheriff’s Officers from remaining in the room during attorney-client meetings involving teenagers in custody. The motion is scheduled to be heard in May before U.S. District Court Judge Lawrence Kahn.

The case has been assigned to Judge Kahn, who sits in Albany, and U.S. Magistrate Judge Therese Wiley Dancks, who has chambers in Syracuse.

Read the story on Syracuse.com here. 

12