Court Dismisses Discrimination Charge relating to Code Enforcement Action
An Illinois Appellate Court ruled in favor of a municipality in a housing discrimination case that had been dismissed for lack of substantial evidence by the Illinois Department of Human Rights. Schoff v. Illinois Human Rights Commission.
The owners of a single family home provided short-term housing. When the village discovered the home was being used for short-term rentals (which use was prohibited by ordinance), it brought an administrative enforcement action against the owners. The owners responded by requesting a reasonable accommodation under the Illinois Religious Freedom Restoration Act (RFRA) to continue to provide short term housing, arguing that they were providing short-term housing to those in need based on their religious beliefs. The village and the owners agreed to settle the administrative enforcement action, which included, among other provisions, a grant of a religious accommodation to allow the owners to house short-term occupants so long as they provided notice to the village. The agreement also included a provision for the village to inspect the home's septic system. During its inspection, the village discovered that two unpermitted bedrooms had been added to the home, resulting in the septic system being too small for the number of bedrooms in the home. The village informed the owners they had to remove the bedrooms or increase their septic system. When the owners failed to do so, the village issued citations for ordinance violations.
The owners then filed a discrimination charge with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Illinois Department of Human Rights (IDHR) claiming that the village's enforcement actions discriminated against them on the basis of race, national origin, and religion. The owners also filed a lawsuit in circuit court claiming violations of federal and state laws and the U.S. Constitution, which case is unrelated to this opinion and was still pending.
After an investigation of the charge of discrimination, the IDHR issued a report recommending that the owners' discrimination charge be dismissed. That decision was appealed to the Illinois Human Rights Commission, which upheld the dismissal of the charge of discrimination. The Commission determined that the owners did not provide evidence that the village discriminated against them on the basis of race, national origin, or religion in enforcing its septic code requirements.
On appeal, the Illinois Appellate Court upheld the dismissal of the discrimination charge. The Court noted that the village had granted a reasonable accommodation in its settlement agreement with the owners. Further, the Court found no intent on the village's part to discriminate against the owner when it enforced its septic code requirements, and that the owners were still able to use their home with the limits on the number of bedrooms. In sum, the Court found no evidence of an intent to discriminate or harassment on the part of the village on the basis of religion, race, or national origin.
0 comments:
Post a Comment