Fair Housing Attorney Claims Retaliation Just for Doing His Job

Retaliation complaints under the Fair Housing Act (FHA) typically follow this fact pattern: a tenant alleges she suffered harm (such as an eviction) because her landlord didn't like the fact she brought an earlier discrimination complaint against him.

But a settlement between the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the Cincinnati Metropolitan Housing Authority (CMHA), shows how retaliation cases don't always fit this mold.

In this case, it's the attorney for alleged victims of race-based discrimination who claims he was retaliated against — simply for doing his job of advocating on behalf of his clients.

HUD claims that former CMHA Chair Arnold Barnett violated the law by allegedly threatening to use "public housing resources" to retaliate against the attorney for having filed a fair housing complaint, according to a report from the Business Courier of Cincinnati. Mr. Barnett reportedly made comments to local media outlets, including the Courier, calling for CMHA to purchase low-income housing units in the attorney's neighborhood.

According to a press release from HUD, the settlement agreement provides that Mr. Barnett won't seek reappointment to the CMHA Board and won't be eligible to participate in most federal programs for a period of three years. In addition, Mr. Barnett has agreed to cooperate with HUD and serve as a witness both in connection with the fair housing complaints and HUD's ongoing investigation of CMHA.

CMHA and Mr. Barnett, who stepped down as chair last year and recently announced his resignation from the board, have denied the allegations.