Westgate & Garden City Third Amended Complaint (Filed)

Case 4:15-cv-00282-WTM-GRS Document 101-1 Filed 03/03/17 Page 1 of 47
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
SAVANNAH DIVISION
TENYIKA SAMS; BRIGITTE BROWN; ) Case No. 4:15-cv-00282

MARIE DAVIS; TOMEKA DUDLEY; )
SHANEQUITA FRAZIER; ADRIAN )
KENNEDY; LESLIE MITCHELL; )
LORETTA MOBLEY; SHANA ROUSE; )
NATALIE WALLACE; LATOYA WHITE; )
JNAI WHITEHEAD; ROSHAUN )
WILLIAMS; JEANNINE BELALCAZAR, )
Administrator of Estate of Carmen )
Rivers; CLYDE JERRON CAMPBELL, )
Administrator of Estate of Debra Truell; )
and SAVANNAH-CHATHAM COUNTY )
FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL, INC., )
)
Plaintiffs, )
)
vs. )
)
AMERICAN APARTMENT )
MANAGEMENT COMPANY, INC.; )
CHG WESTGATE, LLC; and CITY OF )
GARDEN CITY, )
)
Defendants. )
)
THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
1. Plaintiffs – tenants of the Westgate Apartments in Garden City, Georgia –
sue their landlord and the City of Garden City for discrimination in connection with the
ownership and operation of rental dwellings in violation of the federal Fair Housing Act,
42 U.S.C. § 3601, and the Civil Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
2. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 42 U.S.C. § 3613 and by 28

U.S.C. § 1331 in that the claims alleged herein arise under the laws of the United
States.
3. Venue is proper under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 in that the claim s alleged herein
include claims which arose within the County of Chatham, Georgia, and concern or
otherwise relate to real properties located there.
II. SUBJECT DWELLING
4. The Westgate Apartments, currently renamed the Pines at Garden City, is
an apartment complex located at 145 Wheathill Drive, in Garden City, Georgia. It is a
dwelling under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3602(b).
III. PARTIES
5. Plaintiffs Tenyika Sams, Brigitte Brown, Marie Davis, Tomeka Dudley,
Shanequita Frazier, Adrian Kennedy, Leslie Mitchell, Loretta Mobley, Shana Rouse,
Natalie Wallace, Latoya White, Jnai Whitehead and Roshaun W illiams resided at the
Westgate Apartments during the events alleged in this amended complaint. Carmen
Rivers, a former Westgate tenant, is deceased and her estate is represented herein by
an appointed administrator, Jeannine Belalcazar (ECF 62). Plaintiff Debra Truell, a
former Westgate tenant, is deceased and her estate is represented herein by an
appointed administrator, Clyde Jerron Campbell (ECF 93).
6. Plaintiff Savannah-Chatham County Fair Housing Council, Inc.,
(“SCFHC”) is a nonprofit corporation organized under the laws of Georgia with its
principal place of business located in Savannah, Georgia. One of SCFHC’s specific
purposes and goals is the promotion of equal opportunity in the rental of housing and
the elimination of all forms of illegal housing discrimination. To this end, the activities in
2
which SCFHC engages include, but are not limited to: (1) investigating allegations of
discrimination; (2) conducting investigations of housing facilities to determine whether
equal opportunity in housing is provided; (3) taking such steps as it deems necessary to
assure such equal opportunity and to counteract and eliminate discriminatory housing
practices; (4) providing outreach and education to the community, including housing
providers and consumers, regarding fair housing; and, (5) monitoring and training
housing providers that have previously engaged in discriminatory practices.
7. GA West Gate, LLC owned, operated and managed the Westgate
Apartments between September 20, 2008 and December 13, 2012. American Housing
Foundation, Inc., controlled GA W est Gate, LLC as its managing member. Michelle
Abdoo was employed as an agent of GA West Gate and American Housing
Foundation.
8. GA West Gate transferred ownership, operation and management of the
Westgate Apartments on or before December 13, 2012, to defendant CHG Westgate,
LLC, previously and erroneously named as CHG West Gate, LLC, which employed
defendant American Apartment Management Company, Inc. as its managing agent.
9. Defendant CHG Westgate, LLC and defendant American Apartment
Management Company are persons subject to the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §
3602(d). Plaintiffs reserve the right to further amend their complaint if discovery reveals
that it is necessary to name the alter ego of those corporate entities.
10. Defendant City of Garden City is a municipal corporation, established and
organized under the laws of the State of Georgia. It is a person subject to the Civil
Rights Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983 and the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3602(d).
3
11. In committing each of the discriminatory or unlawful acts alleged in
this complaint, each defendant acted as the agent of each other defendant.
IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS
A. City of Garden City
12. The City of Garden City is a small municipality located north of Savannah.
Founded on the grounds of three antebellum plantations, the City has grown rapidly
since its incorporation in 1939, expanding outward from the Port of Savannah and
growing ten-fold in population. Of the City’s 8,794 residents today, 46% are white, 38%
are black, and 16% are Latino. Its 3,392 dwellings are evenly split between renter-
occupied and owner-occupied. Its newer subdivisions and mobile home parks lie
outside the city center.
13. The City’s seven large apartment complexes form two separate clusters:
One group – Westgate, Plantation and Chatham City – is located west of the Georgia
Ports Authority rail yard; the other – Arbors, Marshall’s Run, Kessler Point and Garden
Lake – is spread out to the southeast of the rail yard. Blacks rent more than whites in
Garden City – 77% of black households are renters while only 37% of white households
rent their homes.
14. The municipal government of Garden City has evolved. For the first 70
years of its existence, the City operated under a mayor-council form of government. In
2009 it adopted a council-manager form of government. (GA H.B. No. 297, § 1,
01-20-2009.) Under its current charter, the City exercises plenary powers over
municipal affairs. (1973 Ga. Laws, page 3581; Garden City Code of Ordinances
[GCCO] §§ 1-12, 1-14.) Its municipal powers are vested in the City Council. (GCCO §§
4
2-01, 2.11.) Pursuant to its charter and ordinances, it em ploys a city manager, city
clerk, city attorney, and city marshal (GCCO §§ 2-08, 2-102, 2-103, 3-01, 3-07), and
approximately 100 subordinate officers and employees in various departments (GCCO
3-05). The City exercises plenary powers over dwellings located within its jurisdiction.
(GCCO, Chs. 18, 50, 70, 85, 90.) Since 2002, the City has employed David Lyons as
its chief of police (GCCO, Ch. 64) and director of public safety. Lyons sets public safety
policy for the City and supervises a police force of 31-39 uniformed officers.
15. The City is a receipient of federal and state funds. Under the federal
Neighborhood Stabilization Program, established by the Housing and Economic
Recovery Act, Pub. L. 110-289, the City received HUD funds in exchange for its
certification to “affirmatively further fair housing.” 42 U.S.C. §§ 3608, 5304.
16. Garden City is highly segregated. Its black population is concentrated into
a compact wedge between Highway 21 (the Augusta Road) and the Amtrak rail line to
the west. Three of the City's seven apartment complexes are situated within that
wedge. The Plantation Apartments are located in census block 4004, where the black
population rises to 72 percent. The Chatham City Apartments are located in census
block 5001, where the black population is 89 percent. And the W estgate Apartments
are located in census block 4003, where the black population is 98 percent.
17. The City’s current pattern of racial segregation stems from an historical
legacy common to many Georgia cities. Throughout Georgia, local “race ordinances”
established “colored districts.’‘ After such overt, de jure governmental discrimination
was struck down, Buchanan v. Warley, 250 U.S. 60, 73 (1917), private racial covenants
5
and Realtor® codes of ethics1 perpetuated that segregation. The same federal
government – that today requires cities to “affirmatively further fair housing” in
exchange for federal funds – reinforced past discriminatory practices by depriving
federal housing assistance to integrated neighborhoods, a pattern that private lenders
also followed.
18. Garden City was at the center of this historical legacy. The last Ku Klux
Klan rally in the Savannah area occurred in a vacant lot near the old traffic circle on
Highway 80 that emptied into west Chatham County. In 1963, the Fifth Circuit ordered
Chatham County to integrate Garden City’s Grove High School, Stell v. Savannah-
Chatham County Board of Education, 318 F.2d 425, 428 (Cir. 5th 1963), an injunction
that triggered white resistence and then white flight. (Today Grove High School’s
student body is 87% black.)
19. Although the City has progressed2, its legacy of segregation still informs
its treatment of its black residents. Throughout the 1990s, the City police department
was the subject of continual controversy, ranging from drunk driving by officers,
evidence tampering to convict black suspects, theft of guns and money from the
department, a Georgia Bureau of investigation leading four officers to resign for filing
false police reports, and at least one formal complaint of abusive and discriminatory
1
Like every other state real estate organization, Georgia followed the dictates of
the National Association of Real Estate Boards’ Code of Ethics, which between 1924
and the early 1960’s commanded: “A Realtor should never be instrumental in
introducing into a neighborhood . . . members of any race . . . whose presence will
clearly be detrimental to property values in that neighborhood.”
2
In 2011, the City abandoned at large council elections for election by district,
electing two black council members in 2012.
6
policing by black residents of Rosignal Hill, a neighborhood located at the base of the
narrow wedge in which black residents are compacted in Garden City. Even city police
chief Lyons acknowledges the lasting effects of Garden City’s legacy:
Over the years the Garden City, Georgia Police Department has endured
its share of misconduct accusations and public distrust. [It] had a
reputation for harassment, heavy handed tactics, and profiling. [¶]
Unfortunately, over time race became one of the major criteria for many of
the “profiles” and in many cases became an excuse for harassment. Bias
based profiling is equally troubling for law enforcement agencies and
involves using any criteria other than the reasonable suspicion standard in
deciding to effect a stop or arrest.
In April 2015, the police department contracted with Armstrong State University to train
its officers on “fair and impartial policing.” For the residents of the Westgate
Apartments, however, that training came three years too late.
B. The Westgate Apartments
20. The Westgate Apartments (Westgate) is located at 145 Wheathill Road,
at the apex of the wedge that compacts Garden City’s black residents. It consists of 94
dwelling units in 10 one- and two-story buildings. Its amenities include a community
room, laundry room, leasing office, basketball court, and playground. Thirty-nine units
are three or four bedroom units accommodating large families.
21. Westgate is affordable housing. HUD financed the construction of
Westgate in 1982 under its Section 8 project-based af fordable housing program. In
exchange for that financing, Westgate’s owner agreed that all 94 dwellings will be
7
operated as affordable housing for poor families. HUD executed a Housing Assistance
Payment (“HAP”) contract with the owner under which each household’s rent share is
capped at 30 percent of household income. Under the HAP contract, HUD pays the
landlord the difference between the tenant’s rent share and the f air market rental value
of each dwelling unit. HUD restructured Westgate’s financing in 2003 in exchange for
the owner’s commitment to continue to operate W estgate as affordable housing under
its HAP contract until 2024. Because it offers affordable housing, Westgate’s
occupancy rate rarely dips below 95 percent.
22. Under the Section 8 program, tenants and landlords are subject to HUD
regulations. Applicants must qualify for housing based on need and re-certify that need
annually. Landlords must maintain the property and not overcharge tenants.
Unfortunately, because rents are capped by HUD, there are powerful incentives for
subsidized landlords to skimp on maintenance and staffing, reducing expenses and
boosting profits.
C. GA West Gate LLC
23. These perverse incentives guided GA West Gate’s operation of the
Westgate Apartments between 2008 and 2012. The grounds and buildings were
allowed to deteriorate. Staff turned over frequently, and requests for maintenance by
tenants were ignored. One tactic used to save money was to enlist the City police
department in management decisions as a means of suppressing tenants’ demands.
24. Starting in 2010, Barbara O’Neal, the City’s community policing officer,
oversaw decisions governing Westgate’s management, including the decision to
deprive Westgate residents of their housing. Working with manager Lecia Maloney,
8
O’Neal demanded access to tenant rosters, identified tenants for eviction, and provided
information to Maloney to bolster her efforts to evict tenants for nonpayment of rent.
Unfortunately, while O’Neal fixated on policing Westgate’s tenants, she overlooked the
landlord’s mismanagement of the Westgate Apartments. In August 2011, Maloney was
fired by GA West Gate for theft and assistant manager Shannon Gradick took over as
manager.
25. O’Neal knew Gradick. She vetted Gradick for GA West Gate and, once
manager, Gradick worked closely with O’Neal, even though patrol Captain Phillip Green
warned O’Neal that Gradick did not understand “the laws that govern rental property
and the rights of the tenants.” Gradick provided O’Neal with tenant rosters, and O’Neal
directed Gradick and Lee Ann Rodgers, Gradick’s supervisor, whom to evict from
Westgate. If Gradick or Rodgers lacked a basis for evicting a tenant picked by O’Neal,
they depended on O’Neal to provide the information to justify the eviction.
26. In January 2012, Rodgers received reports from Cindy Woods, Gradick’s
assistant manager, that Gradick was behaving strangely. Gradick was frequently
absent from the office and disregarded tenants’ requests. Woods also emailed that
Gradick had rented to tenants who did not appear to qualify. Rodgers forwarded
Woods’ emails to O’Neal. By the end of January, the police had prepared theft and
forgery charges against Gradick.
27. On February 2, 2012, Michelle Abdoo emailed to O’Neal a complete
spreadsheet of each tenant at Westgate. Abdoo then traveled to Garden City and,
between February 7 and 14, 2012, reviewed each tenant file with O’Neal. That review
revealed that Gradick had only rented to two households – Units 607 and 1004 –
9
without proper tenant screening.
28. On February 20, 2012, O’Neal meet with Pamela Gomez, whom O’Neal
believed to be the president of GA West Gate. At that meeting, O’Neal reviewed with
Gomez a list of tenants, compiled by O’Neal, and outlined the City’s plan for execution
of the eviction notices.
29. The next day – February 21, 2012 – City police officers, lead by O’Neal,
served 29 eviction notices on 29 households at W estgate. Working from her eviction
list, O’Neal enlisted the help of Donald Lowe, Westgate’s maintenance man, to open
apartments as needed. At each dwelling, O’Neal – in the presence of other officers –
would bang on the door demanding entry. If a tenant answered, O’Neal handed the
tenant an eviction notice, telling the tenant that she had three days to vacate her
apartment. If a tenant did not answer, O’Neal ordered Lowe to unlock the door. The
police then entered the dwelling and taped a notice on the interior of front door. Each
notice served by O’Neal and her officers read, in part:
2. The following violation has occurred: False information on Application
and/or Criminal History is not acceptable for known HUD restrictions on
property.
3. Due to the above-mentioned activities by the Tenants or guests thereof,
the Lease has been terminated and the Landlord demands possession of
the Premises on or before February 24, 2012.
4. You are hereby being given 3 days, or the minimal notice period as
required by the laws of the State of Georgia, to quit the Premises. The
Premises must be vacated and surrendered by 3:00 pm on February 24,
10
2012. FAILURE TO COMPLY will result in legal proceedings against you,
to declare a forfeiture of the Lease under which you occupy the Premises
and to recover possession thereof, with any rents owed and charges
allowable under Georgia law.
At the time these notices were served, it was clearly established that each notice
violated state and federal laws.
30. The tenants were outraged and fearful as a result of the City and GA
West Gate’s conduct. Many had lived at Westgate for years without complaint and
each had complied with the criminal history disclosure requirements, as instructed by
the Westgate manager at the time. Several called the press and Savannah-Chatham
County Fair Housing Council; others organized a protest. The prospect that 29 poor
families could be rendered homeless in a matter of days drew headlines and gave GA
West Gate pause.
31. By February 25, 2012, GA West Gate had consulted with Bryan
Strickland, a local eviction attorney, who realized that the notices, crafted and served
under the City’s supervision, violated state and federal law. Strickland prepared 26
corrected notices, called the Garden City Police on the morning of February 25, and
requested police assistance while he served his corrected notices. Strickland explained
that he needed to either hand-serve the notices or gain access to the dwellings and
post the notice on the interior of the front door. Police officers shadowed Strickland
from unit to unit, but in the wake of the bad press, officers told Strickland that – unlike
last time – they could not “get involved with the actual service of papers.” After posting
or delivering the 26 notices, Strickland mailed a copy of the notice to each dwelling.
11
32. The new notices tried to fix errors in the notices served by the City. They
provided for a 30-day termination period, listed specific criminal history (supplied by the
Garden City Police Department), and notified tenants of their right to contest the basis
for the notice.
33. Residents had planned to protest their mass eviction on the afternoon of
February 25, 2012, and Strickland’s second round of notices on that same day further
mobilized them. As residents gathered in the common area to talk and then march
around the grounds in protest, the police appeared in f orce with more backup, parking
their cruisers in the middle of complex.
34. Immediately after the protest, GA West Gate clamped down on the
tenants, enforcing a 10:00 p.m. curfew and restrictive rules that limited the rights of
tenants’ children to play on the common grounds – rules that remain in place today.
Throughout March, several tenants vacated their homes fearing that they might be
evicted, which would hurt their chances of finding a new rental or disqualify them from
affordable housing in the future.
35. On April 10, 2012, GA West Gate filed four eviction actions based on the
29 notices originally served by the City. It sued Frazier, Mitchell, White and Whitehead,
who retained Georgia Legal Services to defend them. Each eviction was dismissed. Of
the remaining 25 notices, West Gate took no action or affirmatively withdrew the notices
on March 28, 2012. For the tenants who remained at Westgate, there was a palpable
fear that their landlord or the City could try to evict them at any time based on their
criminal history or an alleged violation of the restrictive apartment rules.
36. On April 12, 2012, the Garden City Police Department finally arrested
12
Gradick, Westgate’s former manager, charging her with a felony for forgery and two
misdemeanor counts of theft.
D. CHG Westgate LLC and American Apartment Management
37. The mismanagement of the Westgate Apartment by GA West Gate
presented its current owner, CHG Westgate, LLC, with an opportunity. In 2012, Hans
Juhle, a principal with Integra Property Group, a Seattle-based private real estate
investment firm, was shopping for HUD properties to purchase in order to float a public
authority bond. Working with American Apartment Management Company (“AAMC”),
Juhle arranged to purchase 11 HUD properties, including Westgate – with the aim of
exploiting the special status of HUD property to float a public authority bond, converting
the properties into loan proceeds.
38. This plan required synchronized execution. First, for tax and regulatory
advantages, Integra activated and established control of the Chisom Housing Group, an
inactive Texas nonprofit corporation established in 2003, which had never owned or
operated any rental dwellings. Chisom would serve as the nonprofit required for
floating the public authority bond. Next, Integra and AAMC shopped, targeted, and
arranged for purchase of 11 HUD properties in various states, including the Westgate
Apartments in Garden City. With those commitments in place, they then established an
LLC for each property; each bears the prefix CHG. For example, in Georgia on August
28, 2012, Chris Porter, Juhle's Integra partner, incorporated CHG Westgate, LLC, the
entity that today owns Westgate Apartments. As Integra worked with AAMC to
assemble this portfolio, they also coordinated with a bond underwriter to float a Public
Finance Authority - Multifamily Housing Mortgage Revenue Bond, known as the CHG
13
Section 8 Assisted Housing Pool Project. The bond proceeds – totaling more than $26
million dollars – were divided up and paid to AAMC and Integra’s newly-minted CHG-
family of LLCs, which in turn pledged the properties as collateral.
39. To secure public authority bond financing, however, Integra and AAMC
needed a resolution from the City approving the issuance of the bond. To get that
resolution, Integra’s Juhle met with police chief Lyon assuring him that CHG Westgate
would cooperate with the police. Juhle also directed W estgate’s on site management to
meet with Lyon. The purpose and result of those meetings between the City and
Westgate’s new owner and manager became apparent in January 2013, immediately
after AAMC assumed management of Westgate apartments.
40. Meanwhile, on December 13, 2012, CHG Westgate’s purchase of the
Westgate apartments closed and was recorded. AAMC assumed management of the
Westgate apartments, collecting HUD money pursuant to its HAP contract and
implementing the pledges extracted by the City from the owner in exchange for the
City’s blessing of Integra and AAMC’s public bond scheme.
E. Ongoing Discriminatory Practices
41. Although Westgate’s ownership and management changed, the
discriminatory housing practices committed against its tenants did not.
42. CHG Westgate and AAMC continued to enforce the 10:00 p.m. curfew.
They also continued restricting the right of tenant’s children to use the apartment
grounds to play, threatening eviction if either of these restrictive rules were violated.
And, pursuant to their agreement to cooperate with the City police, CHG Westgate and
AAMC threatened to evict Westgate tenants under a newly-invented, more draconian
14
criminal history rule, which remains in force today. CHG Westgate and AAMC
implemented and executed their new criminal history rule in three steps.
43. CHG Westgate and AAMC’s first act as the new owner and manager was
to issue a written notice to each household requiring each adult tenant to report to the
Garden City Police Department and submit to a criminal history background check no
later than January 15, 2013. This demand by CHG Westgate and AAMC – issued
immediately after taking control of Westgate and not long after securing the City’s
support for Integra’s Public Finance Authority bond – caused tenants, including
plaintiffs, to fear that they would be subject to another round of unlawful mass
evictions.
44. Then, sometime around July 2013, CHG Westgate and AAMC took the
next step to perpetuate the City and prior landlord’s unlawful practices. Without notice
to tenants, they promulgated a new Tenant Selection Plan imposing a never-before-
seen “99- year rule,” which barred tenancy at Westgate if a person had a record of
conviction – misdemeanor or felony – within the past 99 years:
Owner/Agent has established standards that prohibit adm ission of ineligible or
unqualified applications with:
a. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon,
which involved injury to a person;
i. Misdemeanor: 99 years from date of conviction or
detention release
ii. Felony: 99 years from date of conviction or detention
release.
15
b. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon,
which involved damage to property;
detention release
release.
c. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon,
which involved manufacturing or distribution of an illegal
substance;
detention release
release.
d. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon,
which involved illegal use or possession of any controlled
substance;
detention release
ii. Felony: 99 years from date of conviction or
detention release.
e. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon,
which involved possession of an unregistered firearm or
possession of an illegal weapon that can cause physical
16
harm or emotional suffering by intimidation;
detention release
ii. Felony: 99 years from date of conviction or
detention release.
f. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon
which involved harm to a child within 99 years from date of
conviction or detention release;
g. A record of any conviction, or settlement other than pardon
which involved harm to an animal within 99 years from date
of conviction or detention release;
h. Conviction of any applicant or member of the household, of
any other felony in any state or federal court within 10 years
from date of conviction or detention release, providing that
the applicant has been given the opportunity to remove said
offender from application.
For plaintiffs, this rule is worse than anything tried by the prior landlord. Under CHG
Westgate and AAMC’s 99-year rule, families face eviction if one member of the
household had a 98-year-old conviction for a petty misdemeanor, such as vandalism or
possession of less than ounce of marijuana.
45. Then, CHG Westgate and AAMC took the final step. Starting in
December 2013, AAMC, acting on behalf of CHG Westgate, began another round of
evictions based on long-term tenants’ past criminal records. For example, on
17
December 17, 2013, AAMC served an eviction notice on plaintiff Leslie Mitchell, stating
that “[o]ur criminal history search reflects that you do not meet the tenant screening
criteria.” A copy of CHG Westgate and AAMC’s 99-year rule was attached to the
notice. Mitchell – who had compiled with past manager’s instructions regarding criminal
history disclosure – had never seen or heard about the 99-year rule that now served as
the basis for her eviction. News of CHG Westgate and AAMC’s attempts to evict
tenants based on criminal history traveled quickly among the residents, including
plaintiffs, causing another wave of fear and uncertainty. Other residents – including
plaintiffs – were then served with similar eviction notices based on the new 99-year rule;
each plaintiff braced for another round of mass evictions.
46. On February 27, 2014, AAMC and CHG Westgate filed eviction actions
against five households pursuant to their “99-year rule”, including plaintiffs Brigitte
Brown, Tanyika Sams, and Jnai Whitehead. Like Mitchell, the tenants targeted for
eviction – Brown, Sams, and Whitehead – had never seen or heard of the new 99-year
rule that AAMC and CHG Westgate now enforced against them. Each had fully
complied with the Westgate manager’s instructions regarding criminal history disclosure
at the time of their applications. Other plaintiffs and residents feared that they too faced
imminent eviction from their homes.
47. In late March 2014, the state court rejected AAMC and CHG W estgate’s
evictions, entering judgment for the tenants. But plaintiffs, like other Westgate
residents, remained fearful – and with good reason: Despite the state court’s
judgments, AAMC and CHG Westgate continued to honor their agreement with the
City, serving eviction notices on Westgate residents based on their 99-year criminal
18
history rule – a rule that remains today part of CHG Westgate and AAMC’s tenant
selection plan.
F. Individual Plaintiffs
1. Tenyika Sams
48. Plaintiff Tenyika Sams, 44, is African American. Sams assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 502 at the Westgate Apartments on January 2, 2007, where she
continues to reside with her two minor children. When Sams applied in 2007, the
Westgate manager instructed Sams to verify her criminal history by completing a
criminal history authorization, submitting that form to Garden City Police Department,
and returning with a copy of her history. Sams complied with the manager’s
instructions. The manager approved Sams’ application after receipt of Sams’ criminal
history report. Sams has completed Westgate’s annual re-certification process each
year since 2007.
49. On February 21, 2012, O’Neal with other City police officers and one
woman whom Sams cannot identify, served Sams with a three-day notice to vacate
based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history. A few days later, Sams was
served with the amended 30-day notice, seeking her eviction based on her alleged
nondisclosure of her criminal history. Sams feared her children would be homeless,
living on the streets.
50. Sams continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
ownership and management of Westgate from GA West Gate to AAMC and CHG
Westgate. She received AAMC’s January 2013 notice demanding that she report to the
Garden City Policy Department by January 15, 2013, so that the City could subject her
19
to a further criminal history probe. She resided at Westgate in July 2013 when AAMC
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. In 2014 AAMC and
CHG Westgate attempted to evict Sams for her criminal history, bolstered by their 99-
year rule, which Sams had never heard about or seen. Although the state court
dismissed the eviction filed by CHG Westgate and AAMC in 2014, Sams remains
fearful today that the City or AAMC and CHG Westgate will try again to evict her family.
Sams and her children continue to be subject to the ov erly restrictive rules limiting
children’s use of the apartment grounds to play enforced by CHG Westgate and AAMC.
2. Brigitte Brown
51. Plaintiff Brigitte Brown, 28, is African American. Brown assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 1014 at the Westgate Apartments on November 11, 2011, where
she continues to reside with her three minor children. When Brown applied in 2011, the
Westgate manager instructed Brown to leave blank the criminal history portion of the
application, stating that Westgate worked with the police and would have the police run
Brown’s history to ensure accuracy. Brown complied with the manager’s instructions.
The manager approved Brown’s application and Brown has completed Westgate’s
annual re-certification process each year since 2011.
52. On February 21, 2012, City police officers entered Brown’s dwelling –
without permission, notice or a warrant – startling Brown’s niece who was inside the
apartment. The officer handed the niece the three-day notice, saying that the family
had to move out in three days. Brown feared that her family might be homeless. She
also feels intimidated by the police response to the tenants’ protest against the mass
evictions.
20
53. Brown continued to reside at W estgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. In February 2014, CHG
Westgate and AAMC attempted again to evict Brown for her criminal history, relying on
their 99-year rule, which Brown had never heard about or seen. Although the state
court dismissed the eviction filed by CHG Westgate and AAMC in 2014, Brown remains
fearful today that the City or AAMC/CHG Westgate will try again to evict her family
based on criminal history. She continues to feel threatened today, fearing that AAMC
and CHG Westgate may try to evict her family if they violate the 10:00 p.m. curfew or if
her children are charged with playing in violation of the restrictive rules enforced by
CHG Westgate and AAMC. Brown and her children continue to be subject to the ov erly
restrictive rules limiting children’s use of the apartment grounds to play enforced by
CHG Westgate and AAMC.
3. Tomeka Dudley
54. Plaintiff Tomeka Dudley, 44, is African American. Dudley assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 1003 at the Westgate Apartments on February 1, 2010, where
she continues to reside with her two minor children. When Dudley applied in 2010, the
Westgate manager instructed Dudley to verify her criminal history by completing a
and returning with a copy of her history. Dudley complied with the manager’s
21
instructions. The manager approved Dudley’s application after receipt of Dudley’s
criminal history report. Dudley has completed Westgate’s annual re-certification
process each year since 2010.
55. On February 21, 2012, a City police and another woman not in uniform
entered Dudley’s home – without notice, permission, or a warrant – while she was not
home. Once inside, the police contacted Dudley’s daughter, handing her the three-day
notice to vacate based on Dudley’s alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history. The
police told Dudley’s daughter that the family had to move out in three days. A few days
later, Dudley was served with the amended 30-day notice, seeking her eviction based
on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history. Then, on March 28, Dudley
received another letter, saying that Westgate was withdrawing its notices. Between
February 21 and March 28, Dudley feared that her children might be homeless.
56. Dudley continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. Since then, she has
been cited once for violating the 10:00 p.m. curfew and restricts her children’s activities
outside. Like other tenants at W estgate, Dudley became aware of AAMC and CHG
Westgate’s attempts to evict tenants for their criminal history starting in December
2013. Dudley fears that the City or AAMC and CHG Westgate may seek to evict her
and her family on that basis. Dudley and her children continue to be subject to the
22
overly restrictive rules limiting children’s use of the apartment grounds to play enforced
by CHG Westgate and AAMC.
4. Shanequita Frazier
57. Plaintiff Shanequita Frazier, 26, is African American. Frazier assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 615 at the Westgate Apartments on November 15, 2010. When
Frazier applied in 2010, the W estgate manager instructed Frazier to verify her criminal
history by completing a criminal history authorization, submitting that form to Garden
City Police Department, and returning with a copy of her history. Frazier complied with
the manager’s instructions. The manager approved Frazier’s application after receipt of
Frazier’s criminal history report. Frazier completed Westgate’s annual re-certification
process each year that she resided at Westgate between 2010 and 2013.
58. On February 21, 2012, O’Neal with other City police officers served
Frazier with a three-day notice to vacate based on her alleged nondisclosure of her
criminal history. A few days later, Frazier received the amended 30-day notice, seeking
her eviction based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history. Frazier’s fears
were compounded when, in April 2012, she was sued for eviction based on those
notices. Although that case was dismissed, Frazier continued to fear that the City or
Westgate landlord would try to evict her family again.
59. Frazier continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
Westgate. She received AAMC's January 2013 notice demanding that she report to the
to a further criminal history probe. She tried to avoid being outside after the 10:00 p.m.
23
curfew and limited her children’s use of the common grounds, fearing that a rule
violation could trigger another eviction attempt. Frazier eventually moved out of
Westgate in June 2013 to avoid any further harassment by AAMC, CHG Westgate and
the City.
5. Adrian Kennedy
60. Plaintiff Adrian Kennedy, 41, is African American. Kennedy assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 911 (later moving to 1004) at the Westgate Apartments on
August 1, 2002, where she continues to reside with her one minor child. When
Kennedy applied in 2002, she does not recall being asked about her criminal history.
In any event, she does not hide the fact that more than 10 years ago she was
conviction of a misdemeanor. The manager approved Kennedy’s application.
Kennedy has completed Westgate’s annual re-certification process each year since
2002.
61. On February 21, 2012, O’Neal with other City police officers served
Kennedy with a three-day notice to vacate based on her alleged nondisclosure of her
criminal history. A few days later, Kennedy received the amended 30-day notice,
seeking her eviction based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history. Then,
on March 28, Kennedy received another letter, saying that Westgate was withdrawing
its notices. Between February 21 and March 28, Kennedy feared that her family might
be forced to leave the only home they had known for so many years.
62. Kennedy continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
24
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. Like other tenants at
Westgate, Kennedy became aware of AAMC and CHG Westgate’s attempts to evict
tenants for their criminal history starting in December 2013. She remains fearful that
the City or AAMC and CHG Westgate may try again to evict her family based on
criminal history. Kennedy and her child continue to be subject to the overly restrictive
rules limiting children’s use of the apartment grounds to play enforced by CHG
Westgate and AAMC.
6. Leslie Mitchell
63. Plaintiff Leslie Mitchell, 26, is African American. Mitchell assumed her
continues to reside with her three minor children. When Mitchell applied in 2010, the
Westgate manager instructed Mitchell to verify her criminal history by completing a
and returning with a copy of her history. Mitchell complied with the manager’s
instructions. The manager approved Mitchell’s application and Mitchell has completed
Westgate’s annual re-certification process each year since 2010.
64. On February 21, 2012, Mitchell returned home from work to find the three-
day eviction notice taped to the interior of her front door. She did not receive notice of
the entry nor did she give permission. A few days later, Mitchell received the amended
30-day notice, seeking her eviction based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal
history. Mitchell’s fears were compounded when, in April 2012, she was sued for
25
eviction based on those notices. Although that case was dismissed, Mitchell still
worried that the City or GA West Gate landlord might try again to evict her family. She
tried to limit her children’s use of the common grounds fearing that a rule violation could
trigger another eviction attempt.
65. Mitchell continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. On December 17,
2013, AAMC served an eviction notice on Mitchell, stating that “[o]ur criminal history
search reflects that you do not meet the tenant screening criteria.” Attached to the
notice was a copy of AAMC’s 99-year policy on criminal history. Mitchell fears that the
City or AAMC and CHG Westgate may again seek to evict her and her family on that
basis. Mitchell and her children continue to be subject to the ov erly restrictive rules
limiting children’s use of the apartment grounds to play enforced by CHG Westgate and
AAMC.
7. Shana Rouse
66. Plaintiff Shana Rouse, 40, is African American. Rouse assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 614 at the Westgate Apartments on January 26, 2007, where
she continues to reside with her two minor children. When Rouse applied in 2010, the
Westgate manager instructed Rouse to verify her criminal history by completing a
26
and returning with a copy of her history. Rouse complied with the manager’s
instructions and her application was approved. Rouse has completed Westgate’s
annual re-certification process each year since 2010.
67. On February 21, 2012, O’Neal with a white female City police officer
served Rouse with the three-day notice to vacate based on her alleged nondisclosure of
her criminal history. A few days later, Rouse received the amended 30-day notice,
seeking her eviction based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history.
68. Rouse continued to reside at W estgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. Like other tenants at
Westgate, Kennedy became aware of AAMC and CHG Westgate’s attempts to evict
tenants for their criminal history starting in December 2013. Rouse is concerned that
AAMC and CHG Westgate impose rules that unfairly restrict tenants in their use and
enjoyment of the property. She fears that a violation of those rules may cause the
landlord to evict her family. She is fearful that the City or AAMC and CHG Westgate
may attempt to evict her again because of criminal history. She is fearful that the police
will treat her unfairly. Rouse and her children continued to be subject to the ov erly
restrictive rules limiting children’s use of the apartment grounds to play enforced by
CHG Westgate and AAMC.
///
27
8. Natalie Wallace
69. Plaintiff Natalie Wallace, 36, is African American. Wallace assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 501 at the Westgate Apartments on August 31, 2009, where she
resided with her three minor children. Wallace continued to reside at W estgate after
the transfer of ownership of Westgate from GA West Gate to CHG Westgate. She was
served both the three and thirty day notices, though no eviction action was taken
against her.
70. Wallace continued to reside at W estgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. Wallace vacated her
dwelling at Westgate in September 2013 to avoid the possibility of further harassment
by the City, CHG Westgate and AAMC.
9. Latoya White
71. Plaintiff Latoya White, 31, is African American. White assumed her
resided with her three minor children. She was served both the three and thirty day
notices; GA West Gate also filed an eviction against her in April 2012. She retained
Georgia Legal Services to defend her and the eviction was dismissed.
72. White continued to reside at W estgate after the 2012 transfer of
28
to a further criminal history probe. Garden City Policy Department stopped and
harassed White when she returned home from work after the 10:00 p.m. curfew
imposed by AAMC and CHG Westgate, threatening to arrest White. White feared
arrest by police pursuant to AAMC and CHG W estgate’s curfew whenever she returned
home from work after curfew. Tired of the harassment and threats, White vacated her
dwelling at Westgate in March 2013.
10. Loretta Mobley
73. Plaintiff Loretta Mobley, 34, is African American. Mobley assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 1008 at the Westgate Apartments on January 3, 2011, where
she resided with her three minor children. Mobley received the three-day notice, but she
cannot recall how it was delivered. She does not recall receiving the amended, 30-day
notice. She felt intimated by police reaction to the tenants’ protest over their mass
eviction and worries that the police will mistreat her.
74. Mobley continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. She has since vacated
her apartment at Westgate.
///
29
11. Jnai Whitehead
75. Plaintiff Jnai Whitehead, 40, is African American. Whitehead assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 1015 at the Westgate Apartments on December 3, 2010, where
she resided with her three minor children. When Whitehead applied in 2010, the
Westgate manager instructed Mitchell to verify her criminal history by completing a
and returning with a copy of her history. Whitehead complied with the manager’s
instructions. The manager approved Whitehead’s application and W hitehead
completed Westgate’s annual re-certification process each year until she vacated.
76. On February 21, 2012, O’Neal with another City police officer served
Whitehead with the three-day notice to vacate based on her alleged nondisclosure of
her criminal history. A few days later, Whitehead received the amended 30-day notice,
seeking her eviction based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history. The
former landlord tried to evict Whitehead on that basis in 2012, and the ev iction was
dismissed.
77. Whitehead continued to reside at W estgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. In 2014, CHG
Westgate/AAMC tried to evict Whitehead, invoking its previously undisclosed 99-year
rule. That eviction was also dismissed. Whitehead felt driven from her home by
30
defendants and the City whom she believed would continue to harass her until she quit
the Westgate Apartments. Whitehead eventually moved out of Westgate in February
2015 because she was constantly harassed by AAMC and CHG Westgate about her
criminal history. Until she moved out, Whitehead and her children continued to be
subject to the overly restrictive rules limiting children’s use of the apartment grounds to
play enforced by CHG Westgate and AAMC.
12. Roshaun Williams
78. Plaintiff Roshaun Williams, 46, is African American. Williams assumed her
tenancy in Apartment 1015 at the Westgate Apartments on December 3, 2010, where
she continues to reside. When Williams applied in 2010, the W estgate manager
instructed Mitchell to complete a criminal history authorization, which she did and
supplied it to the manager. Williams’ application was approved and she has completed
Westgate’s annual re-certification process each year since 2010.
79. In 2012, Williams was served with both the three and thirty day notices
described above. She felt her treatment by the City and her former landlord was unfair
since she had complied with the instructions given by her Westgate manager.
80. Williams continued to reside at Westgate after the 2012 transfer of
and CHG Westgate adopted their 99-year criminal history rule. On April 8, 2014, after
the state court had dismissed AAMC and CHG Westgate’s evictions against Sam,
31
Brown and Whitehead, AAMC served an eviction notice on Williams because of
criminal history, attaching a copy of its 99-year policy. Although she was not ultimately
evicted, Williams fears that the restrictive rules of AAMC and CHG Westgate are
intended to charge residents with infractions as a basis for seeking their eviction and
that she could be subject to eviction for criminal history in the future.
13. Marie Davis
81. Plaintiff Marie Davis’s household is African-American. She assumed her
tenancy at the complex in 2001 and was re-certified annually by defendants verifying
her eligibility for continued residency. Starting on or shortly after February 21, 2012,
and continuing until she vacated Westgate, Davis was subjected to the same pattern of
discriminatory treatment and intimidation by the City and GA West Gate suffered by
other plaintiffs as described above. Davis continued to reside at Westgate after the
transfer of ownership of Westgate from GA West Gate to CHG Westgate. She received
AAMC’s January 2013 notice requiring her to obtain an updated criminal history from
the Garden City Policy Department. Davis vacated Westgate in mid-2013.
14. Carmen Rivers
82. Plaintiff Carmen Rivers was African-American. She assumed her
tenancy at the complex in 2006 and was re-certified annually by defendants verifying
her eligibility for continued residency. Starting on or shortly after February 21, 2012,
and continuing until her death in August 2013, Rivers was subjected to the same
pattern of discriminatory treatment and intimidation suffered by other plaintiffs, as
described above, including receipt of service of the February 2012 three-day notice to
vacate based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history.
32
83. Rivers continued to reside at Westgate after the transfer of ownership of
Westgate from GA West Gate to CHG Westgate. She received AAMC’s January 2013
notice requiring her to obtain an updated criminal history from the Garden City Policy
Department. She resided at Westgate when AAMC and CHG Westgate implemented
their 99-year criminal history rule and when they began eviction proceedings against
tenants based on that rule. Jeannine Belalcazar was appointed the Administrator of the
Estate of Carmen Rivers by the Probate Court of Chatham County on February 15,
2015.
15. Debra Truell
84. Plaintiff Debra Truell was African American. She too is deceased. Her
son Jerron Campbell was appointed the Administrator of the Estate of Debra Truell by
the Probate Court of Chatham County on August 5, 2016. Starting on or shortly after
February 21, 2012, and continuing until her death in September 2014, Truell was
subjected to the same pattern of discriminatory treatment and intimidation suffered by
other plaintiffs, as described above, including receipt of service of the February 2012
three-day notice to vacate based on her alleged nondisclosure of her criminal history.
85. Truell continued to reside at Westgate after the transfer of ownership of
Westgate from GA West Gate to CHG Westgate. She received AAMC’s January 2013
notice requiring her to obtain an updated criminal history from the Garden City Policy
Department. She resided at Westgate when AAMC and CHG Westgate implemented
their 99-year criminal history rule and when they began eviction proceedings against
tenants based on that rule. Like other tenants at W estgate, Truell became aware of
AAMC and CHG Westgate’s attempts to evict tenants for their criminal history starting
33
in December 2013. Truell died in September 2014.
16. SCFHC
86. Several individual plaintiffs complained to SCFHC about defendants’
discriminatory housing practices. In response, SCFHC investigated their complaints,
counseled them about their fair housing rights, and launched an intensive education
and outreach campaign to counteract the effects of defendants’ discriminatory housing
practices. After CHG Westgate and AAMC took over at Westgate, SCFHC received a
new round of complaints from residents of Westgate that they were receiving eviction
notices based on their criminal history. In response, SCFHC investigated their
complaints, counseled them about their fair housing rights and assisted them with
obtaining legal representation to fight their evictions.
G. Municipal Policy
87. The City’s misconduct alleged in this complaint was committed pursuant
to the City’s municipal policy. Its mistreatment of black families at Westgate reflects its
well-settled pattern of mistreatment of black residents spanning decades. Having
certified that it would affirmatively further fair housing, the City’s failure to train its police
officers in the requirements of federal fair housing laws demonstrates its deliberate
indifference of the federal rights provided by those laws. By endorsing CHG
Westgate’s public authority bond in exchange for CHG Westgate and AAMC’s pledge to
work with the City to impose an unlawful criminal history rule, the City imposed and
ensure compliance with its unlawful municipal policy.
H. Disparate Treatment and Disparate Impact on the Basis of Race
88. On April 4, 2016, HUD’s Office of General Counsel issued Guidance on
34
Application of Fair Housing Act Standards to the Use of Criminal Records by Providers
of Housing and Real Estate-Related Transactions. Drawing on long-standing laws, the
guidance states:
Across the United States, African Americans and Hispanics are arrested,
convicted and incarcerated at rates disproportionate to their share of the
general population.[Footnote omitted.] Consequently, criminal records-
based barriers to housing are likely to have a disproportionate impact on
minority home seekers. While having a criminal record is not a protected
characteristic under the Fair Housing Act, criminal history-based
restrictions on housing opportunities violate the Act if, without justification,
their burden falls more often on renters or other housing market
participants of one race or national origin over another (i.e., discriminatory
effects liability). [Footnote omitted.] Additionally, intentional
discrimination in violation of the Act occurs if a housing provider treats
individuals with comparable criminal history differently because of their
race, national origin or other protected characteristic (i.e., disparate
treatment liability).
1. Disparate Treatment
89. During all times relevant, the tenant population of Westgate Apartments
was entirely African American, except for at least one white person who resided with an
African American family. Westgate is unique among the apartment complexes located
in Garden City because it is entirely occupied by black households in a neighborhood
with the highest concentration of black residents in the City.
35
90. The City discriminated against residents of Westgate because of the
unique racial composition of the apartment complex. Although other Garden City’s
apartments, housing developments and mobile home parks experience similar or
comparable rates of crime, the City targeted African American Westgate residents for
mass evictions based on criminal history. The City instructed the owners and operators
to evict Westgate residents and actively engaged in the eviction process, even though
its demands and conduct violated clearly established state and federal law. The race of
tenants occupying the Westgate Apartments was a motivating factor in the City’s
decision and implementation of its demand for the mass eviction of residents from the
Westgate Apartments.
91. CHG Westgate, LLC owns or operates several apartment complexes.
Among its apartment complexes, Westgate is unique because it was entirely occupied
by black families. Crime occurred at each apartment complex owned or operated by
CHG Westgate, but only Westgate was targeted for the mass eviction of any tenant
who had any criminal record, regardless of the nature, age, or disposition of the charge,
regardless of that tenant’s conduct while residing at the property, or whether the tenant
complied with the manager’s instructions regarding criminal history verification as part
of the application process. The race of tenants occupying the Westgate Apartments
was a motivating factor for CHG Westgate’s conduct. It also acquiesced to these
discriminatory practices at the direction of the City.
92. AAMC operates over 50 residential rental properties, including properties
in the CHG family of properties, to which Westgate belongs. Among the apartment
complexes operated by AAMC, including those in the CHG family of properties,
36
Westgate is unique because it is entirely occupied by black families. Crime occurs at
each apartment complexes operated by AAMC. But only Westgate has been targeted
by AAMC for the implementation and enforcement of the draconian 99-year rule, which
precludes from tenancy even those persons convicted of misdemeanor property
damage or possession of less than an ounce of marijuana. Only at Westgate did AAMC
attempt to evict tenants under the 99-year rule, regardless of that tenant’s conduct
while residing at the property, or whether the tenant complied with the manager’s
instructions regarding criminal history verification as part of the application process. The
race of the residents at Westgate was a motivating factor in AAMC implementation of
the 99-year rule on behalf of CHG Westgate. The race of tenants occupying the
Westgate Apartments was a motivating factor for AAMC’s conduct. It also
acquiesced to these discriminatory practices at the direction of the City.
2. Disparate Impact
93. Within Garden City, Chatham County and the State of Georgia, African
Americans are (at least) twice as likely to have a criminal conviction than are whites.
National statistics show that as of 2014 African Americans comprised approximately
36% of the total prison population but only about 12% of the country’s total population.
Thus, African Americans were incarcerated at a rate nearly three times their proportion
of the general population. In contrast, non-Hispanic whites comprised approximately 62
of the total U.S. population, but only about 34% of the prison population in 2014. Thus,
a tenancy policy that bars residency based on prior criminal convictions may predictably
result in a disparate impact on African Americans.
94. Even if not disparate treatment, the municipal policy of the City and
37
discriminatory housing practices of CHG Westgate and AAMC barring any person from
tenancy based solely on his or her criminal history actually or predictably resulted in a
disparate impact on persons and classes of persons protected by the fair housing laws
on the basis of race. Assuming that the City applied its same criminal history policy to
all the apartment buildings in its jurisdiction, then the policy had an adverse disparate
impact on African Americans. The negative effect of the criminal history policy enforced
by the City, CHG Westgate, and AAMC actually or predictably falls more harshly on
African Americans than on other racial groups, particularly whites, as alleged above.
95. Even if not disparate treatment, AAMC and CHG Westgate’s 99-year
criminal history rule actually or predictably results in a disparate impact on persons and
classes of persons protected by the fair housing laws on the basis of race. Assuming
that AAMC and CHG Westgate applied their 99-year rule to all of the residential rental
properties owned or operated by them, then the policy would have an adverse disparate
impact on African Americans. The negative effect of AAMC and CHG Westgate’s 99-
year rule actually or predictably falls more harshly on African Americans than on other
racial groups, particular whites, as alleged above.
96. Each defendant lacked sufficient justification for the policies challenged in
this action and for the manner in which it was implemented by way of mass evictions or
eviction attempts. The policy and its implementation was not necessary to advance any
legitimate business or governmental interest.
I. Familial Status Discrimination
97. Since taking over ownership and operation of the Westgate Apartments,
defendants CHG Westgate and AAMC have enforced overly restrictive rules that
38
discriminate against families with children on the basis of familial status by limiting
children’s ability to play outside and limiting children’s use of the common areas and by
enforcing those rules with threats of eviction. These discriminatory housing practices,
committed by CHG Westgate and AAMC against families with children, injured Tenyika
Sams, Brigitte Brown, Tomeka Dudley, Adrian Kennedy, Leslie Mitchell, Shana Rouse,
and Jnai Whitehead.
J. Pattern or Practice of Discrimination
98. By engaging in the conduct alleged above, defendants engaged in a
continuous pattern or practice of discrimination and harassment against plaintiffs based
on race in their ownership or operation of the Westgate Apartments or in the provision
of municipal services.
1. The City
99. The City has engaged in a pattern or practice of discrimination committing
the following discriminatory housing practices:
a. Evicting or attempting to evict tenants because of their race or color or
because of the race or color a tenant’s guest;
b. Using different qualification criteria or applications, or rental standards or
procedures, or rental approval procedures or other requirements because of race
or color;
c. Limiting the use of privileges, services or facilities associated with a
dwelling because of race or color of a tenant or a person associated with him or
her;
d. Because of race or color, engaging in conduct relating to the rental of
39
housing or the provision of services and facilities in connection therewith that
otherwise makes unavailable or denies dwellings to persons;
e. Refusing to provide municipal services or providing such services
differently because of race or color;
f. Communicating to residents that he or she would not be compatible with
existing residents of a community or neighborhood because of race or color;
g. Assigning any person to a particular section of a community,
neighborhood or development because of race or color;
h. Employing codes or other devices to segregate or reject applicants or
renters because of race or color;
i. Using words, phrases, photographs, illustrations, symbols or forms which
convey that dwellings are available or not available to a particular group of
persons because of race or color;
j. Expressing to agents, employees, renters or any other persons a
preference for or limitation on any renter because of race or color;
k. Coercing a person, either orally, in writing, or by other means, to deny or
limit the benefits provided that person in connection with the rental of a dwelling
because of race or color;
l. Threatening, intimidating or interfering with persons in their enjoyment of a
dwelling because of the race or color of such persons, or the race or color of
visitors or associates of such persons;
m. Intimidating or threatening any person because that person is engaging in
activities designed to make other persons aware of, or encouraging such other
40
persons to exercise, rights granted or protected by the Fair Housing Act; and,
n. Providing different, governmental services in a manner that has a
disparate impact or has the effect of creating, perpetuating, or increasing
segregated housing patterns on the basis of race or color.
2. AAMC and CHG Westgate
100. Defendants CHG Westgate and AAMC have engaged in a pattern or
practice of discrimination committing the following discriminatory housing practices:
a. Evicting or attempting to evict tenants because of their race or color or
because of the race or color a tenant’s guest;
b. Using different qualification criteria or applications, or rental standards or
procedures, or rental approval procedures or other requirements because of race
or color;
c. Limiting the use of privileges, services or facilities associated with a
dwelling because of race, color, or familial status of a tenant or a person
associated with him or her;
d. Because of race, color, or familial status, engaging in conduct relating to
the rental of housing or the provision of services and facilities in connection
therewith that otherwise makes unavailable or denies dwellings to persons;
e. Communicating to residents that he or she would not be compatible with
existing residents of a community or neighborhood because of race, color, or
familial status;
f. Employing codes or other devices to segregate or reject applicants or
renters because of race or color;
41
g. Using words, phrases, photographs, illustrations, symbols or forms which
convey that dwellings are available or not available to a particular group of
persons because of race, color, or familial status;
h. Expressing to agents, employees, renters or any other persons a
preference for or limitation on any renter because of race, color, or familial
status;
i. Coercing a person, either orally, in writing, or by other means, to deny or
limit the benefits provided that person in connection with the rental of a dwelling
because of race, color, or familial status;
j. Threatening, intimidating or interfering with persons in their enjoyment of a
dwelling because of the race, color, or familial status of such persons, or the
race, color, or familial status of visitors or associates of such persons; and,
k. Intimidating or threatening any person because that person is engaging in
activities designed to make other persons aware of, or encouraging such other
persons to exercise, rights granted or protected by the Fair Housing Act.
101. Each plaintiff was injured by each defendant’s commission of these
discriminatory housing practices; accordingly, each plaintiff is an aggrieved person
within the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3602(i).
K. Injuries
102. By reason of defendants’ unlawful acts or practices, each plaintiff was
injured. For the individual plaintiffs, each suffered emotional distress, including
humiliation, mental anguish, and attendant bodily injury, violation of her civil rights, loss
of dignity, and embarrassment. They also suffered invasion of their private right of
occupancy, deprivation of their use and enjoyment of their dwelling, and loss of
42
important housing opportunities. For SCFHC, it suffered diversion of its scarce
resources and frustration of its mission. Accordingly, each plaintiff is entitled to
compensatory damages.
103. In executing the acts of which plaintiffs complain, defendants acted with
reckless disregard of the federally protected rights of plaintiffs. Accordingly, each
defendant – except for the City – is liable to each plaintiff for punitive damages.
104. There now exists an actual controversy between the parties regarding
defendants’ duties under federal fair housing laws. Accordingly, each plaintiff is entitled
to declaratory relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 3613(c)(1) and Rule 57 of the
Federal Rules of Civil Procedure..
105. Unless enjoined, defendants will continue to engage in the unlawful acts
and the pattern or practice of discrimination described above. Plaintiffs have no
adequate remedy at law. Plaintiffs are now suffering and will continue to suffer
irreparable injury from defendants’ acts and the pattern or practice of discrimination
against tenants unless relief is provided by this Court. Accordingly, plaintiffs are entitled
to injunctive relief pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §§ 1983, 3613(c)(1) and Rule 65 of the Federal
Rules of Civil Procedure.
V. CLAIMS
A. First Claim: The Fair Housing Act
[All Plaintiffs v. All Defendants]
106. Plaintiffs reallege and incorporate herein by reference each preceding
paragraph.
107. Each defendant – CHG Westgate, LLC, American Apartment
43
Management Co., Inc., and the City of Garden City – injured each plaintiff by
committing discriminatory housing practices on the basis of race or color in violation of
the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a) - (d) and 3617.
B. Second Claim: The Fair Housing Act
[Sams, Brown, Dudley, Kennedy, Mitchell, Rouse, Whitehead v. CHG Westgate
and AAMC]
paragraph.
109. Defendant CHG Westgate, LLC and defendant American Apartment
Management Co., Inc. injured plaintiffs Tenyika Sams, Brigitte Brown, Tomeka Dudley,
Adrian Kennedy, Leslie Mitchell, Shana Rouse, and Jnai W hitehead by committing
discriminatory housing practices on the basis of familial status in violation of the Fair
Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 3604(a) - (d) and 3617.
C. Third Claim: 42 U.S.C. § 1983
[All Plaintiffs except SCFHC v. The City]
paragraph.
111. Defendant City of Garden City injured each plaintiff, except for Savannah
Chatham County Fair Housing Council, by depriving them of equal protection of the
laws, denying them due process of law, including freedom of association, freedom from
unlawful search and seizure, freedom from selective and discriminatory prosecution,
and freedom from the enforcement of laws that are void for vagueness, as guaranteed
under the First, Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution in
44
violation of the Civil Right Act of 1871, 42 U.S.C. § 1983.
VI. RELIEF
WHEREFORE, plaintiffs pray for entry of a judgment against each defendant
that:
1. Awards compensatory damages according to proof;
2. Award punitive damages against each defendant, except for the City,
according to proof;
3. Declares that defendants have violated the provisions of the applicable
federal fair housing and civil rights laws;
4. Enjoins all unlawful practices complained about herein and imposes
affirmative injunctive relief requiring defendants, their partners, agents, employees,
assignees and all persons acting in concert with or participating with them, to take
///
///
///
///
///
45
affirmative action to provide equal housing opportunities to all tenants and residents;
5. Awards costs of suit, including reasonable attorneys’ fees; and,
6. Awards all such other relief as the Court deems just.
VII. JURY DEMAND
Plaintiffs request trial by jury.
* * *
Dated: March 3, 2017.
Respectfully submitted,
S. WESLEY WOOLF, P.C. BRANCART & BRANCART

S. Wesley Woolf (GA Bar No. 776175)
408 East Bay Street /s/ Christopher Brancart
Savannah, GA 31401 Admitted Pro Hac Vice (CA128475)
Tel: (912) 201-3696 PO Box 686
Fax: (912) 236-1884 Pescadero, CA 94060
woolf@woolflawfirm.net Tel: (65)) 879-0141
Fax: (650) 879-1103
cbrancart@brancart.com
Attorneys for Plaintiffs
46
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
Pursuant to Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, on March 3, 2017, I

served by email via the ECF system a copy of the attached document – THIRD
AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL – on the following
attorneys:
Ellis, Painter, Ratterree & Adams, LLP S. WESLEY WOOLF, P.C.

Dana Braun Wesley Woolf (GA 776175)
P. 0. Box 9946 408 East Bay Street
Savannah, GA 31412 Savannah, Georgia 31401
F: (912) 233-2281 912-201-3695
dbraun@epra-law.com woolf@woolflawfirm.net
Attorney for Defendants American Attorney for Plaintiffs

Apartment Management Company, Inc.
and CHG West Gate, LLC
OLIVER MANER, LLP FREEMAN MATHIS & GARY, LLP
Patricia Tanzer Paul Benton J. Mathis, Jr.
218 West State Street Martin Heller
Savannah, Georgia 31401 100 Galleria Parkway, Suite 1600
ppaul@olivermaner.com Atlanta, Georgia 30339-5948
mheller@fmglaw.com
Attorneys for Defendant City of Garden
City Attorneys for Defendant American
Apartment Management Company, Inc.
/s/ Christopher Brancart
47

Westgate &amp; Garden City Third Amended Complaint (Filed)

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Westgate &amp; Garden City Third Amended Complaint (Filed)

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Case 4:15-cv-00282-WTM-GRS Document 101-1 Filed 03/03/17 Page 1 of 47

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

TENYIKA SAMS; BRIGITTE BROWN; ) Case No. 4:15-cv-00282

THIRD AMENDED COMPLAINT AND DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

1. Plaintiffs – tenants of the Westgate Apartments in Garden City, Georgia –

I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE

2. Jurisdiction is conferred on this Court by 42 U.S.C. § 3613 and by 28

otherwise relate to real properties located there.

II. SUBJECT DWELLING

4. The Westgate Apartments, currently renamed the Pines at Garden City, is

an apartment complex located at 145 Wheathill Drive, in Garden City, Georgia. It is a

dwelling under the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. § 3602(b).

5. Plaintiffs Tenyika Sams, Brigitte Brown, Marie Davis, Tomeka Dudley,

an appointed administrator, Jeannine Belalcazar (ECF 62). Plaintiff Debra Truell, a

former Westgate tenant, is deceased and her estate is represented herein by an

appointed administrator, Clyde Jerron Campbell (ECF 93).

6. Plaintiff Savannah-Chatham County Fair Housing Council, Inc.,

principal place of business located in Savannah, Georgia. One of SCFHC’s specific

discrimination; (2) conducting investigations of housing facilities to determine whether

housing providers that have previously engaged in discriminatory practices.

7. GA West Gate, LLC owned, operated and managed the Westgate

Abdoo was employed as an agent of GA West Gate and American Housing

8. GA West Gate transferred ownership, operation and management of the

Westgate Apartments on or before December 13, 2012, to defendant CHG Westgate,

defendant American Apartment Management Company, Inc. as its managing agent.

9. Defendant CHG Westgate, LLC and defendant American Apartment

that it is necessary to name the alter ego of those corporate entities.

10. Defendant City of Garden City is a municipal corporation, established and

11. In committing each of the discriminatory or unlawful acts alleged in

IV. FACTUAL ALLEGATIONS

A. City of Garden City

outside the city center.

rent their homes.

2009 it adopted a council-manager form of government. (GA H.B. No. 297, § 1,

approximately 100 subordinate officers and employees in various departments (GCCO

Neighborhood Stabilization Program, established by the Housing and Economic

certification to “affirmatively further fair housing.” 42 U.S.C. §§ 3608, 5304.

established “colored districts.’‘ After such overt, de jure governmental discrimination

government – that today requires cities to “affirmatively further fair housing” in

exchange for federal funds – reinforced past discriminatory practices by depriving

federal housing assistance to integrated neighborhoods, a pattern that private lenders

student body is 87% black.)

chief Lyons acknowledges the lasting effects of Garden City’s legacy:

its share of misconduct accusations and public distrust. [It] had a

reputation for harassment, heavy handed tactics, and profiling. [¶]

based profiling is equally troubling for law enforcement agencies and

deciding to effect a stop or arrest.

Apartments, however, that training came three years too late.

B. The Westgate Apartments

20. The Westgate Apartments (Westgate) is located at 145 Wheathill Road,

are three or four bedroom units accommodating large families.

21. Westgate is affordable housing. HUD financed the construction of

Westgate in 1982 under its Section 8 project-based af fordable housing program. In

the owner’s commitment to continue to operate W estgate as affordable housing under

occupancy rate rarely dips below 95 percent.

subsidized landlords to skimp on maintenance and staffing, reducing expenses and

C. GA West Gate LLC

23. These perverse incentives guided GA West Gate’s operation of the

department in management decisions as a means of suppressing tenants’ demands.

oversaw decisions governing Westgate’s management, including the decision to

landlord’s mismanagement of the Westgate Apartments. In August 2011, Maloney was

they depended on O’Neal to provide the information to justify the eviction.

forgery charges against Gradick.

27. On February 2, 2012, Michelle Abdoo emailed to O’Neal a complete

Westgate & Garden City Third Amended Complaint (Filed)

Westgate & Garden City Third Amended Complaint (Filed)