Filed Date: Oct. 23, 1996
Case Ongoing
Clearinghouse coding complete
On October 23, 1996, Cabrini-Green Local Advisory Council (LAC), a tenant organization that represents the tenants of Cabrini-Green, a family public housing development in Chicago, filed this lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. Plaintiff sued the Chicago Housing Authority (CHA) and its Executive Director under the Fair Housing Act, Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 1983, HOPE VI, the U.S. Housing Act of 1937, and the the Uniform Relocation Act. Plaintiffs also brought eight state law claims. The complaint alleged that the CHA's plan to "revitalize" Cabrini-Green would displace Cabrini-Green residents and reduce the supply of affordable housing units, thereby resulting in a discriminatory impact upon African Americans, women, and children. Plaintiff sought declaratory and injunctive relief.
On January 3, 1997, the Honorable David H. Coar denied plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction to the extent that it sought to enjoin the removal of residents from some of the buildings involved in the revitalization plan. However, the court enjoined CHA from taking any steps to demolish those buildings. On January 21, the court dismissed four of plaintiff's twenty-two counts with prejudice. Cabrini-Green Loc. Advisory Council v. Chicago Hous. Auth., No. 96 C 6949, 1997 WL 31002 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 22, 1997).
On April 3, 1997, plaintiffs filed an amended complaint to add the City of Chicago and the Mayor of Chicago, Richard M. Daley, as defendants. After more than a year of discovery, settlement conferences began in April of 1998. On May 1, 1998, the parties reached agreement in principle to settle the case, subject to drafting agreement and seeking necessary court approval. In a minute order on March 2, 1999, the court denied the Mayor's motion to dismiss, CHA's motion for summary judgment, and the City's motion for summary judgment. {THIS IS CONFUSING: IF THEY SETTLED, WHY WERE THESE MOTIONS PENDING?}
Another year passed, and on August 30, 2000, the parties agreed to settle the case on the terms set forth in a consent decree. The consent decree included the establishment of a working group and resident participation in the redevelopment initiative as well as the funding and operation of replacement housing. LAC agreed to the demolition of certain buildings. The decree also outlined relocation options for families, including that displaced families would have priority to move into newly constructed public housing and affordable housing units to be constructed under the decree. In addition, the decree provided for job training and employment opportunities as well as community and supportive services. By its terms, the consent decree had to be approved by Judge Aspen in the Gautreaux case. Gautreaux, one of the most significant housing desegregation cases ever, was a class-action lawsuit against the CHA in the Northern District of Illinois that alleged segregation on the part of the CHA. Once Judge Aspen approved this consent decree, Judge Coar entered the decree, and closed the case, except that the court retained jurisdiction to the extent necessary to enforce the consent decree.
Several years later, on February 25, 2003, Section IIA of the consent decree, which pertained to the funding and operation of replacement housing, was modified. On March 17, 2004, the consent degree was again modified. The 2004 modification pertained to who was responsible for developing and administering some of the community and support services.
On January 10, 2006, the LCA filed a motion to enforce the consent decree. A hearing was held on January 26, and the motion was concluded and terminated that same day. Just two months later, on March 31, 2006, the LCA filed a motion for a court order to reinstate their motion to enforce the consent decree. On April 6, 2006, the court did just that, entering an order for the consent decree to be enforced with respect to a particular resident. On January 29, 2007, the court granted plaintiff's second motion to enforce the consent decree, rendering as unenforceable in all current and future leases a provision that would have required eviction whenever a resident was found to have been convicted of a felony.. Cabrini-Green Loc. Advisory Council v. Chicago Hous. Auth., No. 96 C 6949, 2007 WL 294253 (N.D. Ill. Jan. 29, 2007).
On May 23, 2011, the case was reassigned to Judge Edmond E. Chang. Two months later, on August 15, Judge Chang denied plaintiff's third motion to compel enforcement of the consent decree. Per the consent decree, residential units were to be built on a specific parcel of land. In its motion, plaintiff alleged that in the eleven years since the consent decree had been in effect, the City of Chicago had neither acquired nor taken any steps to acquire the land. Because the City had made considerable progress in building a significant portion of the required residential units on other lands, though, the Court concluded that the consent decree’s flexibility and deference demanded that the motion to compel be denied.
On September 10, 2015, the parties filed an agreed motion to modify the consent decree. In a minute entry on September 14, Judge Chang stated that the proposed modification appeared to be a subset of a broader modification in the broader (and lead) case, Gautreaux v. CHA, in which there was also a pending motion for modification. The court deferred to the Gautreaux court, and when that court granted the motion to modify, so too did Judge Chang. The modification pertained to replacement housing, and according to Judge Chang, was justified because original sources of funding had diminished and new sources of funding (that did not exist when the decree was entered) could be tapped.
As part of the original 2000 consent decree, private developers had to give the LAC both an ownership interest in and a share of fees and profits from certain new development projects in Cabrini-Green. However, the receipt of such funds was conditioned on the LAC only using the money “for non-profit purposes to benefit current and displaced Cabrini-Green residents.” In 2003, the LAC created a non-profit organization called the Cabrini-Green Local Advisory Council Community Development Corporation (CDC) to receive these funds. In December 2016, the CHA’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) began receiving complaints that the President of both the LAC and the CDC had misappropriated CDC funds for her personal use. A May 2020 OIG report confirmed the allegations of financial mismanagement against the CDC. Given the alleged mishandling of funds, on August 22, 2020, the court granted in part and denied in part the defendants' motion to preliminarily freeze the bank accounts of the CDC as well as certain members of the LAC and CDC. The court imposed financial controls and limits, but refused to impose an across-the-board freeze that would have completely disabled the CDC from operating.
On April 21, 2021, the court ordered the appointment of a temporary custodian who would be responsible for selecting CDC board members and professional staff. While in place, the temporary custodian would work with a caretaker CDC board, followed by the new CDC board, to operate the CDC in pursuit of its charitable mission. On July 22, 2021, the court appointed a temporary custodian.
On March 31, 2022, the court granted CHA's motion to compel compliance with the court's orders from August 22, 2020 and April 21, 2021. The court also granted CHA's motion for restitution orders against prior CDC board members. The court prohibited these prior CDC board members from occupying any corporate officer or director role in CDC or any other LAC operating entity that takes its place pursuant to the Consent Decree and also prohibited them from being involved in any of the LAC's responsibilities as set out in the Consent Decree.
The case is ongoing. On June 22, 2022, a telephone conference was held with the Temporary Custodian, in furtherance of settlement negotiations.
Summary Authors
Michelle Wolk (7/25/2022)
Gautreaux v. Chicago Housing Authority, Northern District of Illinois (1966)
For PACER's information on parties and their attorneys, see: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5431660/parties/cabrini-green-local-v-cha/
Bazer, Nicole Beth (Illinois)
Ammarell, Scott William (Illinois)
Barricini, Mia Royce (Illinois)
Bergeson, Patricia Therese (Illinois)
Burch, Anthony R (Illinois)
See docket on RECAP: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/5431660/cabrini-green-local-v-cha/
Last updated April 7, 2024, 3:08 a.m.
State / Territory: Illinois
Case Type(s):
Key Dates
Filing Date: Oct. 23, 1996
Case Ongoing: Yes
Plaintiffs
Plaintiff Description:
Cabrini-Green Local Advisory Council (LAC), a tenant organization that represents the tenants of a family public housing development.
Plaintiff Type(s):
Non-profit NON-religious organization
Attorney Organizations:
Public Interest Lawyer: Yes
Filed Pro Se: No
Class Action Sought: No
Class Action Outcome: Not sought
Defendants
Chicago Housing Authority, City
Defendant Type(s):
Case Details
Causes of Action:
Fair Housing Act/Fair Housing Amendments Act (FHAA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 3601 et seq.
Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000d et seq.
Available Documents:
Injunctive (or Injunctive-like) Relief
Outcome
Prevailing Party: Plaintiff
Nature of Relief:
Injunction / Injunctive-like Settlement
Preliminary injunction / Temp. restraining order
Source of Relief:
Form of Settlement:
Court Approved Settlement or Consent Decree
Order Duration: 2000 - None
Content of Injunction:
Issues
General:
Discrimination-area:
Discrimination-basis:
Race:
Affected Sex or Gender: