August 15, 2008
RETALIATION
 |
New York State tried an end run around Melendez v Wing. Housing Works read the play. |
Last Thursday, Housing Works filed a lawsuit on behalf of Zoraida Melendez, charging that the HIV/AIDS Services Administration (HASA), the Human Resources Administration (HRA) and the New York State Office of Temporary and Disability Assistance (OTD) retaliated against her when it reduced her monthly rental assistance last May from $1,350 to $810. The reduction in Melendez's housing benefits would have resulted in her family's eviction from their home.
When Housing Works filed the lawsuit on Thursday, it also obtained a temporary restraining order on the city's marshal, staving off the eviction of the Melendez family.
Melendez's lawyer, Housing Works staff attorney Matthew Carmody, believes that the city and state government agencies are retaliating against Melendez because of her role as lead plaintiff in Melendez v. Wing. Melendez's victory in that case, which went all the way to the State's highest court, established the right of all HASA clients to exclude family members with SSI income from their household budget calculation. SSI invisibility, as the exclusion is known, saves families over $500 each month, money that can go to the care and support of their disabled family members. Melendez v. Wing was relied on heavily by the Appellate Division in Doe v. Doar, a sister case that restored SSI invisibility budgeting to all eligible public assistance recipients in New York State. Doe v. Doar cost New York State tens of millions of dollars in retroactive benefits.
In late April 2007, Melendez, her husband and child were approved by HASA to move into an apartment with a rent of $1350 a month. In late April, HASA paid the security deposit, first month's rent, and brokers fee, all at the actual rent amount, $1,350. In early May, however, just a few days later, the agency inexplicably reduced Melendez's rental supplement to $810, the bare minimum required by law."In the 10 years I've been practicing HIV law in this city, I've never seen HASA approve an apartment and subsequently not use the actual rent as the basis for the family's shelter allowance," Carmody said. "HASA moved the family in and paid the full rent, then days later informed the family that their rental assistance would be cut by hundreds of dollars. That left the family on a collision course with eviction."
Carmody has obtained affidavits from four leading HIV/AIDS attorneys saying that they, too, have never seen a circumstance in which HASA budgeted rental assistance for less than a client's actual rent.
Carmody said that New York State is essentially attempting an end run around Melendez v. Wing: "Since HASA can't put Ms. Melendez's child's SSI benefits on her budget directly because of the Melendez v. Wing decision, the State is, effectively, attempting to force her to pay rent with those benefits." Those benefits are earmarked to meet the needs of Melendez's disabled daughter, as Melendez v. Wing established. "The family is faced with an impossible choice: Use their subsistence benefits to make up the difference in rent, or use the subsistence benefits to meet the family's survival needs," said Carmody.
After trying to recoup Melendez's rent payments through administrative means, Housing Works filed a lawsuit against HRA/OTDA, which oversees HASA. The City has already signaled that it will move to dismiss the case, with papers due in mid-September.