March 20, 2023 — In Philadelphia, renters who use Housing Choice Vouchers, 84 percent of whom are Black, face widespread discrimination in their search for rental housing. The widespread refusal to accept vouchers limits the ability of these renters to access safe and affordable housing in diverse neighborhoods, deepening racial segregation and the concentration of poverty.
Even though the practice of refusing vouchers is widespread, it is prohibited in Philadelphia. In our work taking on source of income discrimination, we represent tenants who face steep barriers to safe and healthy housing because of how they pay rent and advocate for more effective enforcement of fair housing laws.
At hearings before the Philadelphia City Council Committee on Housing, Neighborhood Development, and the Homeless called by Councilmember Jamie Gauthier, we shared testimony on the impact of widespread source of income discrimination by landlords on housing stability and affordability in Philadelphia, as well as ways for the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations to more effectively address this issue. Our clients, Tomika Anglin and David Smith, and Renters United Philadelphia member Delores Bell also shared testimony discussing their firsthand experience with discrimination as Philadelphia renters using Housing Choice Vouchers.
Below, we have provided written testimony as prepared (emphasis added).
- Read testimony from Law Center staff attorney Sari Bernstein
- Read testimony from Law Center client Tomika Anglin
- Read testimony from Law Center client David Smith
- Read testimony from Renters United Philadelphia member Delores Bell.
Testimony from Sari Bernstein, Law Center staff attorney
My name is Sari Bernstein and I am a staff attorney at the Public Interest Law Center. Thank you for allowing me to testify today about voucher discrimination, a pervasive issue in Philadelphia that prevents low-income renters of color from obtaining safe, quality and affordable housing in neighborhoods of their choice.
Download the testimony including citations here.
Philadelphia has an affordable housing crisis. 54% of Philadelphia’s renters are cost-burdened, meaning they pay at least 30% of their income on housing costs. This problem is most acute for renters with incomes below $30,000 per year, 88% of whom are cost-burdened (and 68% are severely cost-burdened, meaning they spend at least 50% of their incomes on rent). The real impact of these unfortunate statistics is housing and economic instability for too many Philadelphians, including traumatic evictions and all the downstream consequences that flow. But Philadelphia is not without laws to combat these trends; the Fair Practices Ordinance (the “Ordinance”) prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of source of income, defined broadly as “any lawful source of income… included but not limited to… all forms of public assistance, including Temporary Assistance for Needy Families; and housing assistance programs.” Consistent with the language of the Ordinance, the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations (the “Commission”)—the city agency charged with enforcing the Fair Practices Ordinance—interprets this protection to include “any lawful income, subsidy, or benefit with which an individual supports themselves and their dependents. This includes but is not limited to… any federal, state, or local public assistance, medical assistance, or rental assistance program.”
“Voucher holders are turned away from rental opportunities solely because of their voucher status so often, and so flagrantly, that they are reasonably shocked to learn that this behavior is a violation of the law.”
In practice, the largest rental assistance program in Philadelphia is the Housing Choice Voucher program (“HCV” or “Voucher Program”), commonly referred to as “Section 8”, which is funded by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development and administered locally by the Philadelphia Housing Authority. One of the goals of the HCV program is to help households integrate in “opportunity-rich neighborhoods,” which studies show result in long-term improvements in education and economic outcomes. There are about 19,350 HCV holders in Philadelphia, 84% of whom are Black and 70% of whom earn less than $20,000 per year. Without the subsidy, these Philadelphians are effectively locked out of the rental housing market.
Although this law has been on the books for over forty years, a 2018 Urban Institute study found that 67% of Philadelphia landlords refuse to rent to voucher holders, and the refusal rate goes up to 83% in low-poverty neighborhoods. More recently in the City’s 2022 Draft Assessment of Fair Housing, nearly 50% of the respondents cite source of income as the reason they were treated differently when looking for housing, the second highest response after race. Not only did surveyed individuals routinely raise source of income discrimination, representatives from both fair housing organizations cited increased reports of source of income discrimination. Moreover, HCV holders in Philadelphia are largely located in low-income, racially concentrated neighborhoods and not in integrated “opportunity-rich neighborhoods” as envisioned by the HCV program. 43% of HCV households live in neighborhoods that are over 80% Black whereas only 1% of HCV households live in neighborhoods that are over 80% white.
In other words, despite their subsidy, these Philadelphians are actually locked out of the rental housing market in large swaths of the city. Statistics bear this out. Of the 863 Emergency Housing Vouchers administered to Philadelphia in 2021, 322 of those vouchers, or nearly 40% of the vouchers issued under program, are unused today.
The City must take urgent steps to ensure that Philadelphia landlords follow this vital tenant protection. Fair housing laws only realize their objectives with a parallel commitment to enforcement. Studies show that in jurisdictions with source of income discrimination protections, voucher utilization goes up. Because source of income discrimination complaints require administrative exhaustion at the Commission, meaning complainants must first file their allegations of discrimination with the Commission before proceeding to court, the Commission plays a key role in efforts to enforce the law and reduce source of income discrimination.
The Law Center’s recent experience representing both individuals and the Housing Equality Center of Pennsylvania, a fair housing organization, in source of income discrimination complaints at the Commission provides insight into targeted steps the City and in particular the Commission can take to counteract this form of discrimination. Our experience also shows that enforcement works—a recent settlement with a large Philadelphia landlord resulted in the landlord agreeing to encourage and accept voucher applicants in all 77 of their properties. The following recommendations come with an appreciation that the Commission’s resources and budget are currently too limited to accomplish its laudable goals. We therefore call on the City Council to increase funding and other resources to the Commission so that it may realize its Charter-mandated duties.
These recommendations reflect the Commission’s primary mandate: to educate, to investigate and to enforce.
First, the Commission must educate the public—housing providers and tenants alike— through advertisements, targeted social media, print and other means, that source of income is a protected class under the Ordinance. Voucher holders are turned away from rental opportunities solely because of their voucher status so often, and so flagrantly, that they are reasonably shocked to learn that this behavior is a violation of the law. This education should be broad, visible, and undertaken in conjunction with fair housing organizations, community-based organizations and Office of Homeless Services contract providers to reach the most impacted communities.
Second, the Commission must be both proactive and responsive in its duty to investigate violations of the Ordinance. Voucher holders experiencing housing instability cannot be solely responsible for ferreting out, reporting and confronting discriminatory behavior. The Commission should also proactively engage with fair housing organizations and other local agencies to root out discriminatory conduct. When voucher holders do come forward with allegations of discrimination, the Commission must timely respond to and investigate those complaints in a manner accessible to unrepresented individuals. By way of example, for three complaints our office filed in August 2019, the Commission took between eleven months and two years to complete its investigations. This is too long; the Ordinance calls for an investigation period of 100 days unless impracticable, and to provide notice when the investigation period does exceed 100 days. Then, once the investigation does conclude, the Commission cannot shy away from issues of fact. For example, on one occasion, despite written proof that discrimination occurred, the Commission apparently dismissed the claim simply because the landlord denied it. And on another occasion, despite collaborating proof that discrimination occurred, the Commission dismissed the claim.
Third, the Commission’s obligation to enforce the source of income protection is tied to the administrative exhaustion requirement in the Ordinance. The Commission has one full year of exclusive jurisdiction while it investigates or otherwise contemplates the complaint. City Council should consider amending the Fair Practices Ordinance to bring this requirement in line with other jurisdictions and areas of the law. For example, City Council could provide that a person may file a complaint with the Commission or has a private right of action in the Philadelphia Court of Common Pleas. Or, City Council could follow a model akin to the EEOC. That is, a person must first file a complaint with the Commission, after which the Commission has 100 days to investigate. Before the 100 days expires, a person may request and receive a Notice of Right to Sue if the Commission will be unable to complete the investigation within 100 days. After 100 days expires, a person may request and must receive a Notice of Right to Sue if the investigation is not complete. Finally, transparency is paramount to fair housing enforcement; the Commission must publicize settlement agreements and public hearing decisions that further the purpose of the Fair Practices Ordinance and the Fair Housing Act.
The Commission’s commitment to achieving fair housing in Philadelphia is commendable, and it is in a unique position to put teeth into this often-ignored provision of the Fair Practices Ordinance. The scope of the problem is too large to go unattended; Philadelphia must ensure that housing providers abide by its source of income discrimination protection. We are glad to engage and work through solutions with the Commission and all relevant partners. Thank you for holding this important hearing.
Testimony from Tomika Anglin, Law Center client
I am the mother of three adult children. In 1987 after the birth of my first child, I applied for Section 8, now known as Housing Choice Voucher. I lived at the mercy of others for many years. At one point, I had to send my 2 year-old daughter out of state to live with family because it was easier to find housing for one than for two. I was living in transitional housing in 1995 when my number came up. I found a property that would work for my family and a landlord willing to accept the voucher. The benefits of that stability can’t be overstated. Whether I had no job, a piece of a job or was fully employed, I was always certain that we had a safe, warm and affordable place to lay our heads every night. Housing security allowed me to obtain a Bachelor’s degree and a livable income. My children have gone their own ways but they know where home is.
My eligibility for Section 8 ended in 2020, but I have been in the same house since 1995. However, in February of 2019 that stability was threatened because my landlord did not want to renew my lease. I needed to find new housing in 60 days. The search was anxiety producing. I couldn’t even find property owners who would respond to my inquiry because of the voucher. In these gentrifying years, being unhoused has become yet another crisis. There are many employed, typically functioning people who are unhoused or living precariously simply because they can’t afford rent. I thought me and my teen daughter were going to be homeless. The search for housing is fraught with bias and discrimination: Black, young, # of children, unmarried… and then you add a Section 8 voucher and (we all know) your perception as a quality tenant drops into the toilet. So much so that we also know you better ask first. So, I call, I email, I text—Do you accept Section 8? No, sorry. Nope, and those were only the ones who responded. Typically, landlords don’t respond. Little did I know it’s illegal to refuse a perspective tenant based on holding a voucher (source of income discrimination). Thankfully, at the same time Charlene Samuels, Constituent Services Director extraordinaire worked with PHA to address my landlord’s financial needs which allowed me to stay in my home.
“The rights of those who need housing assistance should be enforced as vigorously as laws against racial, gender identity, sexual orientation and religious discrimination are enforced.”
Though my own situation had stabilized, I understood that many people struggle to find safe, affordable housing even with a voucher. I was connected with Public Interest Law Center to file a complaint with the Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations because I had written evidence of two refusals based on holding a voucher. Unfortunately, that process was also less than ideal. I filed two complaints in August of 2019. The first complaint was dismissed even though the landlord texted that they didn’t accept vouchers. Why wasn’t that evidence enough? The second complaint languished until the commission eventually found probable cause to proceed 2 years after filing. But then it took another year to go through conciliation with the commission. The complaint was finally settled in June of 2022. Three years is too long especially when the evidence is in writing and the landlord admits to discrimination.
My situation was resolved. But what could have happened to me happens to people every day without much in the way of justice. Most people are living so insecurely that it only takes a momentary glitch in the matrix to end up on the street. The rights of those who need housing assistance should be enforced as vigorously as laws against racial, gender identity, sexual orientation and religious discrimination are enforced. Please put in place polices that support tenants who are trying to enforce their rights before the PCHR. Landlords must comply with Philadelphia’s law against source of income discrimination just like all the other protected classes.
Testimony from David Smith, Law Center client
Hi, my name is David Smith. Thank you for inviting me to share my story about how landlords have discriminated against me because I have autism and use a voucher.
I live in the neighborhood where I was born and raised in Northeast Philadelphia. I have autism, and I receive Social Security. Some people think that, because I’m high functioning, I should get a job. Well, I may be high functioning but I’m not the Good Doctor! I’m perfectly capable of living by myself but I just can’t afford to do so on my limited income. This is why I need a Housing Choice Voucher to pay my rent. Without my voucher, I wouldn’t be able to afford my apartment. I’m afraid that I would either end up warehoused in a group home or homeless on the streets.
I waited on the voucher waitlist for 12 years. Once I received my voucher in September 2022, I was excited. I was living with my mom, who is an elderly woman. I was looking forward to getting my own place. My mom is getting older, and it’s important to her that I have a safe, affordable place where I can live when she can no longer support me. I was excited to move out and be independent, but I was also stressed about making sure that I found a place. Like I said, I knew that if I didn’t find a place I could end up homeless or in a group home.
I began searching for housing in the Northeast. I wanted to find a place that was in the neighborhood close to my family, friends, and places that I’m familiar with. Because of my autism, stability is important to me. When I looked at the affordable housing apartment listings online, I didn’t see any in the Northeast. I began to panic thinking I would have to leave behind everything that I’m familiar with.
My first heartbreak came when my mom thought she found an apartment in my neighborhood for me. The landlord told her that he accepted vouchers. We paid an application fee and underwent the credit check process. After we submitted our application, the landlord told us he was selling the apartment to turn it in a condo. But this was a lie. Since then, I’ve walked past the apartment and seen that he didn’t sell it – he just didn’t want to rent to me and used that as an excuse.
“Being told ‘no’ again and again was devastating for me and my family. It felt like landlords assumed I was a lazy, no-good person just because I had a housing voucher.”
Then, in late October, I thought I found an apartment in my neighborhood again. The landlord told my mom that they would accept the voucher. I went to tour the apartment and submitted an application and went through the credit check process. I got my hopes up that I had finally found a place. This apartment was one of the only apartments in the Northeast that advertised that they took vouchers, so a lot of other people had applied. The landlord chose someone else. It was a nightmare to have my hopes crushed like that.
Overall, I spent six months looking for a landlord who would accept my voucher in my neighborhood. My mom and I called dozens of landlords to see if they accepted vouchers. We were told no dozens of times. I didn’t even realize it was illegal for landlords to say they didn’t accept vouchers because so many landlords were doing it. Being told “no” again and again was devastating for me and my family. It felt like landlords assumed I was a lazy, no-good person just because I had a housing voucher.
During the six months that I was searching for housing, I was really scared of my future. I would have panic attacks thinking that I would either end up living on the streets, living in an unsafe and unfamiliar neighborhood, or losing my freedom and being warehoused in a group home. I couldn’t eat. I couldn’t sleep. I couldn’t bathe. I became withdrawn and depressed. I had nightmares. I got in fights with my mom. I was scared that I might end up in a mental hospital because of how bad my mental health was.
Eventually, in January, I found a place to live. At first, my landlord said they would not accept applications from voucher holders. But after my lawyer from the Public Interest Law Center informed them of the law in Philadelphia, they accepted my voucher. Even though they originally didn’t want me to live here, I get along well with the management of my building. I do my best to be a model tenant.
Since I’ve moved in, my mental health has been better. My physical health has been better. My mom and I have a better relationship. I don’t fight with my family members. I have an appetite. I have a social life. And I have freedom.
I’m here today because I believe that housing is a human right. And I believe access to housing is a disability rights issue. I believe that all landlords should accept vouchers, especially from people with disabilities like me. Many people with disabilities are capable of taking care of ourselves and living independently, but we simply can’t afford housing!
Please do what you can to ensure that no one else has to go through what I went through. Thank you for giving me the opportunity to share my story.
Testimony from Delores Bell, Renters United Philadelphia member
Good afternoon, my name is Ms. Delores Bell. I’m a Section 8 tenant currently living in Frankford. I’m here today as a member of Renters United Philadelphia and as someone who believes that all tenants deserve to be treated fairly. Thank you for inviting me to share my story about how difficult it is for voucher holders to find housing in Philadelphia.
I have lived at my current apartment for nearly four years. But I want to move for two reasons. First, my parents are getting older, and they need someone to look after them. They live in Germantown, and I would like to move to an apartment closer to them so that I can help them out when they need it. Second, it is my dream to be a foster parent. I have 10 grandchildren, and I believe that children need guidance and all the love they deserve. I want to provide this guidance and love as a foster parent but my current apartment is too small. To host a foster child long-term, I need a two-bedroom apartment.
“I’m a good tenant. I have references and photos to show that I’ve always kept my apartment in good condition, and I’ve always paid my rent on time. But I don’t even get the chance to prove that I’m a good tenant when landlords flat-out refuse to accept voucher holders.”
But finding an apartment where I can use a voucher is very hard in Philadelphia. I’ve searched online for a two-bedroom apartment in Germantown, and I see there are plenty of options. But many of the apartments are too expensive and won’t be covered by the voucher. I wish the voucher would cover higher rents because that would make it easier to find housing. And once you look at the apartments that are in the voucher price range, most of them won’t accept vouchers. I’ve called ten to twenty places! And they’ve all told me they don’t accept vouchers. I’m a good tenant. I have references and photos to show that I’ve always kept my apartment in good condition, and I’ve always paid my rent on time. But I don’t even get the chance to prove that I’m a good tenant when landlords flat-out refuse to accept voucher holders. It’s hurtful to be stereotyped like this.
It doesn’t have to be this hard. In North Carolina, where I lived before, it was much easier to find a good apartment with a voucher. And the Housing Authority assisted voucher holders through the process. They even provided a list of places that accepted Section 8. And, the homes available in North Carolina are clean and nice places. If I didn’t have to care for my parents here, I would move back to North Carolina.
The city needs to take action and to listen to the tenants who testify here today. We’re not being treated fairly by the landlords who refuse to even consider our applications just because we have vouchers. I want to find a place where I can care for my parents and a foster child, but I need to find a landlord who will accept my voucher first. It shouldn’t be this hard. Thank you for your time.
