A federal lawsuit alleging discrimination against disabled homeless individuals has sparked a legal dispute between the city of Berkeley, California, and the nonprofit organizations operating its homeless shelters.
The case, heard Thursday before Senior U.S. District Judge Edward Chen, involves multiple homeless individuals and the advocacy group Where Do We Go Berkeley, who filed suit against the city claiming violations of the Americans with Disabilities Act, state law, the Fair Housing Amendments Act, and constitutional protections. The plaintiffs allege the city’s eviction practices and treatment of disabled homeless people created discriminatory conditions.
In response to the lawsuit, Berkeley filed a third-party complaint against the nonprofit corporations that contract with the city to run shelter facilities and programs. The city maintains it should not bear sole responsibility for any violations and seeks to have the shelter operators share in potential legal costs.
During Thursday’s hearing, Eric Martinez, representing third-party defendant Insight Housing, argued that his clients should be dismissed from the case. He emphasized that while discriminatory conduct may occur at shelter facilities, the underlying harm stems from city policies rather than shelter operations.
“The plaintiffs have presented a number of examples where the class members have been subjected to discrimination as a result of the city’s policies. While the discriminatory conduct would occur at the shelters, the harm results from the city’s policies and refusal to accommodate this population,” Martinez stated.
The city’s attorney, Rahi Azizi, countered that shelter operators bear responsibility for ensuring compliance with disability laws. He pointed out that the shelters are neither owned nor operated by the city, with third-party providers handling daily operations, rule enforcement, and accommodation determinations.
“These third-party providers are required to comply with the ADA, the FHA and all applicable laws, and to the extent the city’s liability is tied to their failure to comply with these laws, the city is entitled to contribution and indemnification,” Azizi argued.
Brigitte Nicoletti from the East Bay Community Law Center, representing the plaintiffs, indicated her clients are not pursuing individual damages but instead seek broad policy changes that would benefit disabled homeless individuals throughout Berkeley’s homeless services system.
Martinez further argued that Berkeley is attempting to shift its legal obligations onto shelter operators through contractual arrangements, asserting that the city cannot delegate its ADA compliance requirements to third parties to avoid liability. He maintained that only the city has the authority to implement the systemic changes requested by the plaintiffs.
The third-party defendants named in the complaint include Bay Area Community Services, Building Opportunities for Self-Sufficiency, Dorothy Day House, and Insight Housing. These nonprofit organizations operate under contracts with Berkeley to provide shelter services to homeless individuals.
Berkeley’s third-party complaint seeks multiple forms of relief, including express contractual indemnity, equitable indemnity, contribution, breach of contract claims, and declaratory relief. The city argues these organizations are contractually bound to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify Berkeley for any losses or liabilities arising from the nonprofits’ alleged legal violations.
Judge Chen took the matter under submission without providing a timeline for his ruling. The decision will determine whether the shelter operators must remain as third-party defendants or if Berkeley alone will face the discrimination allegations brought by disabled homeless individuals.
Leave a Reply