nojobs

No jobs allowed: Community could block access to working seniors

February 11, 2007

By Emma Perez-Tevino eperez-trevino@brownsvilleherald.com or 956-982-6692

The Brownsville Herald

1135 East Van Buren Street

Brownsville, Texas 78520

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com

800-488-4301 or 956-542-4301

Fax: 956-982-4201 or 956-542-0840

To submit a Letter to the Editor: crodriguez@brownsvilleherald.com (250-word limit) http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/contact.php (website form)

Working class need not apply at the Palm Resaca Mobile Home Park in North Brownsville.

That's the writing on the walls at 100 Tangerine Boulevard, where residents could vote to make the park a strictly "retirement" community that would restrict access to those that hold full-time jobs.

Desirable candidates for admission to the 31.5-acre park off Coffee Port Road would continue to be age 55 and older but without full-time employment. Present residents would be grandfathered under current regulations that don't include restrictions on working.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/images/uploads/020807PalmResacaMobileHomePark.jpg

Those already in the park who become full-time workers in the future also would be protected, officials said.

Palm Resaca residents are shareholders in the corporation under which the park operates and is governed by a board of directors. The issue goes to resident voters on February 27.

Park residents seem split on the proposal that board President John Wheeler said he's against.

"I don't want the proposal," Wheeler said. "It is not my privilege to tell anyone what to do."

Wheeler doesn't believe the plan is meant to keep any specific group out of the park, namely anyone that is not a Winter Texan.

"We want to keep the park in an environment that it is presently," said Fred Clabuesch, board director. "It's that simple."

Clabuesch, who motioned at a Jan. 12 board meeting to take the proposal to the vote of shareholders, said many of the residents are "fully retired" and take part in park activities.

"If everybody was working, that would change," Clabuesch said. "I don't understand the big concern."

Still, there are those who believe the changes are discriminatory and aimed at working families and potential residents.

Shareholder and resident Steven A. Luttjohann settled here from Kansas.

"I view it as a veiled attempt to discriminate against the working people of Brownsville," Luttjohann, 65, said. "I believe over 90 percent of the working people in Brownsville are Hispanic. I am not going to deprive Hispanic people or anyone else of access to affordable housing."

In order to become a resident, one must purchase a share at $6,200. Residents pay a monthly operations and maintenance fee, depending on the expenses of the corporation. Generally, the fee is $140 to $200 per month.

"The attempt to veil the discrimination occurs because the vote does not just change the name of the corporation. It changes who can live in the park," said Luttjohan, who's retired from the railroad industry.

He said he's been offered no valid reasons for the change and is concerned that, as far as he knows, the only working residents at the park are its two or three Hispanic residents.

"It is believed none of the other residents who are Anglos are working full time," he said.

"What would be the vote if the park community was made up of Hispanics who make up 90 percent of the population of Brownsville? They would see it just for what it is: an attempt to deprive them of affordable housing in their old age because they are not as well off as the Winter Texans."

The park's attorney, Dan Rentfro, Jr., wrote three letters to park manager Carol Soddy in January, telling her that the proposal to restrict residents to non-working persons does not violate state and federal law.

"The Fair Housing Act protects against discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex, familial status, handicap or national origin, but not on working status," he wrote.

Working status, he wrote, "is not a protected group under either the Fair Housing Act or the Housing for Older Persons Act."

He also cautioned Soddy.

"I would place a caveat on that opinion, however," he wrote. "(The Department of Housing and Urban Development) often looks at the discriminatory effect a policy may have. Thus, if the 'no working persons' policy were to have a disproportionate impact on a protected class, HUD would have a different opinion about the validity of the policy."

Regarding a possible violation of the Right to Work Act, which protects a person's inherent right to work, Rentfro wrote that there is no case law that has addressed a similar situation.

"Before you institute a new policy, however, you should be aware that you might be opening the door to be scrutinized by HUD and other enforcement agencies," he wrote.

Rentfro told The Brownsville Herald that the board had not asked him what he thinks about the proposal but said, "I would advice the board to move cautiously."

Soddy said she didn't know anything about the proposal when asked for a comment.

There is not a unanimous stand among board members. Clabuesch and board directors Ellen White, Greg Brososky, and Bill Oberly voted to take the proposal to shareholders. Wheeler was joined by board directors Lois Nelson and Cal Leavy in opposition.

A letter circulating among park hints at a reason some here might support the exclusionary policy.

"If we have people who are employed full time outside of the park, soon word will spread and we will become a 'subdivision' of working people," the letter reads. The signature on it is not legible.

"Word will travel by word of mouth that this is a more than reasonable rental place," it reads, "with lawn care provided, plus free Thanksgiving and Christmas dinners, plus rec [recreation] hall, pool hall, library, swimming pool and lots of other extras...."

Palm Resaca Mobile Home Park, Inc.

There are about 220 residents in the 31.5 acre park that provides housing to age 55 and older residents. Amenities and activities are included.

The majority here are Winter Texans, according to residents and data from the park's directory. Some stay year-round, while others continue to have off-season second homes in northern states and Canada.

Resident owners are shareholders in the corporation that handles park business. The park and corporation are governed by a board of directors elected by the shareholders.

The proposal

To change the name of the corporation/park to a "retirement" community.

Residency in the park would be restricted to those that do not work full time while in residency here.

Residents could work 20 hours or less.

They would be evicted if they worked more than 20 hours.

Present residents would not be affected.

Residents could work full time while not in residence in the park when they are at their off-season northern home.

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/ts_more.php?id=75157_0_10_0_M36