Commentary

Westchester Case
Since March. Just take a look at paragraph 20(d) of the Consent Decree. The Monitor knows he is supposed to direct the County to replace its fake implmentation provisions with the real implementation provisions he can specify, but, ignoring the model that ADC provided him, the Monitor still refuses to do his duty. More
Westchester Case
Some key elements of the Court's decision finding that the County "utterly failed" to meet its affirmatively furthering fair housing obligations and repeatedly submitted claims to the government that were "false or fraudulent." More
Westchester Case
If implemented properly, this settlement will mark the end of unchecked residential racial segregation in Westchester County. More
Westchester Case
Some of the key points made in the Monitor's submission. More
Westchester Case
On July 23, 2010, Westchester submitted to HUD an Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice ("AI"). The submission was required by the Consent Decree, and, pursuant to paragraph 32 of the Consent Decree, is not compliant unless it is deemed acceptable by HUD. A brief summary of some of the egregious deficiencies of the AI (along with the full document and attachments thereto) is available by clicking "more." More
Westchester Case
On August 9, 2010, the County submitted the third iteration of an "Implementation Plan," the first two having been rejected by the Monitor. As before, the key to the document is understanding that the County's goals were: (1) avoiding committing to taking any specific actions that could then be deemed enforceable obligations under the Consent Decree; and (2) proceeding in a way to maintain the demographic and zoning status quo as much as possible. More

Pages