Farmers Branch - Apartment owners sue Dallas suburb

[Jean]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/hea ... 21956.html

Dec. 22, 2006, 6:59PM
Apartment owners sue Dallas suburb over immigration rule

FARMERS BRANCH — New anti-illegal immigration ordinances in this Dallas suburb were challenged again today, when three apartment complexes filed a lawsuit asking that a ban on renting to illegal immigrants be declared unconstitutional.

The lawsuit also asks a federal court to prevent the city from implementing and enforcing the ordinance, scheduled to go into effect Jan. 12.

Farmers Branch Assistant City Manager Mary Jane Stevenson said late today that the city had just received the suit and could not comment.

"We're just now processing it," she said.

In November, City Council members unanimously approved having property managers or owners verify the immigration or citizenship status of apartment renters.

Council members also approved resolutions making English the city's official language and allowing local authorities to become part of a federal program so they can enforce immigration laws.

The ordinances have been challenged both in court and by activists. In a lawsuit filed earlier this month, a Farmers Branch resident alleges that the city's mayor repeatedly violated the state's open meetings laws to deliberate the ordinances.

Opponents of the ordinances have also submitted a petition that they hope will force a vote on the measures. If at the city verifies at least 726 of the signatures, a public vote is expected in May.

[Crusader01]

A Vote, what so all the criminal illegals can purchase fake voter IDs and vote against it? Or these Anti-American Americans can make some more money by aiding and abetting criminals. How can having a law which forbids aiding and abetting illegal invaders and criminals be unconstitutional? Has most of America gone daft?

[had_enuf]

All legal residents should move out & leave these scumbag apt complexes with the illegals.

[jamesw62]

the problem with the petitions is that according to people who have signed it, they were told it was for a petition for alcohol sales. they were not told it was for the ilegal immigration stuff.

one person said he signed it for that, and then two hours later someone came to his door and he said " oh yeah the beer and alcohol petition." and the person said no, its a petition for a citizen vote on the illegal immigration forums.
that is when he got suspicious

[Jean]

the problem with the petitions is that according to people who have signed it, they were told it was for a petition for alcohol sales. they were not told it was for the ilegal immigration stuff.

one person said he signed it for that, and then two hours later someone came to his door and he said " oh yeah the beer and alcohol petition." and the person said no, its a petition for a citizen vote on the illegal immigration forums.
that is when he got suspicious

Huh? Don't people read what they are signing?

[Dixie]

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent ... 9da8.html#

Apartments sue over FB ordinance

Case is the second filed over law targeting illegal immigrants


08:49 AM CST on Saturday, December 23, 2006
By STEPHANIE SANDOVAL / The Dallas Morning News

Three Farmers Branch apartment complexes have sued the city, asking that a new ordinance banning apartments from renting to illegal immigrants be declared unconstitutional.

The lawsuit also seeks an injunction to prevent the city from implementing and enforcing the ordinance, which is scheduled to take effect Jan. 12.

City Attorney Matthew Boyle said he couldn't comment on pending litigation.

Mayor Bob Phelps said he hadn't seen the lawsuit but couldn't comment for the same reason.

The ordinance "violates the supremacy clause," said attorney William A. Brewer III, partner in the Bickel & Brewer Storefront, which is representing the plaintiffs.

"The city of Farmers Branch has ventured into an area reserved exclusively for the federal government, without authority or entitlement."

That argument's been accepted, he said, by federal courts in lawsuits brought against Hazleton, Pa., and Escondido, Calif.

Judges in both cases issued injunctions.

Mr. Brewer said the law is also unconstitutional because it targets an ethnic group – Hispanics – and interferes with the ability of the apartment complexes to conduct business.

The ordinance requires that apartment complexes obtain proof of citizenship or legal residency of all tenants, regardless of age, before entering into or renewing a lease.

Copies of the documents must be kept on file for two years.

Violation can result in a fine of $500 per day, per offense.

The lawsuit, filed in U.S. district court, also takes issue with the city for targeting only apartment complexes but not single-family rental properties or hotels – including extended-stay hotels.

The three complexes that sued are the Villas at Parkside, Lakeview at Parkside and Chateau de Ville. Together they have 941 units – about one-third of the apartments in Farmers Branch.

The suit also names all City Council members and the city's chief building official, Jim Olk.

Mr. Olk said Friday afternoon that he couldn't comment on the lawsuit and hadn't been served.

But he said he met recently with a manager from the three complexes.

"It appeared they were already in compliance [with the new ordinance] because they already require a valid driver's license and Social Security number prior to leasing ... for a background and credit check," Mr. Olk said.

Dr. Edward B. Frankel, general partner in the three apartment complexes, has declined interview requests.

However, he's sent several letters to the City Council denouncing the ordinance.

In a letter earlier this month, Dr. Frankel said the ordinance doesn't take into account that apartments rent to people whose homes have suffered a fire, flood, wind or other disaster and are unable to supply the demanded documents.

He also said the complexes rent to corporations with people traveling to Farmers Branch on business and those people don't carry citizenship documents with them.

Exactly which documents are required and how the city will implement or enforce the ordinance is still unclear.

City officials said this week that they are still working out the details.

They also said they'll send a letter to apartment managers and owners in early January, then hold a meeting to talk with them about the ordinance.

This is the second time the city has been sued since the ordinance was adopted Nov. 11.

Resident Guillermo Ramos sued Dec. 4 in state District Court in Dallas seeking an injunction preventing the ordinance from taking effect, saying the council violated open-meetings laws by discussing the ordinance behind closed doors, then voting on it before the public had a chance to see its wording or to comment.

Bickel & Brewer Storefront, the community service arm of the Bickel & Brewer law firm, represents the plaintiffs in both suits.

The storefront also helped organize a petition drive asking the council to rescind the ordinance or put the issue to a public vote.

The petitions have been submitted.

If the city verifies that they contain enough signatures of registered voters living in Farmers Branch – 721 are needed – the council is expected to call for a public vote, at its next regularly scheduled meetingJan. 8.

The referendum would be held May 12, along with the next City Council elections.

Meanwhile, a hearing's been scheduled Jan. 22 on Mr. Ramos' injunction request.

The hearing is slated 10 days after the ordinance is due to go into effect.

Unless the court acts more quickly or the council decides to hold off until after the May vote, the ordinance will be implemented as planned, said Mr. Phelps, the mayor.

Council member Tim O'Hare, the driving force behind the illegal immigration crackdown, said he believes that the ordinance has overwhelming support among residents.

"It would certainly surprise me if the council repealed the ordinance," Mr. O'Hare said.

"It's not what I would expect to happen and not what I would hope to see happen."

On Friday, the city's attorneys filed their response to the first lawsuit, asking that it be thrown out.

The city asserts that it has sovereign immunity from the lawsuit unless a legislative waiver of immunity is in place and that therefore the court has no jurisdiction in the case.

The city also said Mr. Ramos didn't provide sufficient evidence that the city violated the Texas Open Meetings Act.

The city also asked the court to deny Mr. Ramos' request for copies of the minutes or any recordings from the closed-door sessions on the ordinance, saying they fall within attorney-client privilege.

E-mail ssandoval@dallasnews.com