On March 11, 1998, the Asian Law Caucus filed a class action lawsuit
against the San Francisco Housing Authority (SFHA) for its continuing failure to address a pattern of racial violence against Asian families assigned to at several public housing projects. On the same day, the Vietnamese
Coalition for Civil Rights filed an administrative complaint with HUD against the Housing Authority charging the agency's practices violate Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The two organizations both charged the
agency with refusing to respond to reports of violence and harassment.Over the past period the SFHA had received scores of reports of incidents such as the following, from a female student returning from school:
"As I was
walking home, a group of approximately three men came up behind me and started saying things like, 'Chinese bitch, you think you're all that'...The men...began beating me with something metal, like a baseball bat...The men finally
stopped when a young neighbor opened her door and scared them off. My body was badly bruised, especially my arms and legs, and my knee was bleeding."
In 1993, we filed an earlier lawsuit in part because the agency was doing
nothing in response to such reports. As a result of that lawsuit, the agency began to relocate families after they became victims of racial violence. Promises to establish policies to prevent future violence came
to nothing.
In 1995, the San Francisco Human Rights Commission issued a report on the city's public housing finding there existed "compelling and credible evidence of the widespread existence and effects on equal access to
housing of interracial violence." The San Francisco HRC report made specific recommendations for reform.
In 1997, HUD also found "evidence of a history of racially/ethnically motivated violence within San
Francisco Housing Authority developments, which constitute a significant safety and security problem at certain SFHA projects, and which requires corrective action." HUD also recommended the agency adopt various reforms.
Despite these reports and repeated calls for change from community organizations, SFHA management has continued to deny the existence of any pattern of racial harassment of Asian Americans.
"We met with the Housing Authority
for months with little progress," recalls Candice Nguyen, co-chair of the Vietnamese coalition. "But you can't take meaningful steps to solve a problem if you don't acknowledge it exists."
An issue of particular controversy
has been the lawsuit's call for the suspension of the SFHA's take-it-or-leave-it assignment policy. Under present local policy, an applicant must accept the first unit offered or be removed from a waiting list that is over
five years long. No consideration is given to the relative safety of the unit offered.
The policy has reinforced the already discriminatory effects of the unabated harassment of Asian residents. For example, several
months ago, a Cambodian family, the Nouns, was offered a unit in a project which had a history of violence against Asians. Only months before, the agency had moved out two Vietnamese families after their children had
been beaten, spray painted, and called racial names. Mr. Noun visited the apartment and was told by a non-Asian neighbor that he should not move in because it would not be safe for him. Mr. Noun returned to his car and
found the air had been let out of his tires. When he asked for an assignment in a safer place his family's application for housing was removed from the waiting list. The family had been waiting on the list for five
years.
Mr. Noun's experience is not unique. Over the past ten years, the number of Asian families living in the seven developments with the highest incidence of racial harassment has declined by 40%. Today, Asians
make up less than 4% of the total households in these seven developments. The numbers of Asian families on the waiting has also declined, from over 40% ten years ago to 28% today. In responding to incidents of racial
harassment, Asian families have voted with their feet.
Some officials associated with the SFHA, have asserted that the data only shows that Asians only want to live amongst themselves, i.e., in the three developments in or near
Chinatown. But this assertion overlooks the steady growth of Asian families in developments where racial hostility has not become entrenched. In these developments, the general trend is of increasing Asian
representation even while other races still predominate.
For example, at the Valencia Gardens project, Asian representation has increased from 10 to 15% over the same ten year period described above. While racial incidents
have occurred in the past, efforts by the tenant's residents council joined with social service agencies have slowly but deliberately overcome racial and language barriers. Today, there is a multiethnic residents' council
which conducts at least some of its meetings in three languages and there have been no recent incidents of racial violence. Disputes among residents now have less of a racial character, though issues of access and equal
participation need ongoing attention.
The development of a more inclusive community at Valencia Gardens did not occur overnight. The process took years of effort, sometimes by a handful of tenants, who pressed for greater
language sensitivity and access. It was supported by CBO's partnering with tenants to provide children's events, job fairs, and other programs offering safe spaces for trust and relationships to build. In the course of
organizing for these activities opportunities were created to address and resolve misperceptions and insecurities. Also important was the presence of a very engaged site manager who supported tenant projects and
initiatives. Finally, the process needed a critical mass of tenants of different language groups so that it became possible for language specific "caucuses" to form for mutual support and leadership development.
The example
of Valencia Gardens shows that multiethnic communities in public housing can work, but not by ignoring tensions or differences. The usual "sink or swim" approach toward introducing new ethnic communities to public housing has
been proven to fail. Integration can work but only with supportive and proactive programs to build inclusive communities. Thus, the lawsuits and complaints against the SFHA do not seek special treatment or benefits
merely for Asian tenants. Our goal is to assure that sufficient services and programs are in place to make integration work for all residents. But until those institutions are in place, no one should be forced to move
into an unabated environment of racial hostility.
For more information, contact the Asian Law Caucus at (415) 391-1655.
720 Market St. Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94103
