NYCHA Agrees to New Oversight, Requirements in Ongoing Mold Class Action
A new ombudsperson will serve as an outlet for residents, and will have the power to issue relief to enforce violations of the agreement.
April 06, 2018 at 03:20 PM
4 minute read
Photo: David Handschuh/ALM.
New York City's embattled public housing authority has agreed to a more stringent consent decree in a running, multiyear battle over mold in New York City Housing Authority residents' apartments.
The latest chapter in the suit, Baez v. NYCHA, comes after the plaintiffs claim NYCHA has continued to not be in compliance with the consent decree, first issued in 2014. The agreement submitted to U.S. District Judge William Pauley III of the Southern District of New York on Friday substantially bolsters the requirements and the oversight of the public housing authority.
“NYCHA has continued to breach the original consent decree, with an average time to complete certain repairs exceeding 25 days and a reoccurrence rate of more than 46 percent, so we threatened to take them to court and seek injunctive relief,” Quinn Emanuel Urquhart & Sullivan of counsel Steven Edwards, lead counsel for the plaintiffs, said in a statement. “I am glad we have been able to achieve something that should provide real relief for hundreds of thousands of NYCHA residents who have been suffering as a result of NYCHA's failure to effectively remediate mold.”
The most significant new imposition placed on NYCHA will be an ombudsperson empowered to take action on behalf of residents should the housing authority fall out of compliance. This is on top of a special master that's been in place since February 2016.
NYCHA's compliance will also be more rigid. One of the many concerns faced by the plaintiffs was the coming sun-setting of the earlier consent decree. Now, NYCHA's compliance with remediation provisions will determine the end point of the agreement. Whereas a wait-out-the-clock approach could have afforded the housing authority an out, now the plaintiffs are hoping that only the end of the mold issues in public housing will provide one.
Under the new agreement, the housing authority is required to get the 46 percent reoccurrence rate down to zero, with firm repair time frames put in place. New policies and procedures are also required to fix problems going forward.
The NYCHA must also submit reports to the court, under penalty of perjury. The provision is in response to earlier concerns that the authority was submitting reports that were less than fully truthful.
The agreement announced Friday is the latest in a recent flurry of activity over the state of public housing in the city. The city council has held hearings over residents' issues. Gov. Andrew Cuomo recently announced the state would impose its own monitor over the housing authority, in an ongoing battle with Mayor Bill de Blasio. Federal officials, from the Manhattan U.S. Attorney's Office to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, have been scrutinizing NYCHA over various issues as well.
In its own press release on Friday's agreement, NYCHA characterized the move in optimistic terms, noting that the agreement includes the roll out of authority-wide of a pilot program developed under the special master that will improve training for staff. The authority pointed to aging and deteriorating infrastructure at NYCHA facilities as the underlying mold culprit.
“This is a positive step for NYCHA and our residents. We appreciate the parties coming together to agree on real goals and science-based solutions that will help public housing residents,” NYCHA general manager Vito Mustaciuolo said in a statement. “Mold is a serious issue, and we are committed to resolving it, not only on the surface but also by uncovering and resolving root causes and educating tenants on how to work with us to prevent mold.”
The plaintiffs are also represented by counsel at the Natural Resources Defense Council, the National Center for Law and Economic Justice Inc. and Proskauer Rose.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllLisa Zornberg, Former Adams Chief Counsel, Moves to Morvillo Abramowitz
5 minute readPresidential Immunity Doesn't Block Trump's NY Criminal Prosecution, Judge Rules
Corporate Confidentiality Unlocked: Leveraging Common Interest Privilege for Effective Collaboration
11 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Mental Health Issues Don’t Get a Holiday
- 2'It's Got to Be a Wake-Up Call:' Atlanta Attorney Hopes $16M Verdict Spurs Training Changes at Hotels
- 3FTC Bans 'Junk Fees' in Live-Event Tickets and Short-Term Lodging
- 4California Legal Awards Moving to Mid-Summer Date in 2025, Adds New Categories
- 5Law Student Sues NY Attorney Grievance Officials, Seeking Materials Over Sexual Assault Claims
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250