Mental health advocates sue Arlington Hts.

Developers behind an apartment building for people with mental illness have sued Arlington Heights in U.S. District Court, saying the village violated the Fair Housing Act and Americans with Disabilities Act when it rejected the proposal in May.

The village board voted 4-3 May 17 to reject the zoning variances that would be required to build 30 units at 120-122 E. Boeger Road, just east of Arlington Heights Road and south of Dundee Road on the edge of the village by Buffalo Grove.

The proposal raised a firestorm of opposition from residents in Arlington Heights and Buffalo Grove who would live near the project, and from residents whose children attend Buffalo Grove High School, a few blocks away. But it also raised support, from mental health experts and others who said many people with mental illness are institutionalized only because they cannot find enough supportive independent housing.

The village has not been served with notice of the lawsuit yet, Jack Siegel, village attorney, said Tuesday.

“Of course the village acted lawfully,” said Siegel, who nevertheless is aware of the lawsuit. “There is no question about that. I have every confidence we did the right thing. People sue us all the time, and frequently we win.”

The suit was filed on behalf of a group of parents who have been trying to establish supportive, low-income housing for people like their own adult offspring with mental illnesses. Also named as plaintiffs are Thresholds Inc., the not-for-profit that would provide services at the building, and Daveri Development Group, the for-profit developer that would build the project.

The suit was filed by staff and students of the John Marshall Law School Fair Housing Legal Clinic.

Besides violating the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, the suit also claims the village violated the Rehabilitation Act. The suit asks the development be allowed to go forward as well as requesting unspecified damages plus costs and attorney's fees.

It sounds like both sides have good arguments, said Henry Rose, associate professor at the School of Law at Loyola University Chicago.

“The fact that the village staff and plan commission approved the project are powerful factors, evidence in favor of the plaintiffs' case,” said Rose. “On the other hand, 30 units compared to the 16 allowed in the zoning law is a big difference.”

The close vote of the village board also indicates there was merit to the proposal, said Rose.

“It doesn't surprise me that there's a court case,” he said.

In general, fair housing law does not require that zoning laws be altered to accommodate housing for people with handicaps, said Rose.

He indicated the case could be decided on subtle issues such as how fairly and respectfully the developers were treated by the village.

“If Arlington Heights came across in the case like it was open to this and sensitive to the needs of the future residents but it just felt like the project was too big, the village might prevail,” said Rose.

If density is seen as a pretext the decision could go against the village, he said.

Opponents objected that the proposed building would be next door to a KinderCare day care center and close to Buffalo Grove High School. Some teenagers would have to pass the building on their way to high school; others would interact with them at area fast food restaurants.

The vacant site of just under one acre is currently zoned for commercial use, and the proposal was to change it to institutional.

In the lawsuit the plaintiffs said they had requested the village board postpone a vote near the end of a “long and contentious” meeting attended by more than 225 people, but the board voted the rejection at about 1:35 a.m.

Since then the village has refused to engage in discussions about the project, the suit said, although it does mention discussions with the village board president.

Arlene Mulder, president of the village board, confirmed she has met with proponents at their request but did not want to comment further because of the lawsuit.

In a Sept. 22 letter to the village, Allison K. Bethel, director of the law school clinic, said the laws require municipalities “to make reasonable accommodations to their policies, practices and procedures” to provide disabled persons equal opportunity to have housing opportunities available to others.

The 30 units would have 14 efficiencies, 10 one-bedrooms and six two-bedrooms. The developers have not indicated they would reduce the number of units in the proposal.

Instead, they have offered to change some features that also drew objections, such as staffing the building 24 hours a day during the first year; increasing the size of the units to meet village minimums; dealing with transportation issues for the residents and meeting with neighbors.