Attorney General Karl Racine announced a settlement requiring three real estate firms—DARO Management Services, DARO Realty, and Infinity Real Estate—and several individual defendants to pay a landmark $10 million in penalties for illegally discriminating against renters in the District who use Section 8 housing vouchers and other forms of housing assistance.
Article continues below
r>
This is the largest civil penalty in a housing discrimination case in U.S. history.
In 2020, the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) sued DARO, related entities, and several of their executives for violating D.C. civil rights and consumer protection laws by treating people who receive housing subsidies inequitably and making it difficult or impossible for them to rent apartments in its 15 buildings—located in Wards 1, 2, and 3.
To resolve the lawsuit, DARO will pay the largest discrimination penalty in U.S. history, dissolve its property management business, and all defendants will be permanently banned from owning a residential real estate management company in D.C.
DARO Management President and Principal Broker Carissa Barry will also be required to forfeit her real estate licenses for 15 years. This resolution is a continuation of AG Racine’s longstanding efforts to protect tenants and increase access to safe and affordable housing in the District.
“This landmark resolution is a major victory for D.C. residents. This case should send a strong message that if you break the law and discriminate against renters who use housing subsidies, you will face serious consequences,†said AG Racine.
“The District has experienced among the highest levels of gentrification and displacement of longtime Black and brown residents of any city in the country in recent years. Housing vouchers are critically important to help our most vulnerable residents—including seniors, people with disabilities, and single mothers—keep roofs over their heads in our soaring rental market.
"When landlords break the law and refuse to accept vouchers, it’s reminiscent of Jim Crow-era housing discrimination policies intended to restrain opportunities for Black residents.â€
“Too often greedy landlords are looking for ways to drive up rents, while at the same time discriminating against residents and their families who struggle to get by, illegally preventing them from accessing housing in high-opportunity neighborhoods,†said Will Merrifield, Executive Director for The Center for Social Housing and Public Investment.
“This settlement draws a line in the sand and sends a clear message that discrimination will have consequences. I commend the Office of the Attorney General and Mr. Racine for their important work on this issue.â€
Housing assistance programs are a key part of the District’s response to its ongoing affordable housing crisis. Roughly 11,500 low-income District households depend on the federally funded Housing Choice Voucher Program, often called “Section 8†vouchers, to rent housing in the private market.
60% of D.C. households that use federal rental assistance are seniors, families with children, or people with disabilities. 95% of D.C. voucher-holders are Black, and 79% of households using vouchers are headed by women.
In addition, a local voucher program, the Local Rent Supplement Program, provides tenant-based subsidies to nearly 5,000 households. Another form of housing assistance, rapid-rehousing vouchers, provides immediate help to residents transitioning from homelessness to permanent housing.
In the last year, more than 3,400 families used rapid-rehousing subsidies. In total, more than 50,000 District residents rely on some form of subsidy for housing stability.
The District’s Human Rights Act (HRA)—which is one of the strongest civil rights laws in the country—specifically outlaws housing discrimination based on source of income.
This means that it is illegal for landlords to refuse prospective tenants or treat tenants differently simply because they rely on vouchers or other forms of housing assistance. Nineteen states and the District expressly ban source-of-income discrimination, which helps expand housing choice options for subsidy holders, including in resource-rich neighborhoods like those where DARO’s buildings are located.
Despite these protections, a recent study showed that 15% of District-area landlords still refuse to accept housing subsidies. District residents expressed significant concerns to OAG about housing discrimination at Civil Rights Listening Sessions held in 2019. ■