The City of Lawrence has filed what appears to be its first Douglas County District Court lawsuit against a local landlord for allegedly refusing a prospective tenant based solely on their use of housing vouchers.
Sue Herynk and her husband Joe Herynk, of River City Homes Inc., are named as defendants in the case. Sue’s responses indicate that they are eager for another chance to contest the city’s ordinance banning source of income discrimination, which they call unconstitutional.
The Lawrence City Commission in February 2023 approved an ordinance change that creates a protected class based on renters’ source of income, as well as their status as a survivor of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking or stalking. It also disallows discrimination based on prospective tenants’ immigration status. The ordinance went into effect June 1, 2023.
A Douglas County judge in May ruled against the group Landlords of Lawrence, which had sued the city over the ordinance.
A complainant wrote in September 2023 that she had seen an ad for a unit in the 4700 block of Moundridge Court, according to documentation in the city’s lawsuit. The townhome was for rent at $1,400 per month, according to a Zillow listing.
The complainant wrote that she called Sue Herynk, the property owner, who said the unit was available and just needed its carpets cleaned before new tenants could move in.
“Up to this point the conversation had been positive. I then asked about payment of the rent, and explained that my payment would be in the form of a housing voucher (Section 8),” the complainant wrote. “Ms. Herynk stated that she would not accept my housing voucher, no matter the circumstances. She stated that a housing voucher would leave the landlord with uncovered liability in the case that the tenant were to abandon or damage the property. She rejected my request to be considered on the same basis as any other would be renter.”
Herynk responded to the city within a few days. Her response was critical of the city spending $5 apiece to send four total certified letters to Herynk, her husband and two of their companies — “You need reminding that you work for me, the money you spent was a part of my taxes and that your very salary comes from money generated by business people like my husband and myself” — and stated that they pay $1,071 each week in property taxes to the city and county.
“This letter also advises me to not retaliate against the person who filed the complaint. Nothing is further from my mind. In fact, I might be her biggest fan,” Herynk wrote. “She has paved a way for me to meet you in court. Please skip all of the back and forth of paperwork, we waive our ‘rights’ so we can contest your unconstitutional ordinance while we listen to your explanation to a judge of how an unlawful city ordinance supersedes the Constitution of the United States and the Supreme Court decision of Marbury v. Madison (1803).”
Documentation Herynk provided to the city also indicates that she and her company disqualify renters who are “In the United States illegally,” which is also in violation of the city’s discrimination ordinance.
Respondents to complaints under city ordinance have the right to conciliation, or a hearing before the Human Relations Commission. The city gave the Herynks that opportunity. But attorney Adam Hall of Thompson-Hall P.A., who had filed and argued the case on behalf of Landlords of Lawrence, responded with a request to take the case to court in a civil action.
The city filed the case on June 18. Online court records indicate that Mark Simpson, the same district court judge who let the ordinance stand, will preside over this lawsuit.
The city’s lawsuit asks the court to enter declaratory judgments that the defendants’ actions were illegal; enjoin the defendants from refusing to rent to prospective tenants who are voucher holders; assess a $10,000 penalty against the defendants; award damages to the complainant for her emotional distress, loss of civil rights, loss of housing, humiliation and embarrassment; and to grant attorney fees and any other relief the court finds appropriate.
No hearing dates are set yet.
In response to an open records request in May, the city clerk’s office declined to disclose any findings of probable cause that the city’s source of income discrimination ordinance had been violated, stating that “disclosure would interfere with a prospective administrative adjudication or civil litigation or reveal the identity of a confidential source or undercover agent”, and that city code states that information about complainants or respondents will not be released “until a complaint becomes the subject of a public hearing or court proceeding.”
The city clerk’s office did not respond to a follow-up email asking if it was possible to release simply the total number of findings of probable cause of source of income ordinance violations.
If our local journalism matters to you, please help us keep doing this work.
Don’t miss a beat … Click here to sign up for our email newsletters
Click here to learn more about our newsletters first
Mackenzie Clark (she/her), reporter/founder of The Lawrence Times, can be reached at mclark@lawrencekstimes.com. Read more of her work for the Times here. Check out her staff bio here.
More coverage:
Molly Adams / Lawrence Times
Molly Adams / Lawrence TimesCity of Lawrence files case against landlord for alleged source of income discrimination
Mackenzie Clark/Lawrence Times
Latest Lawrence news:
Pancho Metz/Contributed photo
