Few Victims Seek Help of New Law on AIDS Bias

In its first week of operation, the city’s landmark ordinance banning discrimination against AIDS victims has drawn national attention as well as local public furor, but little response from those it is meant to protect.

Of more than 100 calls a day to the city’s AIDS hot line, only a few have come from AIDS victims seeking help under the ordinance. A few more complaints have been called into the city’s Rent Stabilization Program, which deals with housing discrimination claims, and to the city attorney’s office. That office is charged with enforcing the sweeping provisions of the new law that prohibits employers, landlords, schools, businesses and medical facilities from discriminating against individuals who have contracted acquired immune deficiency syndrome.

No private lawsuits have yet surfaced under provisions of the ordinance that allow individuals, as well as the city attorney’s office, to file civil suits for damages against those who break the new law.

Enforcement Program

“We don’t anticipate a huge program” for enforcing the ordinance, said Heather Dalmont, an aide to Councilman Joel Wachs, noting that of the 1,200 reported cases of AIDS in the county, about half of the victims have died, leaving only about 600 potential claimants.

“But if you’re dying of AIDS and you’re thrown out of your house . . . the mechanism is in place to take care of that,” she said.

Amendments to the new law, proposed by Mayor Tom Bradley when he signed the ordinance into law, would limit legal action to the city attorney’s office, as well as seek consistency with state laws. The proposals, referred to the council’s Public Health Committee, are expected to be on hold for at least a month, when Councilman Ernarni Bernardi, the committee’s chairman, is scheduled to return from vacation.

The mayor has emphasized that the new law is not meant to punish but to educate the public about the incurable disease, which medical experts say is transmitted through sexual activity or the exchange of blood. In a letter to the City Council, Bradley objected to allowing enforcement through private legal action because this “might generate costly lawsuits against individuals who are acting out of good faith--if mistaken--belief about the causes of AIDS,” he said. Unlike private suits, the city attorney’s office would seek to halt the discriminatory action rather than to provide monetary relief or compensation.

Another Means

Wachs opposes the amendments, which he views as weakening the ordinance he originally drafted, said Dalmont. She noted that all other discrimination laws in the city allow for individual legal action.

Referring to Bradley’s proposal to determine whether state law preempts the city’s jurisdiction in these discrimination cases, Dalmont argued that the city ordinance merely provides “another means by which an AIDS patient who is a victim of discrimination can seek relief.”

But Deputy City Atty. Maureen Siegel, who drafted the AIDS ordinance, said that the city attorney’s office remains concerned over whether state law preempts the city law, especially in the area of employment.

If the city were challenged on the issue, “we would have an uphill battle” defending the ordinance, she said.

During the last week, only two complaints of alleged discrimination, both in the area of employment, were received through the AIDS hot line. One of the men was allegedly given two weeks notice after he told his work supervisor that his roommate was ill with the deadly disease. The other charged that he was demoted to a position that would keep him away from the public when he returned to work after being hospitalized for the disease.

The complaints were referred for investigation to the state Fair Employment Practices Commission, which already is charged with handling job discrimination complaints. Housing discrimination complaints, which routinely have been handled by the city’s rent stabilization program, will continue to be investigated by that agency, program director Barbara Zeidman said.

Confirms Practice

While the anti-AIDS discrimination ordinance may break new ground in other areas of discrimination, Zeidman said that in the area of housing it “simply confirms what the practice in this division has always been.”

But, she added that the new law “lends a great deal of certainty and legal clarity” to existing practices.

Of nine AIDS discrimination cases that the rent control program has handled since May, Zeidman said, all revolved around eviction or reduced services, such as banning AIDS victims from using a common laundry room or swimming pool.

“We settled seven of the nine simply through phone calls and a little education about rights and obligations of tenants and landlords under the law,” she said. If the two pending cases cannot be resolved through mediation, they will be ultimately referred to the city attorney’s office for prosecution, she said.

The various city and state offices that cooperated to deal with the initial trickle of AIDS discrimination complaints have met the demand, but additional city funding will be required to provide a permanent staff for the AIDS hot line and city attorney’s investigators to follow through on complaints, said Patricia A. Clemens, who heads the city attorney’s special operations section, charged with enforcing the ordinance. A proposal for extra funding has been referred to the City Council’s Finance Committee.

Clemens said that as AIDS discrimination cases are successfully settled or litigated, she expects the number of claims to increase.