Many District residents with disabilities living in public housing have had to wait years, or even more than a decade, for accommodations from the DC Housing Authority, D.C. Attorney General Karl Racine alleges in a lawsuit filed Thursday. Some 250 D.C. public housing tenants have been approved for transfer to accessible apartments, according to the suit, but are languishing on a waiting list, living in units that don’t meet their needs, and with no other options for housing.

The suit, filed in D.C. Superior Court, cites several disturbing cases. For example, one tenant was approved for a wheelchair-accessible unit in January 2017, according to the suit. The resident lived in a fourth floor walk-up apartment at the time — with no elevator in the building, she had to enlist others to carry her up and down four flights each time she left the building for a medical appointment or other outing, the lawsuit states.

A few months after she was approved for the new unit, she was told by DCHA that she was at the top of the waitlist, according to the lawsuit. But, five years later, in late 2021, she died before ever getting an accessible apartment.

“DCHA has repeatedly failed to fulfill its legal responsibility to accommodate District residents who have physical disabilities with housing units that are safe and accessible,” Racine said in a press release. “After seeking to persuade DCHA to address these safety and quality of life issues, we had no choice but to file this case to ensure that the disabled tenants receive the accommodations that the law requires.”

A spokesperson for DC Housing Authority said that the agency has not been served with the complaint, and thus is “unable to respond to the investigation or individual allegations.”

This is the second time in recent years that the AG’s office has sued DCHA over public housing conditions and management. In June 2020, Racine alleged the housing authority was “refusing to address systematic drug-and firearm-related activity” at ten of its properties. As part of a settlement in that lawsuit, DCHA agreed to upgrade security and fund violence interruption efforts.

According to the new lawsuit, the delays in accommodations constitute an “egregious pattern and practice of discrimination against District residents with disabilities,” thereby denying them equal access to housing, in violation of D.C.’s anti-discrimination law. Racine’s office also accuses DCHA of violating the District’s consumer protection law because the agency says it provides quality affordable housing, “when in fact much of its housing is inaccessible to the tenant or unfit to live in,” the lawsuit states.

The disabilities in question are often significant, including conditions such as cerebral palsy, amputated limbs, and paralysis, according to the lawsuit, and the lack of accommodations from DCHA has a serious negative impact on the tenants’ lives.

In another example cited by the AG’s office, a bedridden tenant who is unable to afford overnight care was approved for a two-bedroom apartment, so her daughter could move in and care for her at night. The tenant is still waiting a year later, and since the tenant cannot afford to move somewhere else on her own, her daughter installed a remote camera to monitor her at night, the suit states.

The suit also charges that some tenants have developed disabilities as a direct result of conditions at DCHA public housing. In one example, a tenant developed asthma and allergies from mold in her unit. She was approved for a different unit as an accommodation, but five years on she is still waiting, according to the lawsuit.

The DC Housing Authority is one of the largest landlords in the city, serving 50,000 residents; of those, more than 10,000 have disabilities and more than 6,000 are senior citizens.

The authority owns 52 traditional public housing developments with 8,000 units, and also administers housing vouchers and mixed-income properties. DCHA tenants, who range from extremely low-income to moderate-income,  pay 30% of their adjusted income in rent — an average of approximately $250 per household, according to the authority.