United States District Court, D. Arizona
Bradley R. Blansette, Plaintiff,
Scottsdale Housing Agency, et al., Defendants.
Dominic W. Lanza United States District Judge
before the Court are (1) Defendant City of Scottsdale's
(the “City”) motion for summary judgment (Doc.
36) and (2) Plaintiff Bradley R. Blansette's
(“Blansette”) revised motion for sanctions (Doc.
For the following reasons, and although the Court has
endeavored to liberally construe Blansette's filings and
arguments in light of his status as a pro se
litigant, the Court grants the City's motion and denies
otherwise indicated, the following facts are undisputed.
The City's Housing Choice Voucher Program
City's Housing Choice Voucher Program (the
“Program”) is managed in conjunction with federal
assistance through Section 8. (Doc. 36-1 ¶ 2.) It is
governed by an Administrative Plan (the “Administrative
Plan”), adopted pursuant to 24 C.F.R. § 982 and
approved by the Department of Housing and Urban Development
last several years, the program has had more applicants than
available vouchers. (Id. ¶ 3.) The City
maintains a waiting list for new applicants in accordance
with HUD regulations and the Administrative Plan.
is not a prerequisite to eligibility to participate in the
of the anticipated length of the waiting list, the City
typically uses a two-step application process, under which an
applicant will be required to provide sufficient information
for the City to determine initial eligibility and the
applicant's placement on the waiting list. (Id.
Administrative Plan provides for three categories of
preferences related to an applicant's position on the
waiting list: 1) Live/Work in Scottsdale, 2)
Elderly/Disabled, and 3) Homeless. (Id.) The
applicant receives additional points for each preference that
he or she establishes. (Id. ¶ 7.) A Program
Specialist determines whether the applicant submitted
sufficient evidence of disability but does not determine
whether the applicant is “disabled.”
(Id. ¶ 9.)
August 2015, Blansette applied to the City to be placed on
the waiting list for the Program. (Id. ¶ 8;
Doc. 36-2.) Blansette did not indicate in his application
that he would require accommodations for a disability to use
the Program. (Doc. 36-1 ¶ 8; Doc. 36-2 at 8.)
the processing of the initial application, Blansette provided
a note from Paradise Valley Family Medicine that stated:
“This patient has chronic pain present for years now.
He is unable to work due to his pain and is seeing multiple
specialists for this. He is also on pain medication to treat
his pain.” (Doc. 36-1 ¶ 9; Doc. 36-2 at 5.) A
Program Specialist evaluated this note and determined it was
insufficient to establish that Blansette was disabled for
purposes of preference points on the waiting list. (Doc. 36-1
also submitted to the City of Scottsdale Housing Agency
(“SHA”) a letter from the Social Security
Administration, Office of Disability Adjudication and Review
“granting [his] request for more time before [it]
act[ed] on [his] case” and informing him that he could
“ send [it] more evidence or a statement about the
facts and the law in his case.” (Doc. 36-1 ¶ 10;
September 14, 2015, the City notified Blansette that the
documentation he had submitted was insufficient to establish
a disability preference and invited him to submit a statement
from a physician stating he was disabled. (Id.
¶ 11; Doc. 36-5.)
in Blansette's file indicates that he called the City on
September 17, 2015 to explain that his doctor would not give
him a disability letter, so he was looking for another
doctor. (Doc. 36-1 ¶ 12; Doc. 36-5.) Blansette objects
to this evidence on what appear to be authentication and
hearsay grounds. (Doc. 47 at 4.)
City did not receive any further documentation establishing
that Blansette was disabled. (Doc. 36-1 ¶ 13.)
Ultimately, Blansette's application received the
preference points for Scottsdale residency but not for
disability. (Id. ¶¶ 10, 13.) That did not,
however, affect Blansette's eligibility for the Program.
(Id. ¶ 13)
October 7, 2016, Blansette was notified that he had reached
the top of the waiting list. (Id. ¶ 14.) On
October 25, 2016, he met with personnel from the SHA for the
step-two eligibility interview. (Id.)
Blansette's eligibility was confirmed, he was invited to
attend a mandatory briefing process on November 17, 2016.
(Id. ¶ 15.) During that process, he was
provided a briefing packet. (Id.) ...