Skip to comments.Resort That Refused Black Family Pool Access Must Pay
Posted on 08/11/2005 11:55:37 AM PDT by Tumbleweed_Connection
An extended African-American family, most of whom reside in Maryland, today announce the settlement of their discrimination claim against a vacation rental condominium resort in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, which barred them from using its swimming pool. Among other things, the settlement of the complaint filed by the Lawyers' Committee and the law firm of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan, provides the plaintiffs with monetary compensation, the amount of which cannot be disclosed under the agreement.
Over 100 African-American family members alleged that they were racially discriminated against when they stayed at Baytree III, part of the Baytree Plantation in Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for the Turner-Gray family reunion in July 2001. The plaintiffs alleged that shortly after they arrived for their family reunion weekend, Stuart Jenkins, property manager of Baytree III and president of the Homeowners' Association, padlocked and chained the entrance to the pool area closing it off to the reunion attendees. According to the complaint, the day after the reunion ended, Jenkins removed the padlock and chain and reopened the pool to guests, personally inviting white guests to use the pool during their stay.
"We selected Baytree as the site for our reunion in part because of its amenities, including the pool facilities," stated Gloria Turner-Simpkins, one of the plaintiffs who organized the family reunion. "But instead of being able to enjoy them, because of these discriminatory actions, we were humiliated and saddened, during what was meant to be an enjoyable family gathering," added Mrs. Turner-Simpkins.
In addition to monetary compensation, the Homeowners' Association agreed to issue a written apology to the family members, to conduct fair housing training for individuals involved in the day-today management of Baytree III, and to inform its members of its policy of non-discrimination.
"This settlement makes clear that such racist behavior and such blatant disregard for the law will not be tolerated," stated Charles Lester, a partner in the Atlanta office of Sutherland Asbill & Brennan LLP and one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs.
"It is sad but true that in this day and age there are still those who want to stop African Americans from enjoying the same privileges as everyone else," said Barbara Arnwine, Executive Director of the Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law. "While no amount of money can make these family members whole for the racist acts they had to endure and to explain to their small children, this settlement does give them some measure of justice."
I just don't get this at all. Didn't this manager know that this was going to happen? What's wrong with this man? What's wrong with the family using the pool?
If it happened as presented, a fair call. I notice that there was no defense presented in the article. Did the resort offer any?
The story would have been just fine without thata paplum.
It sures sounds to me like was a clear cut case of discrimination.
This kinda shiz is still happening in 2005?
So they are good enough to rent to and use the rooms, but not the pool? If you are going to be a racist, at least be consistent.
I am amazed that they didn't call police at the time.
Reprehensible...but, IMO, assuming that this discrimination represented the will of a private homeowners association...everyone should have the right to associate or not associate with whomever they like...on whatever basis they like
First, the resort was absolutely wrong and should be punished. But my evil, cynical twin is asking if part of the settlement is going to include changing the name of the resort to something "less offensive" to black families who would like to hold their family reunions there?
Filed a lawsuit for a 100-member, African-American family that held a reunion, in July 2001, at the Baytree Plantation in Myrtle Beach, SC. Defendants are the Baytree III Homeowners Association and its president, Stuart Jenkins. The suit alleges Mr. Jenkins engaged in racial discrimination by padlocking and chaining the entrance to the pool area, closing it to reunion attendees; and reopening it to guests in all three Baytree complexes and personally inviting white guests to use the pool the day following the reunion. This incident marked the first time that many of our small children were exposed to overt racism, said one of the reunion plaintiffs (Turner v. Baytree III Homeowners Assoc).
Notice how the wording is essentially identical in their press release of today as the write-up on their beginning the case in 2001.
I you suggesting that I should have the right not to sell my house to a black person for no other reason than the are black? What if I don't want to rent one of my aprtments to black people or serve black people at my restaurant? Freedom of Association?
I you... = Are you...
Hopefully an unemployed idiot
"Reprehensible...but, IMO, assuming that this discrimination represented the will of a private homeowners association...everyone should have the right to associate or not associate with whomever they like...on whatever basis they like"
You are free to hold that personal opinion, but be assured that it is at wide variance with the laws these days.
Private clubs, associations which exclude people based on race and religion are clearly illegal.
That would include "homeowners associations." HOAs in turn hire Property Management companies. These companies know well about illegal discrimination, in real estate activities.
I'm gonna get nailed for this but...private property owners should be allowed to restrict/admit whoever they please onto all or any of their property.