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."
However, given the condition of the average "public" pool the plaintiff's may have been spared some nasty diseases. I am deathly afraid of public pools these days, people are by and large just too careless about their hygiene. Have you ever observed how many people don't even bother to wash their hands when using a public restroom. Ugh!
Not if the ACLU is successfully RICOd soon, although that should have already happened. I still don't understand how NAMBLA has been allowed to exist for this long.
Sorry about the paragraphs. They were there when I reviewed it but something went wrong when I posted it.
He pissed away tons of money for next year's planned reunion. One hundred eaters and probably half of them are drinkers, as well.
If I owned a Hotel in that area, I'd be contacting each one personally to invite them to come next year.
Oh, yeah! All the more reason to think that this particular family was not given to imagining discrimination that's not really there.
Anyway, sounds like the manager should have been canned (or caned, as I mistyped at first :) , not re-trained.
Ms. Turner reserved twenty-one units for a total cost of $10,511.56.
Quite a sum.
I wonder how the members of the HOA feel about their president now that he has cost them a (hopefully) big lump of cash.
Family reunions are highly sought after by resorts and hotels. Many have a coordinator who is supposed to work closely with the reunion host. When I had mine last month I had to tell the hotel exactly how many adults and kids were coming. They knew how many people were eating breakfast each day and how many were going to be at the banquet. We also paid for everything five days before arriving. I can't imagine that this resort was unaware of how many kids were coming. They took this family's money and didn't let them use the facility that they paid for.
OK, so what's your guess as to why the pool was closed? It makes no sense that a hotel willing to rent to a group of Black people would only put the pool off limits.
They slept there; they ate there. They probably used other facilities. Why not the pool?
And, BTW, I have booked vacations where something went wrong, and I didn't get everything I expected. There was usually an explanation.
It is her private property. She should be allowed to rent to whoever she wishes and deny rent to whoever she wishes for any reason whatsoever.
I don't see clear evidence of racism in the complaint. I do see an admission by the plaintiffs that they had violated the pool usage rules and that prompted the pool to be closed to non-owners. Have black families rented units at the condo before? Was the pool closed during their stay?
And oh, by-the-way, they were the Democrats!
And they didn't change for a hundred years until the
Federal Government forced them to at the point of a Gun.
Why don't Republicans remind everyone of that with
every other sentence they speak?
The Republican has always had the moral high-ground yet
has never failed not to use it.
I hope the Baytree III management staff don't get carpet burns on their knuckles.
"Absolutely. Let the market decide."
My (Orthodox Jewish) landlord has quite a few African-American tenants in his building. When one of them moves out, he tries to bring in Jewish tenants -- not because he dislikes blacks, but because he wants to make the neighborhood more Jewish. Believe me, he would rent it out to a black convert to Judaism, so the issue here isn't race.
Ironically, his loyalty to the Jewish community is hurting him financially, since many of the African-Americans are outstanding & upstanding tenants. They pay the rent regularly & don't make as many demands as do some of the Jewish tenants.
Sometimes beliefs take precedence over market value. (Again, his beliefs have nothing to do with racial prejudice. And he has very good relations with his black tenants.)
"I'd like to hear the other side of this story, if there is another side."
I would also like to hear more. There is something about this story that does not pass the smell test.
The Turners began the litigation process in 2001. The case was finally settled in 2005 . . .
Yet another example how the litigation process grinds on inexorably slowly in this country. I hope the settlement was worth the wait.