Judge orders city of Vallejo not to evict disabled homeless woman

VALLEJO – Over the holiday weekend, a federal judge ordered the city of Vallejo not to evict an elderly homeless woman after the city allegedly did not try to connect her with housing and support services and did not provide moving assistance that she requested because of her disability, according to court documents. 

Evelyn Davis Alfred, 64, who is known by her neighbors and friends as “Brown Sugar,” told the Vallejo Sun in an interview that she is relieved that the judge granted a restraining order but she still feels anxiety about the situation because she is unsure if she will be able to find stable housing.

“The Vallejo City Manager said that he is going to help and I just want him to be a man of his word and do what he said he is going to do,” Alfred said.

For the past year and a half, Alfred has lived on a vacant lot alongside Mare Island Way near Tennessee Street, where she built a small structure out of tarps and salvaged materials. While she has been there, she removed trash, cut back overgrown weeds and turned the surrounding property into a tidy yard.

“My upbringing was to always keep your home up to par, clean, which just stuck with me,” Alfred wrote in a declaration to the court. “I always keep my area clean inside and out, and try to beautify the place so it looks better than it did before.”

Her neighbors recognized her efforts to maintain property and she quickly became a valued part of the community. So when neighbors learned that the city of Vallejo was evicting her, she received an outpouring of support.

Initially, city officials showed up at Alfred’s campsite on Oct. 29 and gave her a 72-hour notice to vacate the property. Alfred verbally asked for more time and assistance with the move because she is disabled, but city officials denied the request, according to Alfred’s lawsuit. 

The next day, Alfred submitted a written request under the Americans with Disabilities Act for an additional 30 days to move as well as moving assistance. With no response from the city and her eviction date rapidly approaching, Alfred worked with the Vallejo Homeless Union to file a request for a temporary restraining order. 

Many neighbors wrote letters to the city testifying to her contributions to the neighborhood and requesting that she be allowed to stay if no alternative housing could be found. 

City Manager Andrew Murray and City Attorney Veronica Nebb responded to the neighborhood concerns by email and stated that Alfred had been granted a 30-day pause on her eviction date and that the city would “work with her over the course of the next 30 days to connect her with appropriate housing and support services,” according to email records included in the lawsuit.

The city told the court that they would honor Alfred’s request and the judge dismissed the case, according to Alfred’s lawsuit. City officials claim that they notified Alfred that they would honor her ADA request prior to the court proceeding, but Alfred said that she had not received any calls or messages from the city.

After she was granted the extension, Alfred began looking for housing. A community member recommended that she sign up for services with Caminar, a nonprofit that manages aspects of the county’s coordinated entry system for homeless services. 

Alfred filled out paperwork at the office and three days later she called to check the status of her case, but she only reached a voicemail system. She said she still has not heard back despite that the recording promised a response within two days. 

Alfred visited several apartment buildings that she felt would fit her budget, but all the managers she inquired with said their units were full.

Even though she did not yet have another place secured Alfred then began focusing on packing up her belongings, but in the process she exacerbated an ankle injury and had to visit the emergency room on Nov. 20. Alfred requires a cane to walk and she wears an ankle brace and a back brace to support her mobility. 

The doctors at the emergency room told her to stay off her ankle so she was unable to continue packing her larger items.

The day after her hospital visit, Alfred received a new eviction notice stating that she was to vacate the premises by Dec. 2. 

Alfred and other members and supporters of the Vallejo Homeless Union then drafted a second lawsuit and a request for a temporary restraining order. This lawsuit alleged that the city had not honored Alfred’s ADA request for moving assistance and that the eviction would place Alfred in imminent danger, violating constitutional protections under the 14th Amendment. 

The lawsuit argued that Alfred’s severe depression, which had driven her to attempt suicide twice, in combination with her disability, the cold winter weather and her vulnerability to violence as a elderly woman without shelter constitutes a significant danger that she would not otherwise face if it were not for the eviction. 

Alfred’s doctor wrote a note describing the dangers of Alfred’s depression and bluntly stated that his recommendation was: “Don’t bother patient.”

Alfred said that her neighbors look out for her and she has felt safe in the time she has been at her current location, and she’s worried that if she is evicted that she will be forced to sleep in her car which terrifies her because she was once assaulted while sleeping in her vehicle. 

“I believe it was June of 2021, I woke up with someone hitting my window,” Alfred wrote in a statement to the court. “I saw it was a gun. He told me to open the door. He then raped me and took all my money.”

U.S. District Court Judge Dena Coggins found that Alfred’s complaint met the legal requirements for a temporary restraining order. 

“The court is persuaded by Plaintiff’s argument that an eviction may ‘endanger her and will deny her shelter that is accessible for her disability,’ particularly because she has no alternative place to stay,” Coggins wrote in her ruling. The judge noted that the city is not likely to be significantly harmed by the order because a hearing to decide further actions can be held in a matter of weeks, so if the city’s eviction is allowed to proceed there will not be a major delay. 

“Plaintiff has only demonstrated that there are sufficiently ‘serious questions’ regarding Defendant City’s liability under the ADA with respect to her request for a temporary restraining order,” Coggins wrote. “Defendant City has not been heard in response; it may well be that Defendant City has not violated any law.”

A hearing to determine if the court will order the city not to evict Alfred while the lawsuit proceeds is scheduled for Dec. 13. 

Alfred’s current lawsuit is the third federal lawsuit filed without legal representation but with support from Vallejo’s Homeless Union. The first lawsuit that the Union collaborated on involved an encampment on Mare Island. In that case, a restraining order was ultimately denied because the complaint had not properly alleged violations for which the court could grant relief.  

In Alfred’s current lawsuit, the judge said that there were procedural errors but the claims were sufficient to meet the standards for the initial order while the court examines the claims further.

Alfred said that she hopes that she can find housing that accommodates her disability. But she feels that her efforts are also important to bring attention to the number of unhoused people with disabilities and perhaps improve Vallejo’s policies.