If she'd been with a less accommodating council, she could have been told to get out.
I'm not sure if they legally could if she has a disability, though. I think that's part of the point with the FHA stuff.
And part of the point that I keep coming back to is I can't tell if she really has a disability.
If she's a flaky person who is trying to take advantage of the ADA/ FHA because she a) wanted to live someplace, with her dog, that doesn't allow dogs and then b) didn't want to deal with a carrier and/or c) is a drama queen looking for ways to make drama and/or money, then I hope the book is thrown at her.
But, if she's a person with a genuinely severe anxiety disorder who needs to have her dog nearby for medical reasons to be able to function (and I can see that possibility, but, again, I don't know), then I don't think this is ridiculous.
The condo guy already said that if she was blind and it was a guide dog, that would be fine. So the issue is, which category is she in? Blind-person-with-a-guide-dog territory (disabled) or flakey-drama queen? (I wonder if it would have made a difference if her service dog was a big black lab instead of a toy spaniel?)
Joe, you're missing my point, and I accept that I didn't make it well (I confused the issue by making an analogy that wasn't sufficiently separate from the situation at hand). To back up, you said:
Actually, the condo board has made an effort to accommodate her disability. It's a no-pets building, yet it is allowing Stevens to keep a dog, so that's already a pretty big concession. But I agree that the property manager probably thinks that Stevens doesn't need the dog by her side all the time. As for using the service elevators, that makes sense. Stevens, however, wants to have her dog on a leash and use the regular elevators "like a regular resident," but that ignores the fact that she isn't a regular resident. If she were, she wouldn't have a dog.
I don't think this is either here nor there. The fact that she is not a regular resident doesn't mean that, if she is in fact disabled
, she shouldn't get "reasonable accommodations" to allow her to function as close to possible as a regular resident. The fact that the condo board made AN effort doesn't mean that is necessarily an adequate effort. (If I go to a doctor's appointment and ask for an interpreter, and their response is to bring in the doctor's nephew, who has taken one high school ASL class is there to fulfill his volunteer hours for graduation, they have made AN effort.)
People with disabilities do often feel like second class citizens, and do often wish they could feel like a regular (resident/ student/ worker/ patient/ etc.) The ADA is partly about providing those opportunities. Giving people in wheelchair access to places they didn't used to have access to. Bringing people with cerebral palsy out of institutions. Allowing blind people to use guide dogs in situations where dogs are not usually allowed.
So,is she in the blind person with a guide dog category? Dunno.