Homeowners Formally Strike Racially Restrictive Language from CC&Rs

[The Straight Story]

Homeowners Formally Strike Racially Restrictive Language from CC&Rs
Written for the web by C. Johnson, Internet News Producer
kxtv, california

Racially restrictive language was stricken from one Sacramento neighborhood's Covenants, Codes and Restrictions in a "mass redaction" ceremony on Thursday. The event took advantage of a new law that makes it easier for such language to be eliminated from the charters for organization.

Language excluding certain racial and ethnic groups from purchasing homes was not uncommon in the charters for neighborhood associations set up in the 1940s and 1950s. The language remained in charters even though racial discrimination has been illegal for decades.

The ceremony took place in the Arden Park Community Center. The surrounding Arden Park Vista neighborhood was built before racial restrictions and language reflecting such in neighborhood association documents was ruled illegal. The original CC&Rs included a provision, Clause VI, that restricted neighborhood occupancy to whites only. Over time, a cover letter noted the clause was invalid, but it was never actually stricken from the CC&Rs and officially recorded that way.

http://www.kxtv.com/storyfull2.aspx?storyid=15308

[Gormy Cuss]

1. The CCRs for my neighborhood have restrictive clauses too.

It embarrasses everyone but until the assembly passed the law to simplify the process everyone just shrugged and said "it's unenforceable, no big deal."

The first time in my life that I've encountered a race restrictive CCR was in the suburban SF Bay Area.
The CCRs were written in the late 1950s and this area was fairly rural. I suppose they were afraid of "those people" from Richmond and Oakland moving out here.

The CCR did allow homeowners to have a house servant who's not of the white race -- awfully liberal-minded of them, don't you think?
Editted to add: I'm being sarcastic in that last comment.

[Boojatta]

2. Hierarchy is one thing. Having job opportunities is also something.

The CCR did allow homeowners to have a house servant who's not of the white race -- awfully liberal-minded of them, don't you think?

No, not really, but it would have been even worse if non-white servants had been forbidden.

Does anyone know whether the CCR allowed Irish Catholic homeowners to have British Protestant servants?

[Gormy Cuss]

4. To answer your question,

as long as the British Protestant servants were white, it would be no problem because in America the Irish Catholics were viewed as white by the 1950s.

I think the drafters thought they were making a big concession by allowing one live-in who wasn't white.
The CCRs list the exception for a house servant in the same section that details limits on farm animals.

[Boojatta]

5. The people who wrote it might not have enjoyed All In The Family (TV show)

The CCRs list the exception for a house servant in the same section that details limits on farm animals.

[theboss]

3. There are probably more of these out there than you think

It was very common prior to the 60s. It's irrelevant now as it's unenforeable, but there are probably people here with these convenants in their deeds back at the courthouse.

[tn-guy]

6. Almost certainly there are more than people think

".....there are probably people here with these convenants in their deeds back at the courthouse."


It's a near certainty that some posters here have similar restrictions on their own home deeds. When such restrictions were ruled unenforceable some states went further and passed legislation that forbade real estate professionals, lawyers, etc. from reporting the existence of such restrictions to prospective buyers. Thus, there are loads of these restrictions still on the books with the homeowner having absolutely no knowledge of such.

Years ago I actually heard one guy berate another for his "racial insensitivity" for buying a house with such a restriction even though the buyer didn't know one existed at the time. His real estate agent and the closing attorney were both prohibited from telling him. I had to wonder how lame the idiot with the indignant attitude had to be to act upset over that.