Read on Twitter
North of Montana in Santa Monica has a median home value of $4.1M, is almost exclusively single family homes, and has a population that is more than 80% white. Objectively, it is one of the most segregated neighborhoods in the United States. (thread)
North of Montana is rich in resources. Great public schools, robust city services, hardly any crime, and close access to jobs. Yet most residents are white. Why?
Many may think this segregation was by chance. A few unscrupulous real estate agents, maybe, or perhaps just the vestige of people from decades past choosing to live near others like them. That couldn't be further from the truth.
The truth is, segregation in Santa Monica is by design. When North of Montana was first subdivided, deed restrictions were put in place to prevent anyone who was not white from purchasing a home. Blacks, Latinos, Asians, Jews, etc. were all excluded by law.
A redlining map from the 1930s archived by @HOLCRedlining casually describes the area:
"Terrain: Level to rolling with favorable grades. No construction hazards. Land improved 80%. Deed restrictions provide for single-family construction and protects against racial hazards."
"Terrain: Level to rolling with favorable grades. No construction hazards. Land improved 80%. Deed restrictions provide for single-family construction and protects against racial hazards."
White residents liked it that way. Across Santa Monica, the power of law was used to make life for racial minorities as miserable as possible. Neighborhood character and property values had to be preserved, they'd say. Language not too dissimilar from what you often hear today.
At George Caldwell's Dance Hall, one of the few Black-owned businesses in Santa Monica, dance parties became a popular event. When the Black dancers started having too much fun, white residents organized to shut it down. Shortly after, Santa Monica made dance parties illegal.
Near the beach, a group of Black entrepreneurs decided to build a resort. They negotiated for the land, raised money from investors, and submitted plans to the city. Their permits were quickly denied. A few years later, white investors received approval for near identical plans.
Their resort - the Casa Del Mar - still stands. It first opened as a private club open only to white people. Go to the resort's website, or their Wikipedia page, or anywhere on their property, and you'll see no mention of this history.
At Bay Street Beach, a section of the beach popular with the Black community, Santa Monica decided to build a storm drain. The storm drain poured toxic sewage into the ocean and remains an occasional source of pollution today.
And when I-10 came to Santa Monica, traffic engineers decided to build right through minority neighborhoods. Their residents, largely unwelcome and with little political clout, were unable to fight back. Hundreds of homes were destroyed.
Overt discrimination isn't as common anymore but the segregation still exists. North of Montana - at 80% white - is exceptional but Santa Monica as a whole isn't much better. 65% white in a county (Los Angeles) that is more than 70% people of color.
Because while de jure discrimination was made largely illegal in the 1950s and 1960s, white homeowners were nonetheless able to find new tools to perpetuate the status quo. Apartment bans, specifically, allowed cities like Santa Monica to continue to keep minorities out.
These apartment bans were passed not too long after the Fair Housing Act of 1968. Across California, most apartment bans came into force in the 1970s and 1980s. My building - apartments built in 1973 - would be illegal in Santa Monica if someone tried to build it again today.
Undoing these apartment bans is key to tackling housing segregation. But we have to go a step further, too, by funding new affordable housing to allow people of all incomes to move in. This holds true in Santa Monica, the rest of California, and across the US.
At the local level, fierce resistance remains. White homeowners fight new housing by ranting about neighborhood character, property values, safety, etc. This is language that white homeowners perfected when talking about race-based exclusions in decades past.
But in Sacramento, California is finally reckoning with housing justice. Numerous bills have been passed in recent years which are slowly chipping at housing segregation. Many more are in the works.
Just this week, #SB35 authored by @Scott_Wiener in 2017, was used to propose 227 affordable apartments in Novato. Novato banned most apartments decades ago and is 75% white today. https://www.marinij.com/2020/07/09/downtown-novato-affordable-housing-seeks-streamlined-approval-under-state-law/
None of the bills in Sacramento are a panacea, and so much work remains. But, at last, the work is finally happening. California will be better as a result.
