California
Related: About this forumCouple outraged over Sac area neighborhood’s “whites only” rule
http://kron4.com/2016/08/25/couple-outraged-over-neighborhoods-whites-only-rule/This happened in the city of El Dorado Hills just east of Sacramento....
But before signing it they noticed it included a clause reading No person except those of the white Caucasian race shall use, occupy or reside upon any residential lot or plot in this subdivision.
Im like youve got to be kidding me, the wife said. Thats ridiculous. Thats really kind of awful and racist and terrible. Everybody knows you cant enforce things like that. It still sends a message.
Gosh, I love our Blue state!
uppityperson
(115,677 posts)marybourg
(12,633 posts)they (and anyone else who encounters this) should cross it out. If it's a stand-alone agreement, just refuse to sign it. And object, strongly. And publicize it. As these people obviously did.
virgogal
(10,178 posts)Person 2713
(3,263 posts)TexasBushwhacker
(20,202 posts)The older wealthy neighborhood in Houston is River Oaks. A long time ago, they wouldn't sell homes to anyone but white Christians, but it wasn't in writing anywhere, it was just understood.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)I'm just astonished that a remnant, apparently, survives.
SusanCalvin
(6,592 posts)River Oaks never had it in writing? I'm floored.
TexasBushwhacker
(20,202 posts)I heard it was a gentlemen's agreement but perhaps I misunderstood. Although it wouldn't be legally enforceable, I suppose a gentlemen's agreement could be in writing.
mwrguy
(3,245 posts)Dating back to 1928.
It was simply considered void since it was illegal, but the original deed had that as a stipulation.
Also could not build any home on it worth less than $1500.
Buzz cook
(2,472 posts)Unfortunately there are lots of covenants and ownership agreements like that. It's a good thing to have them removed, but not necessary.
Throd
(7,208 posts)All of the tract neighborhoods here were built after the Civil Rights Act.
That said, this is a VERY white community.