Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search
 

KamaAina

(78,249 posts)
Fri Aug 26, 2016, 11:34 PM Aug 2016

Couple outraged over Sac area neighborhood’s “whites only” rule

http://kron4.com/2016/08/25/couple-outraged-over-neighborhoods-whites-only-rule/

A Northern California couple is outraged after being told they had to sign a “whites only” agreement when they bought their new home.

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.”

“I’m like you’ve got to be kidding me,” the wife said. “That’s ridiculous. That’s really kind of awful and racist and terrible. Everybody knows you can’t enforce things like that. It still sends a message.”


Gosh, I love our Blue state!
11 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Couple outraged over Sac area neighborhood’s “whites only” rule (Original Post) KamaAina Aug 2016 OP
Good grief, I'm glad they are getting it removed. uppityperson Aug 2016 #1
If it's part of a larger document, marybourg Aug 2016 #2
I hate to be cynical but I don't believe this. virgogal Aug 2016 #3
The OP or the link? Person 2713 Aug 2016 #4
It does seem odd TexasBushwhacker Aug 2016 #6
Oh, it has been in writing. SusanCalvin Aug 2016 #8
Are you kidding? SusanCalvin Aug 2016 #9
That's my understanding TexasBushwhacker Aug 2016 #10
My first house had that in the paperwork mwrguy Aug 2016 #5
It's not enforceable Buzz cook Aug 2016 #7
This story sounds fishy. I live in El Dorado Hills. Throd Aug 2016 #11

marybourg

(12,631 posts)
2. If it's part of a larger document,
Fri Aug 26, 2016, 11:39 PM
Aug 2016

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.

TexasBushwhacker

(20,192 posts)
6. It does seem odd
Fri Aug 26, 2016, 11:56 PM
Aug 2016

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.

TexasBushwhacker

(20,192 posts)
10. That's my understanding
Sat Aug 27, 2016, 09:48 AM
Aug 2016

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)
5. My first house had that in the paperwork
Fri Aug 26, 2016, 11:52 PM
Aug 2016

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)
7. It's not enforceable
Sat Aug 27, 2016, 12:57 AM
Aug 2016

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)
11. This story sounds fishy. I live in El Dorado Hills.
Mon Aug 29, 2016, 03:06 PM
Aug 2016

All of the tract neighborhoods here were built after the Civil Rights Act.

That said, this is a VERY white community.

Latest Discussions»Region Forums»California»Couple outraged over Sac ...