Something I Didn't Know About Restrictive Covenants in Deeds

I am currently reading the book The Color of Law by Richard Rothstein.[1] I had heard the term "systemic racism" but never really understood it until I began reading this book. This really opened my eyes about how discriminatory policies, from the federal government down to the local level, played a role in the racial inequities we have in America. 

I found an example of this in my grandparent's papers. 

In 1949, my maternal grandparents bought a house in a brand-new housing development in Pleasant Hill, California, called Gregory Gardens.[2] From the deed included in the title company papers, I learned they paid $7800.[3] It might even have been the first home they bought. Previously, they were renting in neighboring Walnut Creek, but the man who owned their property wouldn’t sell it to them. It was a great opportunity for them to purchase a new home, although it also forced their daughter to change high school districts.

Restrictive Covenant
Besides the deed that gave the land description, I found a two-page restrictive covenant. This document spelled out things not permitted on the piece of property. Many of us are familiar with home owner association's rules and regulations. This was similar to that. Among the document's rules: no separate building could be built too close to the lot line nor a fence could be built too tall. There could be no offensive trade or activity. There could be no kennels or raising of commercial animals. One expects such rules, as these make for pleasant living areas and help keep the property values up.

This covenant also had a clause that today would shock us. It clearly stated that no person could occupy, use, or reside in the property who was not of the white or Caucasian race. There was an exception if the person was a servant or domestic employed by a white Caucasian owner, tenant, or occupant.[4]

In 1917, as a result of a lawsuit, zoning could not be based on race.[5] Because of that, restrictive covenants like the example above were developed. They were considered by the court to be private agreements.[6] Later these restrictions became required by such agencies as the Federal Housing Administration and the Veteran Home Loans before they would approve the mortgage on the property.

It is very likely that the developer of the Gregory Gardens had to agree to the restrictive covenant to obtain a loan to build the housing tract. Once the houses were built, the FHA then pre-approved the mortgages to those buyers who satisfied the restriction.

Another part of the covenant was the penalty for selling, conveying, leasing, or renting to a person who was not Caucasian. One would have to pay four of their neighbors $2000 each in damages. This total would amount to about the same price my grandparents paid for their house!

Here is a map of the property. They lived at 307 Nancy, the second house into the court, which on this map is lot number 22.

Our parents and grandparents clearly benefited from these policies of being able to purchase homes with FHA-backed loans. Because of this opportunity, their homes increased in value. They were able to save for retirement. They sent their children to college, who then received an education that enabled them to obtain good paying jobs, buy homes, and send their own children to college.

African Americans and other minorities were not allowed FHA-backed loans. Being prevented from this opportunity to purchase property with secure loans and low interest rates, they were not able to acquire "wealth" from home ownership in the boom years of the 50s and 60s and later years. I am disappointed in my government for allowing this discrimination to happen.

Did They Know?
I have no idea if my grandparents knew about this restriction. Did they just sign the deed paperwork without reading all the details? Or did they buy specifically into this housing development because of the restrictive covenant? 

Have you thought about your own family--was this the reason they moved from the city to the suburbs?

If you would like to read more about restrictive covenants and segregation, try this website article “Private Agreements, Government Enforcement.”[7]

---

[1] Richard Rothstein, The Color of Law, (New York: Liveright Publishing Co, 2017).

[2] Contra Costa County, California, grant deed, Hergan, Inc. to Tom J. Johnston Jr and Pansy L. Johnston, 1949, bk 1483 p. 371. Original title company papers in Johnston Family Papers; privately held by Lisa S. Gorrell.

[3] Contra Costa County Title Company, Title Insurance and Guaranty Company, police of title insurance, no. 106855, 29 Dec 1849; Johnston Family Papers.

[4] Declaration of Restrictions, Hergan, Inc., 27 Jun 1949, filed in Contra Costa County Clerk, no. 25038.

[5] Buchanan v. Warley, 1917, U.S. Supreme Court, 245 U.S. 60.

[6] Claremont Improvement Club v. Buckingham, 1948, District Court of Appeal, First Division, Division 2, California, 89 Cal. App. 2d 32.

[7] “Private Agreements, Government Enforcement,” https://erenow.net/modern/color-of-law-forgotten-history/6.php. 

Copyright © 2020 by Lisa S. Gorrell, Mam-ma's Southern Family, All rights reserved.