Tag Archives: Condo Association

Homeowners’ Associations Invented To Discriminate ► History Is Complicated

KEEP OUT! THIS MEANS YOU BLACK &JEW!

Dateline May 3, 1948 – The Supreme Court ruled that restrictive covenants in real estate deeds — which specifically barred sales to Blacks, Jews, and other minorities — was illegal. Prior to that date the courts had ruled these discriminatory practices were simply matters between private contractors, and the courts had been there to enforce these restrictive covenants in deeds for decades.

Contractually enforced discrimination has long, proud history in ‘Merka, going back to the original Founding Fathers and their cruel compromise, counting Black folk as 3/5ths a person and leaving the “peculiar institution” of slavery intact. Hell, a whole war was fought over it.

When the country was built on such a crass foundation, is it any wonder that whole generations of people came to feel privileged? So privileged, in fact, that people thought nothing of putting down that privilege in their real estate deals. The idea really started to take off in the 1920s, when planned communities like Coral Gables became the suburban norm as people started moving out of congested cities. What we now call White Flight can traced to these earliest migrations; it wasn’t just congestion that some people wanted to escape. Blacks and Jews were other ills of cities that people wanted to move away from. The best way to assure yourself that you won’t have to live among THEM is to put restrictive covenants in property deeds, which specifically spelled out to whom you could sell your own property. Therefore, you would be assured that you would only be living among your own kind by moving into planned communities with exclusionary covenants. According to the WikiWackyWoo

Example of a restrictive Florida deed:

6. At no time shall the land included in said tract
or any part theorof, or any building located thereon,
be occupied by any negro or person, of negro extraction.
This prohibition, however, is not intended to include the
occupancy of a negro domestic servant or other person
while employed in or about the premises by the owner or
occupant of any land in said tract.

In the 1920s and 1930s, covenants that restricted the sale or occupation of real property on the basis of race, ethnicity, religion or social class were common in the United States, where the primary intent was to keep “white” neighbourhoods “white”. Such covenants were employed by many real estate developers to “protect” entire subdivisions. The purpose of an exclusionary covenant was to prohibit a buyer of property from reselling, leasing or transferring the property to members of a given race, ethnic origin and/or religion as specified in the title deed. Some covenants, such as those tied to properties in Forest Hills Gardens, New York, also sought to exclude working class people however this type of social segregation was more commonly achieved through the use of high property prices, minimum cost requirements and application reference checks. In practice, exclusionary covenants were most typically concerned with keeping out African-Americans, however restrictions against Asian-Americans, Jews and Catholics were not uncommon. For example, the Lake Shore Club District in Pennsylvania, sought to exclude various minorities including Negro, Mongolian, Hungarian, Mexican, Greek and various European immigrants.[18] Cities known for their widespread use of racial covenants include Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and Los Angeles.

History

Racial covenants emerged during the mid-nineteenth century and started to gain prominence from the 1890s onwards. However it was not until the 1920s that they adopted widespread national significance, a situation that continued until the 1940s. Some commentators have attributed the popularity of exclusionary covenants at this time as a response to the urbanisation of black Americans following World War I, and the fear of “black invasion” into white neighbourhoods, which they felt would result in depressed property prices, increased nuisance (crime) and social instability.

The Shelley House,
4600 Labadie,
St. Louis, Missouri

In 1945 Louis Kraemer sued to prevent the Shelley family from occupying the house they purchased in St. Louis. The Shelleys were Black and there had been a restrictive covenant on the land since 1911, which the family had been unaware of when they made their purchase. Kraemer knew, however, and sued. He was counting on the courts to uphold the contract and keep the Black Shelley family out of the neighbourhood.

The Missouri Supreme Court obliged, ruling as courts had been doing for
decades, that the deed was a private agreement, attached to the land.
Because it was estate law, as opposed to personal, the contract could be
enforced by a third party such as Louis Kraemer, who wanted to keep his
lily White neighbourhood lily White. Shelley appealed the Missouri
decision.

The Orsel and Minnie McGhee House

By 1948 The Supreme Court was ready to decide Shelley v. Kraemer, which came with a companion case along the same lines. McGhee v. Sipes was a case that had bubbled up from Detroit, where the McGhees had purchased property that came with restrictive covenant. By then Detroit had already gone through several racial spasms, such as the Ossian Sweet trial in the 1920s and the 1943 Riot.

Then Orsel and Minnie McGhee purchased the house at 4626 Seebaldt in Detroit, in which they had been living as tenants for a decade. A neighbourhood group decided to sue to uphold the restrictive covenant in the deed and Sipes became the plaintiff in that case. It too was decided in favour of the discriminatory covenant. It was also appealed. When it came up to the Supreme Court it was rolled in with Shelley v. Kelley. Lawyers for the defendants, including Thurgood Marshall for the McGhees, argued their positions under the Equal Protection Clause of the 14th Amendment.

I’m a sucker for historical markers.
Courtesy of Detroit: The History and Future of the Motor City

The Supreme Court didn’t QUITE rule the restrictive covenant was illegal under the 14th Amendment. The court ruled that contracts between private parties can still have restrictive covenants, which the parties can choose to abide by, or not, depending. However, the Supreme Court ALSO ruled that parties in dispute over restrictive covenants could no longer expect judicial review of these contracts because for a court to uphold the contract it would necessarily violate the Equal Protection Act of the Constitution.

And, let’s be clear: The Supreme Court’s decision in Shelley v. Kraemer didn’t end discrimination in housing. It just took new and different forms. Redlining was one way of restricting a neighbourhood. Condo and Homeowners Association Boards have their own ways of restricting who gets in.

As an aside: The Condo Association my parents moved into, and which I now reside to help take care of him, is predominantly White, while the surrounding associations (all a part of a much larger condo complex with several association boards) are far more mixed in the number of Blacks and Latino residents. That doesn’t happen by accident.

Just as Coral Gables being 98% White is no accident.

Additional Reading at Not Now Silly:

The Detroit Riots: Unpacking My Detroit ► Part Five

The 1943 Riot ► Unpacking My Detroit ► Part 5.1
No Skin In The Game ► Part One

No Skin In The Game ► Part Two

No Skin In The Game ► Part Three

You’ve Come A Long Way, Baby – NYT Decides To Capitalize Negro
Montgomery Bus Boycott ► Nostalgia Ain’t What It Used To Be
Happy Birthday Coconut Grove!!! Now Honour Your Past
An Introduction to Trolleygate
The Bible, Subliminal Satan, and Racism
Bulldozing Cultural History

***

***

Unpacking Coconut Grove ► Part 2.2 ► The Neighbourhood Around The E.W.F. Stirrup House

The open gate with the condo complex in the distance.

On a visit to Charles Avenue yesterday the gate was open on the E.W.F. Stirrup property, so I walked right in. I was able to take some interesting close up pictures of wood rot and other damage that normally can’t be seen from the sidewalk or the bank parking lot. It revealed how much damage has been caused by simple neglect of this house that stands as a testament to one of Florida’s first Black millionaires, a man who once owned most of Coconut Grove and helped build the early Bahamian community of The Grove, literally with his own hands.

The last time I found the gate left open it was because the landscaping crew had unlocked it, but were working on the empty lot across the street. So I wandered onto the property and started taking pictures. The landscaping crew noticed and started yelling at me, waving frantically. I waved back as if to say, “Hello!” One of the guys got on his cell phone and within minutes a Security Guard from the condo complex behind the Stirrup House (see below) showed up to shoo me off the property. I was able to engage him in conversation for a while and he revealed a few clues about what may have happened to stall all work on the Stirrup House, which had apparently been promised as a gift of sorts to the neighbourhood as a historical community center of some sort. Unfortunately, it’s not something I have been able to confirm as of yet, so I dare not repeat it.

The front door of the E.W.F. Stirrup House taken from
outside the fence. Ferns now grow on the concrete.

Synchronicity may have been at work again yesterday when I spoke to another gentleman who just happened to be riding past on a bicycle. He’s lived in the Grove 50 years and seems to know where all the bodies are buried. We had a good conversation and would be talking still, I imagine, if not for the lightening and thunder of an approaching storm. He wanted to pedal home before he got soaked. Unless he lived a block away, he got drenched. The sky opened up in a deluge, with barely a drop or two to give final warning.

When I told him I was a journalist investigating the E.W.F. Stirrup House, he told me some wonderful stories concerning ‘interesting’ real estate deals in The Grove, including some about the 3 lots that were assembled to build the condo complex behind the Stirrup House. During this conversation he dropped one important name — one I had not heard before — and a cursory investigation of that name reveals that he is actually the guy that might have piled up all the bodies needing burying.

All of this — what the security guard told me, what this bicyclist told me, the gentleman who appears to have assembled the 3 lots — are just more unconfirmed threads for me to pull to see how this story unravels. However, now I have the name of someone who knows all the players and may no longer have an axe to grind. Or, in the alternative, may have a very large axe to grind. Either way, if I can connect with this gentleman I might be able to solve the riddle of the E.W.F. Stirrup House.

Meanwhile, nothing really changes on Charles Avenue as long as you don’t consider continued deterioration as no change. This is why I am calling this DEMOLITION BY NEGLECT, because nothing else makes any sense. Why would such a beautiful example of a 19th Century house, a house that has survived on that spot for more than 100 years be allowed to rot? Nothing in Florida, it seems, is allowed to get much older than 20 years. In the many decades I’ve been visiting (and 7 years living here) I have seen buildings go up and down and up and down and up and down on the same piece of land. Who cares? They’re usually gas stations or banks or were gas stations and became banks, or vice-versa. There’s no sense of age — of history — in Southern Florida, except for a few small pockets. Most of those have been preserved, restored with love, and maintained as historical sites or museums.

The clock is ticking as the E.W.F. Stirrup House rots.

Take a look at the rest of my photo essay below and please read the previous chapters of Unpacking Coconut Grove, Florida, 33133 ► Part OnePart 1.1Part Two: E.W.F Stirrup, His House and All His Other HousesPart 2.1

Wood rot under the window frame on the side of the E.W.F. Stirrup House.

Wood rot at the side door, which is now being invaded by vines.

A pile of wood behind the house, under a huge bower that developed from all the vegetation. It’s where trash is
hidden from the prying eyes of Miami by-law inspectors because it’s against the law to pile up trash on your property.

This pile of landscaping clippings is also under the bower. It also (allegedly) breaks the law.
It doesn’t look like much in this pic, but it’s about 3 feet tall. That’s a nine foot palm frond on top.
The extent of the wood pile under the bower. It’s several feet high. This is the opening of the bower.

What kid wouldn’t want to play in a bower this size?
While it was impossible to tell from any vantage point, these plants must be invading the E.W.F. Stirrup House.

The plants are clearly invading the house through a side window.

The side door with the other window, open to the elements. The bower is on the left.

The condition at the bottom of the side door.

A window on the east side of the house open to the elements. The house appears to store construction debris.
Any thunderstorm coming in from the ocean will blow water right into this window.
Close up of the porch of the E.W.F. Stirrup House.

Other side of same post.

She’s a beauty, ain’t she?
Just a reminder of what this is all about.

The condo complex behind the Stirrup House sits on the corner of Franklin and Main Highway. It includes unobstructed views of Biscayne Bay from the upper floors, 2 high-end restaurants, a recreation of a former venerated neighbourhood bar called The Taurus, and valet parking. I have been told there was a “Save the Taurus” campaign when the possibility of its demise was announced years ago. I’ll be writing more about this complex in Part Three of Unpacking Coconut Grove, Florida.

This is one of the gated communities on the opposite side of Main Highway. At one time it was the extension of Franklin Avenue to Biscayne Bay. Now it’s gated and inaccessible, even to the Google Street View Car.

This is another of the gated communities on the other side of Main Highway. Camp Biscayne, which is also closed to Google Street View, has a long and rich history going back 109 years. Camp Biscayne is so exclusive that even though it’s only a short block away from gated Franklin, there is no access from Franklin, or vice-versa.

Picture of the abandoned Coconut Grove Playhouse, taken from Camp Biscayne entrance where the gentleman and I spoke.

Detail of the Coconut Grove Playhouse.

Detail of the Coconut Grove Playhouse.

Picture of the Coconut Grove Playhouse sign taken from inside the car after the skies opened up.

If you want to help me save the E.W.F. Stirrup House you could provide no greater service than sharing this with people you think may care.

Colour Me Shocked!!! A Revolution In Condo World

In my world this is earthshaking news. It’s hard to describe in mere words just how shocking this is (which is why I also have pictures), but I’ll try because I’m a writer, dammit!!! This is the equivalent of discovering, late in life, that not only were you adopted, but so were both of your parents, and your parents’ parents. Nothing you ever believed makes any sense any more. It’s that shocking. Really. Trust me.

My parents’ condo complex was built 35-40 years ago; some 240 buildings of 30 units each, with almost no variation from building to building. Del Boca Vista, the Florida condo complex where Jerry Seinfeld’s tee vee parents retired, had to have been based on this community. However, the writers toned down the craziness because they knew how unbelievable it would be, even in a show about nothing. I moved in here after my Mom died to take care of Pops. Within weeks I had run afoul of the Condo Board President. At the next board meeting the bitch moved a motion to have me ejected from the complex. It was seconded and passed with nary a discussion, in contravention of condo by-laws, and I was ordered to leave within 10 days. That was 7 years ago and is a long, involved, Kafkaesque story I don’t care to get into here. However, it is indicative of how conformity is a way of life in this condo complex.

And, that includes the colours. Especially the colours. Oh, those colours!!!

Panorama showing 4 buildings in my complex. There are 236 other buildings just like them. Click to enlarge.

The pink wasn’t quite flamingo pink, nor was it Milk of Magnesia pink. It was a tedious and uninteresting pink. The brown accent was also dull and joyless, not quite chocolate or tan, but somewhere uncomfortably in the middle without having to make a declaration. And this is how it’s been for the past 4 decades. The incorporating documents of the complex stipulate that all the buildings will be the exact same colour. Every so many years the complex gets painted top to bottom, one end to the other. Whenever they’ve painted they have tried to match the colours as close as possible. However, there have always been slight variations from one painting to the next, or from one end of the complex to the other. It must be hard matching that much paint. It still amuses me to hear people complain about a paint job a few occasions back that came out far too pink and not quite brown enough. People were forced to live with it until the next painting. Let’s face it: The people here don’t like change, unless it’s to make a new condo by-law.

And then…suddenly…without warning…without any changes to the condo by-laws…without seemingly a whole lot of discussion…without our previous knowledge…a number of new colours have appeared on my building, and my building alone. And, just on my floor. And, just on my wing. Get a load of this:

No longer in the pink. My front door showing the bilious almost-yellow wall and not-quite-tan door.

My almost-yellow wall against my neighbour’s somewhat greenish-blueish wall.
Where my condo touches my neighbour’s condo. Note the old, not-really-pink in the foreground..
Close up detail of above. Four colours touch.

An intersection where the old colours (left) coexist with the new.

Several condo colour scemes: a slightly different almost-yellow and a slightly different greenish-blueish.

Several condo colour scemes.

Here’s what I have managed to cobble together: A new committee (comprised of whom I do not know) is going to select a new colour scheme for the entire complex. A decision was made (by whom I do not know) to paint a few sample colour schemes (chosen by whom I do not know) and have people live with them a while before deciding (with what input from the owners I cannot determine) what colour to paint the complex in the fall.

I LOVE IT!!! Aside from the sheer anarchy of the whole enterprise, suddenly we look like a happy and colourful community, instead of one with a foot already in the grave. My first suggestion was to make all the buildings multi-coloured, just like my floor is now. It creates a really vibrant look to the building, although I would have stuck more to a pastel/ice-cream pallet, which looks good in the Florida sunshine. However, I was told that that would be impossible because of the incorporating documents. My next suggestion was to choose several colour schemes and dot them around the complex, so that no two buildings next to each other were the same colour. Again, the incorporating documents make that impossible and the cost to change the incorporating documents, ie: the condo by-laws, is prohibitively expensive, according to someone in the know.

And therein lies the big Catch 22: These sample colour schemes themselves seem to contravene the condo by-laws. I have yet to hear if there was a vote by the Board of Directors, but the condo board cannot overrule the incorporating documents.

Short HOA rant: ‘Merkins willingly sign documents which give them almost no rights whatsoever. They allowed themselves to be ruled by capricious, mendacious, and sometimes criminal Boards of Directors. Here in “The Land of the Free and the Home of the Brave” ‘Merkins are legally prevented, and afraid, to paint their front door any colour they want, let alone add any other non-conforming element to the house or condo they think they own. Fun HOA trivia: HOAs were specifically invented to keep out Blacks and Jews. Eventually they lost that power (although it is still applied covertly by some condo boards; a charge that’s hard to prove), but that’s one of the few powers HOAs have lost over the years. Today condo boards are very powerful entities and can crush any dissent. Don’t believe me? My treatment when I moved in is Exhibit A. I publicly called the Board President a bully and, ironically, she set out to prove how right I was.

Meanwhile, until further notice, here’s my very colourful building in a very large panorama:

Colour my world. The 3 almost-yellows are not the same, nor are the two greenish-blueish.