When Janice Hahn first made the motion to return Bruce's Beach to one of the original owners for $20,000,000 I knew it would start a real estate gold rush for "lost land" and it has. Blacks, Latinos, Indigenous, whites and everyone else will all be asking for payment for lands once maybe owned by their ancestors.
While the return of Bruce's Beach was big news it did not set a legal precedent because it was a gift. There was no recent lawsuit. The county of Los Angeles did not have to give the land back to the Bruces. The Bruces ultimately agreed to sell the property for much, much more than market value back in the day after an eminent domain lawsuit which they lost. It wasn't "stolen" from them. Had they invested that money back into real estate they would have much more than $20,000,000 today but they didn't. They sold the real estate and spent the money. They recently said they will sell the property again. In essence the family sold the property twice both times for more than market value. Some are upset they aren't keeping it in the family to build generational wealth for black families. It's their property to do with as they please. The real cause of the wealth gap among whites, blacks, Latinos is the income gap.
Because of the Bruces' big payday many people are thinking about asking for compensation for land once owned by their ancestors or maybe they just rented it or lived there. Sometimes that land was sold fair and square. Other times it was taken through legal eminent domain, failure to pay taxes, legal abandonment, questionable transactions, outright theft or war.
While genealogical documents, old newspapers, old real estate deeds can show some ownership interests and transactions, that might not tell the whole story. How will we figure out who actually owned the rights to the property and whether or not they actually sold or transferred it fairly and legally? How will we figure out which descendants should be compensated, for how much and in what order?
In 1923 20-150 black people were murdered in the Rosewood Massacre. It was sanctioned by the local government. The people who survived fled in fear abandoning their real and personal property. By the 1990's some considered a lawsuit but evidence and statute of limitations issues ended those plans. Years later a politician filed a bill to compensate the children of some victims for the losses. The few that were left got about $150,000 each. I watched the film in 1997 and did most of the genealogical research for the Rosewood Cemetery. I personally feel they deserved much more compensation but, Florida.
UPDATE:03/2024 A bill was filed to seek reparations for families displaced in Chavez Ravine. ORIGINAL: In the 1950's Chavez Ravine properties were taken, bought by eminent domain. The owners were compensated for the land. Some sold outright. Some filed lawsuits. Dodgers Stadium ultimately ended up being built on the land. During the eminent domain proceedings there were holdouts who sued. They lost the lawsuits but did get over market value for the land at the time. The descendants of some are now talking about suing to get Bruces Beach type of money. Some didn't even own the land but were just renters or lived there with others for free. Some renters were given relocation fees. In fact most living in Chavez Ravine at the time were renters. Do their children who never lived there have a right to new compensation? The stories of eminent domain actions for Los Angeles freeways, government buildings, schools are all very similar. Poor people living in poor areas were displaced for government projects. The government chose the sites based on logistics, economic feasibility and property values. Gov had to choose a site that was cheaper to preserve gov funds per law. Race was not a consideration. Many times the people displaced were just poor whites.
There are already sufficient laws to protect real estate rights in our country. Anyone can file a lawsuit to try to reclaim land they feel rightly belongs to them. They just need to provide proper documentation. There's currently a system for clearing heir property with clouded title. Some of these cases go back a few generations over 100 years. But what about people who owned the land before the US existed? In my state of California the land was previously owned by Mexicans, Spaniards and Indigenous people in that reverse order. Who has the legal right to the land and compensation?
In a recent article on this issue "A New Front in Reparations: Seeking the Return of Lost Family Land" Thomas W. Mitchell, a law professor and director of the Initiative on Land, Housing & Property Rights at Boston College Law School, stated “We are talking about the loss of heritage and history and culture.” “You are talking about a fundamental hit in terms of economic mobility and generational wealth.” But whose heritage, history, culture and wealth are we talking about? Should claims by Native Americans take precedence based on chronological order? They definitely lost their "heritage, history, culture and generational wealth" besides their lives. Did they legally sell or give their land to US states and nations? No, it was stolen, taken by the Spaniards, French, Russians, US states, USA and private individuals through brute force. Is brute force, war a legal means of seizing property?
What about the Spaniards. Did they legally give all Spain owned land grants to Mexico after the Mexican revolution? Did the state of California legally acquire land from Mexico after the war? At least the California, Mexican, Spanish land grant documentation still exists but there were no grants from Native Americans. Generally possession over a period of time shows rights to the land. Perhaps because the Indians didn't have a paper deed written in English filed at the local county assessor's office showing they owned the land they never really owned it. If a tree falls in the forest and no one hears it...?
Bruce's Beach was originally owned by the Tongva Indians. There was no sign that said "Free land. Take whatever you want, kill us and send the rest of us on a death march to a small desolate area of the country." Should the Bruce family give the $20,000,000 to the Tongva Indians just like LA County gave it to them? Maybe the Tongva tribe should sue the Bruces? The Tongva weren't even allowed an eminent domain hearing. They were killed and forced off the land. Is that considered a legal real estate transaction? It's a legitimate question.
Another recent article talked about reparations and real estate in California. California was never a slave state yet a state commission was convened to study black slave reparations for residents. The commission considered papers and research on blacks, wealth, income and property. No reparations will be paid for many reasons. First and foremost the state doesn't have the funds. Second and more importantly one would need to consider reparations for all before you start handing out state money otherwise it's discrimination. There was already a black only Covid subsidy case which set legal precedent and reversed the subsidy. There are a lot of poor Latinos, Native Americans, Asians and even whites who are affected by some of the same negative influences in the Reparations Report. You don't have to be descended from slaves owned in another state to be poor in California. It was actually a good thing for those slaves and their descendants that their owners came to free state California because they were freed. They would have continued to be slaves in other states for much longer.
Latinos, Chinese, Japanese, everyone except the rich were taken advantage of for labor, real property, personal property through government actions all throughout California's history. Some Chinese were murdered in government sanctioned massacres and their property stolen. Others US citizens were expatriated to Mexico during the depression losing their land, jobs, income and all possessions. The Japanese were sent to internment camps but some have been compensated for some lost property. And don't forget about the Native Americans. Some were given rations and land but it was never equal to the land value of the US. Who gets reparations, land, how much and in what order?
In the article "Can Reparations Bring Black Residents back to San Francisco" linked above a woman talks about the old family home in Fillmore sold through eminent domain from her black grandfather. Her grandfather was paid market value for the property. Had he reinvested in real estate his family would have more money than the current value of their old home today. But they didn't. She still wants reparations for the value of the property. She also feels she personally should get the home back. What about the people who owned it before her? What about the Native Americans who owned the entire area and the Americas?
Descendants of black slaves weren't the only people living in blighted areas sold under eminent domain in California. Latinos, Asians, Italians, Irish, immigrants, Jews... poor people of every race and color including whites lived in those areas. Do they also get reparations? I realize it was the California Reparations Task Force which was formed to mainly look at reparations for the descendants of black slaves owned in other states and free black people who were in California by the 19th century. The purpose was to calculate racist and other harm done to black people. Still, the task force considered the economic effect of things which affected more than just descendants of black people. Other people experienced racism, colorism, sexism, genderism, religious persecution, people taking advantage of the poor... Will we revisit and re-litigate every act of eminent domain? Every land transfer? Every instance of a laborer being paid less than what they feel they were worth or due? Every murder and assault? Every slight ever made to another in California? Everyone would end up owing everyone else money and California would go broke.
Another woman in the article wants the tossed about figure of $5,000,000 per black Californian reparations so she can move back to expensive San Francisco. She states it's her home because she lived there when it was a less expensive blighted place. What about all the other poor people who also lived there and had to move? Blacks weren't the only people living there. What about the Indians who used to own it? It was their home for over 10,000 years. Currently they're trying to reclaim some of their land. They tried to reclaim Alcatraz but failed. They were given back some land in the form of reparations in the East Bay. Now they want to reclaim "Turtle Island" which is their name for all of North America.
So far we have no set answers but a Pandora's box full of question. We do at least have centuries of established real estate laws. Most of our real estate laws came from the British and are older their our own country. You sometimes see them cited in Supreme Court rulings. People have always been able to sue for these causes. We'll soon see if the courts will be flooded with lawsuits to unwind eminent domain actions and other real estate transactions. Title companies may be busy.
As I'm both a licensed real estate appraiser and genealogist perhaps this may be my new calling. I was able to figure out market value for Bruce's Beach property in 1920. I could appraise even older claims if I could find enough documentation. This may be the beginning of an interesting new era in genealogical real estate studies. Or we could just give Turtle Island back to Native Americans, go back to our ancestral countries and be done with it.
References:
AB 3121 Reparations Task Force Report https://oag.ca.gov/ab3121/reports
Mary Cummins of Cummins Real Estate is a certified residential licensed appraiser in Los Angeles, California. Mary Cummins is licensed by the California Bureau of Real Estate appraisers and has over 35 years of experience.
Mary Cummins, Mary K. Cummins, Mary Katherine Cummins, Mary, Cummins, #marycummins #animaladvocates #losangeles #california #wildlife #wildliferehabilitation #wildliferehabilitator #realestate #realestateappraiser #realestateappraisal #lawsuit real estate, appraiser, appraisal, instructor, teacher, Los Angeles, Santa Monica, Beverly Hills, Pasadena, Brentwood, Bel Air, California, licensed, permitted, certified, single family, condo, condominium, pud, hud, fannie mae, freddie mac, fha, uspap, certified, residential, certified resident, apartment building, multi-family, commercial, industrial, expert witness, civil, criminal, orea, dre, brea insurance, bonded, experienced, bilingual, spanish, english, form, 1004, 2055, 1073, land, raw, acreage, vacant, insurance, cost, income approach, market analysis, comparative, theory, appraisal theory, cost approach, sales, matched pairs, plot, plat, map, diagram, photo, photographs, photography, rear, front, street, subject, comparable, sold, listed, active, pending, expired, cancelled, listing, mls, multiple listing service, claw, themls, historical appraisal, facebook, linkedin
DISCLAIMER: https://mary--cummins.blogspot.com/p/disclaimer-privacy-policy-for-blogs-by.html
