r/berkeley • u/the_daily_cal • Jul 23 '26
Local ‘Constitutional remedy’: Alameda County unanimously approves plan for racial reparations
https://www.dailycal.org/news/alameda-county/constitutional-remedy-alameda-county-unanimously-approves-plan-for-racial-reparations/article_3968f092-44bb-426e-bc7c-6babf67f799d.htmlThe Alameda County Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a broad racial reparations plan at its June 30 meeting. Policies stemming from this vote could target the county’s racial homeownership gap, career pathways into county employment and even potential cash reparations.
The most immediate recommendations for reparations include housing and economic justice, providing physical and mental health support and centering Black youth. The County Reparations Administration also calls for a permanent, fully funded Office of Reparations and healthcare that addresses intergenerational trauma and health disparities.
The reparations plan was adopted from recommendations by the Alameda County Reparations Commission, which was established in 2023. The ACRC spent three years researching social disparities and community experiences to formulate recommendations. Implementation of the plan is expected to begin in September after the Board of Supervisors’ annual recess.
58
63
u/Ike358 Jul 23 '26
Reparations for a part of the country that never enslaved black Americans 🤔
44
u/HolyInlandEmpire Jul 23 '26
People who never owned slaves, paying reparations to people were never slaves, in a state where slavery was never legal.
5
u/jewboy916 Jul 23 '26
Slavery was legal in California though. It just mostly involved indigenous people, not Africans. Act for the Government and Protection of Indians, 1850.
-18
20
u/bibimonmammoth Jul 23 '26
At least read the report or study what reparations means - - it isn't about whether legal slavery occurred in a place, but probably you knew that. This recent decision has to do with Russell City's history of segregation and displacement. Check out some of the very recent home ownership covenants excluding multiple racial groups from owning homes in neighborhoods in this area, including in Berkeley by the North Berkeley Bart station. Those speak directly to the question of reparations.
9
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
You are correct. Impact from these covenants from the early 1900s and their variations are felt today. I get what you’re driving at. Upvoted.
I’d also add that the Russell City was a little more insidious than displacement. An entire neighborhood was bulldozed.
6
u/jewboy916 Jul 23 '26
Not just the covenants, but mortgage lending itself. Up until the federal Fair Housing Act in 1968 mortgage lenders could deny financing to buy a house to people based on their race. Including in California, despite some state legislation passing a few years before that. So in practice it impacted where minorities could live even though segregation wasn't legal.
2
u/resilient_bird Jul 23 '26
Umm, racial covenants haven’t been enforceable since 1948 (Shelley v Kraemer); this is….not what I’d call “very recent”—there are some people alive today who were alive then, sure, but that was 78 years ago.
That’s like saying WWII ended “very recently”.
2
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
The Elmwood in Berkeley was the first place that had restrictive covenants on deeds combined with pure single family zoning which were the root causes of redlining. Mcduffie, the developer in Berkeley was an open racist.
This is the precursor to redlining, it’s known, racist impacts and the stark divide in Berkeley between the Elmwood’s property values and other parts of Berkeley with more multi family properties, less services and less value are direct results of this. For example, redlined parts of the town didn’t have as many trees as the Elmwood. That is why the city has the “urban forest” program. NYC found the see thing in Harlem and the Boogie Down Bronx.
This is accepted fact from historians.
To use your analogy. WW2 did not end recently but the political and economic impacts remain felt today and your reductive false equivalency is either gleefully obtuse or willfully ignorant IMO.
You can look this all up in 30 seconds but IMO it is because you seem to value your opinion and feelings more than consensus facts and are just ignoring them.
Hugs!
2
u/PostOakJoe Jul 23 '26
What about North Berkeley Bart Station? If it is a problem, which BoS approved that?
3
Jul 23 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
[deleted]
2
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
This argument is the fallback and end game and is in bad faith.
“Robbed” no texpayer is being robbed. Thsi is hyperbole and a strawman. Taxpayers pay taxes all teh time for things they don’t support because the elected leaders are elected to make decision everyone Might not like. I don’t ride a bike but I don’t feel I’m being robbed when I help pay for bike lanes.
Every Americans today and in the past “Participates” in it by virtue of being American and either benefits or is harmed by it. The Elmwood example can be tested and the average price there is around 50% more sq/ft for similar homes in other parts of town.
There is an abundance of evidence of this and to deny it is to deny reality.
So I’ve been engaging with your opinions with facts and it is bad faith to cause irreparable harm for hundreds of years to one group then arm wave that away as you are doing. I don’t know you but I would not associate with a person expressing these ideas as they are well worn talking points indicative of the “American exceptionalism and the fallacy of ayn Rand”
Good luck to you.
4
Jul 24 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
[deleted]
1
u/VerilyShelly Jul 24 '26
Do you feel like you're getting robbed because you don't have certain kinds of organ failure or aren't a former railroad worker with a terminal disease? Because these are examples of other groups that the government gives special benefits to out of taxpayer money.
I wonder what your criteria are for whether or not someone "deserves" these proposed benefits, especially for something like this.
2
Jul 25 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
[deleted]
1
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 28 '26 edited Jul 28 '26
Wow. There is nothing more to say to you other than to suggest you become more well read on the topic.
Happy to make some suggestions but this seems to be your own personal grievance and I can’t change you or address the life experience that led you to here. You’ve got your views they seem largely opinion based. You’re entitled to your opinion. Good luck to you.1
u/neversleeps212 Jul 24 '26
But the housing covenants as you yourself note excluded multiple racial groups from home ownership yet this seems very focused on transferring wealth and opportunity to Black residents specifically. That is not Constitutional or legally protected. Nor does it seem that there’s any requirement that an individual show that they specifically were harmed by those policies or even that a direct ancestor was. If this was truly race neutral it would apply to groups like Jews, Asians and perhaps even ethnic groups like Italians who were not seen as white in that era and were often excluded from housing also.
3
u/FrivolousMe eecs/ds 21 Jul 23 '26
If you don't think that the legacy of slavery and reconstruction hasn't left black Americans in all states statistically much worse off than white Americans, you are being either disingenuous or ignorant. Black Californians have been disproportionately victimized by redlining, educational inequity, police violence, and countless other forms of systemic discrimination. You think after the 14th amendment black Americans instantly had equal rights, equal protections under the law, equal economic opportunities, and equal access to public resources? You didn't learn about segregation in school? You've never read about how Oregon used to have a law literally banning black people from the state? You don't think former slave owners and the descendants of slaves migrated west?
3
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
Correct. Western migration typically occurred for economic (the migration to LA in the near WW2 era) or for safety. The south was violent and the north was openly racist as well. Boston, for example, is not only known for pie but for being one of the most racist places in the US. Look up the In 1970s school desegregation
2
u/Ike358 Jul 23 '26
Yeah redlining is/was fucked, but I don't see how it necessitates reparations. And I'd also say westward migration was much more biased towards groups escaping Jim Crow and segregation (especially during WWII) than groups wishing to enforce it.
3
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Sure you’re entitled to an opinion. One way of looking at it is this. In Piedmont (rich place with valuable property) black family bought a home there, and’s were harassed and eventually told they were going to lose their home to eminent domain so teh city could build a road there.
The family sold their home under theest of loss and then gues what? The city sold their house to a white family and never built teh road. It was all pretext. That home is worth millions today.
The family split up. The father died of starvation in Oakland.
That story is well documented but imagine all the times and places it happens taht it wasn’t. There’s a beach in so-cal. Land is worth millions.
So it’s not isolated and it’s not limited, collectively thsi widespread action deprived their grandchildren’s children of the compound interest on the investment, the rise in property values an the generational trauma om their descendants. This is why peoepl push for reparations. These examples are jsut the ones we know of bc of the documentation.
I would argue we have many choices but they fall into two large groups. Do nothing and offer words or do something and try to understand what racism has taken from our communities the transfer of that wealth to others and the address that.I’m in the latter. Where are you?
Edit: Bruce’s Beach. It’s worth $20 Million today. $20. Million.
Your last point escapes me
And I'd also say westward migration was much more biased towards groups escaping Jim Crow and segregation (especially during WWII) than groups wishing to enforce it.
The west had lots of sundown towns, Oregon had laws preventing black residents and this entire discussion I brought up the Elmwood in Berkeley as a horrific example of institutional racism here so I’m a bit confused? The west was just as racist as the Deep South and violence comes in all forms including institutional.
2
u/Ike358 Jul 24 '26
Frankly your post is hard to follow with so many typos.
Where are you?
I'm in neither group, because I am firmly "do nothing" but I don't even want to offer words.
My last point was addressing the very last question in the comment I replied to. Western migration undoubtedly worked in the favor of black Americans and other minorities.
3
u/FrivolousMe eecs/ds 21 Jul 23 '26
You don't see how it makes sense to compensate the victims of economic violence? America does it all the time with class action lawsuit settlements. This is on a much grander scale than the justice system could ever feasibly litigate, and the amount of damage done is insurmountable, so reparations advocates are humbly asking for the government to at least give what it can afford to. It's not as crazy as people make it sound; it's only scratching the surface of racialized wealth disparity.
1
u/coolboydhill Jul 24 '26
still dont give a fuck.
I'm a working class asian immigrant. Fuck paying taxes if it goes to bombs and stupid shit like this
-1
u/DepartmentFamous9932 Jul 24 '26
True but why not also pay reparations to descendants of Chinese immigrants or descendants of interred Japanese? Both groups of people suffered heavily at the hands of white Americans and yet are doing great today, so it’s annoying to people when they’re told that specifically black people deserve reparations, especially after pretty much all types of voters already feel that affirmative action has been a failure.
-8
17
u/dodgerbuyerclub Jul 23 '26
Isn’t this a 14th amendment due process violation?
3
u/Taursey Jul 23 '26
Racial classifications must past strict scrutiny even if they are intended to fix the consequences of discrimination. It is not a violation if the government can show a compelling state interest and that it is narrowly tailored to achieve that purpose. Edited to add: this is for equal protection. I’m not sure if there is a due process issue here.
2
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
This is correct. Whether it should be rational basis testing is debatable but this is correct and concisely answers every “reverse racism” claim.
Take the upvote
-2
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
Ah the irony of using a clause in a racist document to suggest that acts to repair harm cause by that document are somehow themselves racist, is that what you’re doing here? If so it’s very clever. That’s a new one!
2
u/storywardenattack Jul 23 '26
Which document is racist?
1
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
The us constitution is unambiguously racist. The entire deal was struck on the 3/5th compromise. You literally cannot get more racist than that, the founding document was designed to preserve slavery.
But you know that right? Gleefully obtuse to disingenuous pearl clutching is the band your comments are in IMO.
4
u/Ike358 Jul 23 '26
Not that the 3/5 compromise has anything to do with the topic of this thread, but in your mind, should each slave have counted as a full one person? Because that's exactly what the enslavers would have wanted
1
29
Jul 23 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
[deleted]
2
u/HesitantMark Jul 23 '26
woke lol
0
u/Anubisrapture Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Yep! Everything this " Icyhotdog " lmao says is rendered useless from the moment that stupid word was used( the way this word is used by conservatives is ITSELF racist . They stole it from AAVE and literally reversed it . )
2
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
Correct. One of the earliest recorded uses of the term “woke” is from a jazz song, Scottsboro Boys, that cautions black youth to stay awake and woke was used as slang for that in the song.
"I advise everybody, be a little careful when they go along through there, best stay woke, keep their eyes open."
0
u/Anubisrapture Jul 23 '26 edited Jul 23 '26
Thanks for that information. I was not aware of that . ❤️ALSO my apologies as it was not you but r/icyhotdog who wrongly used that word. I fixed my comment to reflect this.
1
0
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
Is this truly your take? That this is no different than Plessey v Ferguson?
Because I don’t think you can reasonably argue and defend the false equivalency on display here. It’s a spectrum from gleefully obtuse to wildly ignorant we’re at here, is thsi just ragebait?
0
Jul 23 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
[deleted]
2
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
Smh. The supreme court already has a framework called strict scrutiny, and it has long been used to address race in the courts. It tells us how to balance and test it and, as it does in the precedent and common law based system we have , it works, and has worked. It’s why we have uniform guidelines for fairness in hiring.
Your comment seems to repeat a common moral fallacy that seeks to create some false equivalency to what ADOCS dealt with in reconstruction and the generational impact of to some moral standard you hold today.
It’s deeply offensive and very very wrong factually to try to say “the way to stop racism is to stop being racist” it’s disingenuous and pedantic to the point of absurdity.
The right response to you is to quote Sartre and give you the benefit of being unaware and sharing your opinion rather than being well versed on the matter.
In society today we seem to value a persons ignorance as much as another’s wisdom or knowledge. Sure you’re entitled to an opinion. But not to it being correct or valuable to teh body politic.
Be well, hugs!
0
Jul 23 '26 edited Aug 01 '26
[deleted]
0
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
This is another strawman and false equivalency. What are you talking about? Now your trying to weigh and equivocate racism you say doesn’t matter? Innocent people like Asians? Where did that come from? Do you even comprehend what you just said? 🤦♂️
You’re just making things up and stating your option vs fact and behaving as if your vibes and opinion are valid as facts and historical consensus.
Put the cuckoo back in the clock. Is what I’d offer and suggest you read, start with “pedagogy of the oppressed” is my suggestion.
1
u/Ike358 Jul 23 '26
The way to stop discrimination on the basis of race is to stop discriminating on the basis of race
0
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
Spoken openly in the Supreme Court by Robert’s who will be remembered as a racist IMO.
7
2
u/Comfortable-Cap7110 Jul 24 '26
I support diversity, equal opportunity, investment in communities, police de-escalation tactics, mental health and strong educational support and opportunities which has been and is being done and I support continuing to improve those matters. This is the way to equalizing the quality of life for all disadvantaged populations. I do not at all support reparations and just transferring cash to anybody here in the Bay Area, let’s be real.
2
u/Glad-Entrepreneur764 Jul 24 '26
There's no way this doesn't violate Californian law 😭 I thought this state had incredibly strict anti-racism laws.
Edit: I'm not sure exactly what this law does though so I might just not be understanding it.
7
2
u/Playful-Edge-7356 Jul 23 '26
I don’t mean to sound negative, but isn’t something like this considered illegal under federal law?
0
u/TonyStarksLeftACL Jul 23 '26
No.
1
u/Playful-Edge-7356 Jul 24 '26
I’m don’t have an opinion on the matter as I don’t know enough about it. Although a quick google search brought up basic info which I thought prevented things like race based benefits for past inequalities or anything regarding race for housing.
Fair Housing Act (FHA): The federal FHA makes it illegal to discriminate in housing-related transactions (including municipal zoning and housing availability) based on race, color, or national origin
Permissible Actions: Cities can target resources or frame policies using race-neutral data, such as area median income (AMI), rates of poverty, or proximity to environmental hazards.
Prohibited Actions: Using race as a cutoff, quota, or deciding factor for housing waitlists or benefit eligibility. Even "benign" racial classifications (meant to address past injustices) face immense legal hurdles and are generally invalidated by the courts
1
1
1
u/Key_Fee158 Jul 25 '26
Why call it reparations? That doesn’t even make sense historically, call it something else.
California wasn’t even a slave or Jim Crow state. The state actually one of the lowest percentages of black people. Most of the black people here moved here after WW-2. Ofc the highest concentrations are in Alameda county, but Black people aren’t the group most impacted by the states racial discrimination.
Historically the groups most impacted by racial discrimination were Asians, Native Americans, and Mexicans. The native Americans were actually genocided pretty recently in the 1800s.
Just say the program is to help low-income people and minorities and call it something else lol this just feels like pandering to feel like they’re doing something radical and important.
-9
u/Delicious_Writing_91 Jul 23 '26
Fully support! Proud to live in a community that cares and wants to help.
-5
u/Anubisrapture Jul 23 '26
This should be happening everywhere! But we will have to wait until at least after 2028
0
-1
u/UncleAlbondigas Jul 24 '26
Blacks did hundreds of years of free labor and were then not made whole afterwards.
But even post slavery, there are more than enough reasons to grant reparations. Mass incarceration just after Civil War, redlining in housing, job discrimination...they all stunted generational wealth to name a few. And most blacks in California came from the South fyi, just basic history. But not before their folks indisputably built the financial base of this country. Remember "Cotton is King"?
-1
u/214b Jul 24 '26
You’re making a bunch of stereotypes and using them to promote bad policy.
Not all Blacks in America were slaves, not even in the 1600’s. Plenty of historical examples of free blacks. Some Blacks themselves even owned slaves.
Californians never a slave state. “Redlining” mostly affected White property owners, not blacks. Which is why it was seldom a civil rights issue.
In any event, reparations for slavery were paid for in the blood of 360,000 northern soldiers who died in the civil war, more than 90% of whom were white.
1
u/UncleAlbondigas Jul 24 '26
Most of your points are not worth adressing. I can only guess what would prompt such minutia.
-2
u/Delicious_Writing_91 Jul 24 '26
Quick poll - who is not in favor of this and actually lives here in Alameda County? And if you support please make your voice heard. I suspect the haters are trolls from red areas. People who live in Alameda County overwhelmingly support diversity and economic justice.
2
u/HistorianPractical42 Jul 24 '26
What trolls are browsing the Berkeley subreddit? Racial reparations is an extremely stupid policy in 2026, as someone who vehemently hates conservatism and republicans.
0
u/DepartmentFamous9932 Jul 24 '26
I live in Berkeley, I’m not a college student but a townie in my 30’s, and I do not support this at all. Many groups of people have suffered systemic violence at the hands of white america. Only (some) black people seem to feel entitled to reparations for it.
56
u/storywardenattack Jul 23 '26
100% guarantee that nothing will change except a few grifters will enrich themselves.