RACE LA County Supervisor: the US need to give back 'stolen' land to black families (OP April 2021)

Cyanatic

Contributing Member
Bolding within the article is mine. Opening Pandora's Box...

Link: LA County Supervisor says the US needs to give 'stolen' land back to black families | Daily Mail Online

'We stole it': LA County Supervisor demands land taken from black people across the US is given to their descendants after she handed $72m property to relatives of family forced out a century ago
  • Janice Hahn, LA County Supervisor, on Friday urged other local governments to follow her lead
  • On April 9 Los Angeles County officials announced seaside land was being returned to descendants of a black couple, Charles and Willa Bruce
  • The Bruces bought land on Manhattan Beach in 1912 and opened a resort along a then-undeveloped stretch
  • In 1924 city officials seized two dozen properties through eminent domain and said that a park would be built
  • The Bruces fought the city in court, lost, and left the area: the proposed park was not built for decades
  • The family are yet to say what they will do with the land, which some estimate is worth around $72m
By HARRIET ALEXANDER FOR DAILYMAIL.COM

PUBLISHED: 22:13 EDT, 23 April 2021 | UPDATED: 04:02 EDT, 24 April 2021

The United States should follow the example of Los Angeles County and 'make amends' with black Americans by returning land which was owned by their ancestors and taken from them, the county supervisor has said.

Janice Hahn on April 9 announced a historic first for the nation, giving back land wrongfully taken from black owners to their descendants.


The land in question, a beachfront plot in Manhattan Beach, Los Angeles, was taken from the owners under eminent domain, or forced sale, in 1924. It is now worth an estimated $72 million.

Hahn on Friday told TMZ that other local governments should follow her lead.

'I think this is the first time in our nation that a government has given land back to an African American family to make amends for past discrimination and atrocities and policies that were enacted, that really limited African Americans' ability to own businesses, to own property, to even buy homes in certain neighborhoods,' she said.

'This is a very small step towards what I think this whole country should be doing - and that is working to repair and to make amends with the African Americans in this country.'

Hahn further said that a widespread apology was necessary for the historic wrongs.

'We as a collective society should apologize - not just to African Americans, but to indigenous Americans,' she said.


'There are a lot of people we should probably apologize to for how we literally stole land for public benefit.'

Hahn said that, despite growing up in Los Angeles County, she was unaware of the story in her own community.

'I learnt to swim in the ocean a couple of blocks from this lot, and I never knew this story,' she said.

'I always thought the atrocities against African Americans happened in the South.

'Because I grew up in LA, we never saw drinking fountains that were labelled colored or white, so I felt like we in LA County sort of escaped some of those horrible injustices that were inflicted on African Americans in our country.'

She then discovered, around a year ago, that 'we had this story right here in our back yard, in Manhattan Beach.'

She added: 'When I looked at the plot map and realized that through a series of land transfers, the property that was the original Bruces' Beach resort was now owned by the county of Los Angeles, I knew in my heart there was only one thing to do, and that was to figure out how to give the land back.'

Los Angeles County now plans to return prime beachfront property to descendants of the black couple, Willa and Charles Bruce, who built a seaside resort for African Americans.

The story of the Bruce family caught the eye of a Los Angeles county supervisor who earlier this year started looking into what could be done to make things right, according to ABC.

Advocates and others had for years been telling the story of the Bruce family - and the remaining members of the family itself had been speaking out over what they saw as the injustice.

The Bruces and their son, Harvey, came from New Mexico during the early 1900s and were among the first black people to settle in what would become the city of Manhattan Beach.

The city of Manhattan Beach issued a statement acknowledging and condemning its city's actions from the early 20th century - but the statement stopped short of a formal apology.

The site, known as Bruce Beach, now has a county lifeguard training headquarters building on the property. It is along some of the most coveted coastline in Southern California.

The property encompasses two parcels purchased in 1912 by the Bruces, who built the first West Coast resort for black people at a time when segregation barred them from many beaches.

They built a lodge, café, dance hall and dressing tents with bathing suits for rent.

Initially it was known as Bruce's Lodge.

'Bruce's Beach became a place where black families traveled from far and wide to be able to enjoy the simple pleasure of a day at the beach,' Hahn said.

It did not last long.

The Bruces and their customers were harassed by white neighbors, and the Ku Klux Klan attempted to burn it down.

Charles Bruce was often out of town, working as a dining car chef on trains to Salt Lake City, so it was Willa Bruce who bought the property and handled much of the business at the resort.

She had purchased for $1,225 the first of two lots along the Strand between 26th and 27th streets.

'Wherever we have tried to buy land for a beach resort, we have been refused,' she told The Los Angeles Times in 1912.

'But I own this land and I am going to keep it.'

The Manhattan Beach City Council finally used eminent domain to take the land away from the Bruces in the 1920s, purportedly for use as a park.

Eminent domain is when a government body takes private land for public use - oftentimes to build infrastructure like a highway.

The Bruces fought the eminent domain order in court, but lost their case. The city paid them $14,500, and they left their beach and lost their business.

'The Bruces had their California dream stolen from them,' said Hahn, announcing the news at an April 9 press conference.

'And this was an injustice inflicted not just upon Willa and Charles Bruce but generations of their descendants who almost certainly would have been millionaires if they had been able to keep this property and their successful business.'

The value of the property has not been assessed, officials said.

However, homes along the sea front, known as The Strand, regularly sell for around $20 million.

One blog estimated that the land alone was worth $72 million.

The family are yet to say whether they will sell it for developers, or keep it in the family.

A return of the land could include an option for the Bruce descendants to lease the land back to the county for continued use.

Their case aroused anger. Members of the NAACP participated in a 'swim-in' to assert their right to the sea in 1927, and several black beachgoers were arrested that year.

One of their descendants, Anthony Bruce, 38, said it was time to correct a historic wrong.

'I just want justice for my family,' he told The New York Times.

He now lives in Florida and has childhood memories of visiting the California land his relatives once owned.

Another descendant described the 1920s decision as a 'scar' on his family.

'What we want is restoration of our land to us, and restitution for the loss of revenues,' said Duane Yellow Feather Shepard, 69, a relative of the Bruces who lives in Los Angeles and is a chief of the Pocasset Wampanoag Tribe of the Pokanoket Nation.

'It's been a scar on the family, financially and emotionally.'

Both descendants told the paper that the issue was about more than just their family.

'We've been stripped of any type of legacy, and we're not the only family that this has happened to,' said Shepard. 'It's happened all over the United States.'

The Bruce's Beach decision comes at a time some see as a reckoning in relation to land rights.

Last month Evanston in Illinois became the first city to announce it would pay reparations to black homeowners, in recognition of the horrors of slavery.

After lying unused for years, the land was transferred to the state of California in 1948 and in 1995 it was transferred to Los Angeles County for beach operations and maintenance.

The last transfer came with restrictions that limit the ability to sell or transfer the property and can only be lifted through a new state law, Hahn said.

State Senator Steven Bradford said that he will introduce legislation, SB 796, that would exempt the land from those restrictions.

'After so many years we will right this injustice,' he said.

If the law passes, the transfer to the descendants would have to be approved by the county's five-member Board of Supervisors, said Liz Odendahl, Hahn's director of communications.

Manhattan Beach is now an affluent city of about 35,000 people within Los Angeles County on the south shore of Santa Monica Bay.

Its picturesque pier juts into swells prized by surfers, and luxury residences have replaced many of the beach houses along an oceanfront walk called The Strand.

According to Census data, its population is 78 per cent white and 0.5 per cent black.

The current City Council this week formally acknowledged and condemned city leaders' efforts in the early 20th century to displace the Bruces and several other black families, but stopped short of formally apologizing, Southern California News Group reported.

'We offer this Acknowledgement and Condemnation as a foundational act for Manhattan Beach's next one hundred years,' a document approved by the council says.

'And the actions we will take together, to the best of our abilities, in deeds and in words, to reject prejudice and hate and promote respect and inclusion.'

A hill rising steeply behind the beachfront property has a beach parking lot and above that is an ocean-view city park that was renamed Bruce's Beach in 2006.

The lot and park were not part of the Bruces' property and would not be part of a transfer to the family, Odendahl said.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
We stole it from the Indians
Read article - the land was taken by eminent domain for the construction by the government of a "seaside park."

Not built for DECADES, and even then transferred to the state protection under "beaches," I.e. environmental feelz.

And Black Family fought the law and the law won.

This was a time where a black human's right could be and was trampled. I can't say this as fact in this case - but its sounding like someone got a tail strand across their butt and decided to "buy out" the Black ownership. $14K plus WAS a lot of money in that time. And how can one County Supervisor or even a group of them, decide of their own volition to vacate a judicial eminent domain procedure - even one from nearly a century before.

At the very least the land today has to be sold "at market value" after auction or other "fair" selling procedure - like any other excess city property.

Note what she says:

'I think this is the first time in our nation that a government has given land back to an African American family to make amends for past discrimination and atrocities and policies that were enacted, that really limited African Americans' ability to own businesses, to own property, to even buy homes in certain neighborhoods,' she said.

This is "feelz" - not economics. NOt even good Administrative management. How long before feelz gives another of favor advantage, and deprives the taxpayer of asset?

It is not for one or a group of county supervisors to make decision based on feelz.

Dobbin
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
Seaside property IS worth a lot more now.

Owner's grandfather bought a cottage in Pocasset, MA (Cape Cod) - front row typical victorian cottage much like all the others built around 1900 or so. No heat, kerosene lights, outhouse - all the amenities of 1926 for a then price of $2000. About half the price of a full blown 4 bedroom house on a city lot.

Owner's father sold the updated, electrified, not winterized cottage in 1968 for $20K. A fair amount of money for then but this a front-line walk down to the beach abode. The money went to help construction of a 2 bedroom city lot house total price about $48K. (again, about 2x the price of beach cottage.)

Today that cottage has been winterized but otherwise much as it was. Current valuation by the town is $2M - on a 1/4 acre lot. And this number is probably low. Owner has said "I can't even afford the taxes on the Pocasset Cottage."

I would guess a 1920s property taken for $14.5K today would be worth $145M. (10X - like Pocasset.)

But who knew what it would be worth?

Dobbin
 
Last edited:

ChicagoMan74

ULTRA MAGA
It never goes the other way...does it? My grandparents/uncles/other friends and family all had to lament back in the day...having to move out of THEIR neighborhoods because of crime brought in by the Amish. All residential and commercial buildings that were a sight to behold...essentially stolen from them and are now mostly ghetto hoods. All right by public transportation...all right by the major expressways (you know, areas that would be great for people that worked) What recourse do THEY get? This was some classic architecture, now mostly ruined and burned out...OH...and I might say...most of which was built by the same white-folk that lived in them. AARGH. Examples below of some of the few restored properties of what I'm referring to:

1619274376839.png

1619274403491.png

1619274431477.png



1619274718420.png
 

et2

TB Fanatic
America was not founded by blacks ... end of story. There were and still are ... the indigenous people who lived on these lands before us. The blacks are imports ... it‘s not there land. If they really want to go down their stupid road of racism. The land should be given back to the Indians.

Maybe whites should have a battle with blacks, just so they have some skin in the game ... the winner takes all.


Blacks absolutely destroy anyplace they live. Take Detroit as a perfect example. They’re parasites.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
Does it set a precedence for properties taken by eminent domain, too?
Yes, imagine the White Construct of "established fair market value paid by taxpayers for a benefit to the public at large."

I can't think of anything more "White."

It must be raycist.

Dobbin
 

TKO

Veteran Member
America was not founded by blacks ... end of story. There were and still are ... the indigenous people who lived on these lands before us. The blacks are imports ... it‘s not there land. If they really want to go down their stupid road of racism. The land should be given back to the Indians.

Maybe whites should have a battle with blacks, just so they have some skin in the game ... the winner takes all.


Blacks absolutely destroy anyplace they live. Take Detroit as a perfect example. They’re parasites.
Blacks aren't builders. Look at Africa. It never will be anything worth much. Whitey is a builder, explorer, and civilizer. Having said that, there are some dang solid Bible scholars in Africa. Solid to the core.
 

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked
Wrong race.
We stole it from the Indians
Not so. We beat them in war, and took it over by right of conquest.
This is how most land has changed possession during the time men have existed.

go-back-to-where-you-came-from-comic1.png
 
Last edited:

Farmgal

Senior Member
The Federal, State and local governments have used eminent domain powers on landowners in which land was taken "for the public good." Millions of acres have been taken by government or private entities using the governmental powers. All races of landowners who have been through this process have horror stories of being forced off their land.
 

Dobbin

Faithful Steed
All races of landowners who have been through this process have horror stories of being forced off their land.
It is a natural human tendency to consider one was forced into a bad deal by Eminent Domain. There is some "negotiating" in the process. Generally the government looks on the negotiation as one of "total cost." That is, the cost of the offer, to which is added the cost of defending it, to which is added the delay cost of the project of intention.

Generally the government will revise any Eminent Domain offer upwards simply to minimize the next two. But this has limits.

Sometimes delaying in the hope of a better deal can be counterproductive. An early counter for somewhat above the initial offer may be the best and most remunerative path.

And despite this, the seller may still feel "taken" simply because there is compulsion involved.

While designed to be a "fair value" economically, it can't possibly evaluate familial connection, heritage, or simply one's pleasure of location.

And truthfully, were my field sold by Owner to developers, I would feel mightily disappointed. So I can understand.

I LOVE my field.

Dobbin
 

Pinecone

Has No Life - Lives on TB
FIL's business property was taken due to Eminent Domain about 1985 because the city of Lawndale, CA, a couple miles from Manhattan Beach, wanted to build an industrial park and shopping center there. Maybe the city should return the property to our family! Oh, FIL is white. Not gonna happen.

Every single day I think things can't get much crazier, and then someone proves me wrong.
 

LoupGarou

Ancient Fuzzball
...
She had purchased for $1,225 the first of two lots along the Strand between 26th and 27th streets.

'Wherever we have tried to buy land for a beach resort, we have been refused,' she told The Los Angeles Times in 1912.

'But I own this land and I am going to keep it.'

The Manhattan Beach City Council finally used eminent domain to take the land away from the Bruces in the 1920s, purportedly for use as a park.

Eminent domain is when a government body takes private land for public use - oftentimes to build infrastructure like a highway.

The Bruces fought the eminent domain order in court, but lost their case. The city paid them $14,500, and they left their beach and lost their business.
...

Let them buy it back from the county/state for the $14,500 that they were paid back then.

My issue is that TPTB are now classifying EVERYTHING they want to do under the INFRASTRUCTURE idea. So let's read that middle sentence one more time:

Eminent domain is when a government body takes private land for public use - oftentimes to build infrastructure like a highway.

What happens when they declare their "New Bill of Rights" (the one that the first Commie in Chief, FDR tried to push)? The one that tries to push the idea for things like "Housing", and "Happiness" (Freedom from Want) as a "Right"....
Check out a few here:

If they can take anything (or everything) under the guise of "Infrastructure", then they can take ANYBODY's property, keep it, and "rent" it out to anyone they want through taxation. Wonder why all of the car companies are now switching to only making a few cars, and most of them electric (limited range, lower maintenance, no fuel needed but you have to have electricity)? Wonder why they are building houses like there are going to be 3 to 4 times the current population in the area now? Wonder why they are trying to mix everybody in the 'burbs and burn the cities out? Figure a world where everything is taken away from you, and you have to rent it back. Figure a world where you have a "job" that TPTB send you to in or near the city, and you have to work there, you can't "find" a job on your own. Figure a world with a LOT more automation (read central planning meets robots and a LOT less humans. Figure a world where your choice for transportation is limited to where THEY want you to go and how THEY want you to get there... And if you don't want to play their game or by the new rules, then they have "options" for you (Every socialist/communist country LOVES those "options", just read up about Aktion T4 or Aktion 14f13...).

It's amazing how fast their BS "Utopias" turn to an insane Dystopia... It's all in the name of "theft" through equality/equity, has been since the beginning. Selling your (and trying to sell everyone else's) soul to gain the world...
 

Housecarl

On TB every waking moment
Considering LA politics back in the 1920s, never mind now, the only surprise I have is that the original owners did as well as they did in court against the taking by the county, which isn't saying much.
 

LoupGarou

Ancient Fuzzball
FIL's business property was taken due to Eminent Domain about 1985 because the city of Lawndale, CA, a couple miles from Manhattan Beach, wanted to build a convention center there. Then they didn't build the convention center. Maybe the city should return the property to our family! Oh, FIL is white. Not gonna happen.

Every single day I think things can't get much crazier, and then someone proves me wrong.

I would have fun with that. Especially if they are trying to set a precident. If they force the issue for one class, they have to do it for others...
 

Pinecone

Has No Life - Lives on TB
I would have fun with that. Especially if they are trying to set a precident. If they force the issue for one class, they have to do it for others...
Yeah, but they won't. I had to edit that post because evidently they did build it. But FIL had to move because someone else wanted his property and the city thought a larger business was more important than his.
 

Kathy in FL

Administrator
_______________
They'll sell it and have to pay Bai-dan's 50% capital gains in addition to any property taxes they owe on the property before they sell it. They won't follow the local codes and they'll probably have fines to pay for that. AND you also have to consider Cali state's tax on top of what they will owe the IRS. They also undoubtedly owe the lawyers a good bit and you know they'll collect one way or the other, even if it is through a forced sale.

They'll walk away with a couple ten thousand dollars ... maybe. Those lawyers are going to want a serious cut of the cash. And that assumes that this deal actually gets finalized which it hasn't if you follow the small print.
 

lonestar09

Veteran Member
Interesting there are similar situations happening on the Southern border right now. A family here that has had land on the Rio Grande River dating back to Spanish Land Grant days. The land had been in a court fight and the family just lost the case.
 

MinnesotaSmith

Membership Revoked
Interesting there are similar situations happening on the Southern border right now. A family here that has had land on the Rio Grande River dating back to Spanish Land Grant days. The land had been in a court fight and the family just lost the case.
That was antiwhite antiTrumpers opposing that land being used to build border wall, right?
 
Top