Removing Racially Restrictive Covenants

From the Washington Post Today:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/racist-housing-covenants/2020/10/21/9d262738-0261-11eb-8879-7663b816bfa5_story.html#comments-wrapper

I did not know racially restrictive covenants were still so prevalent. Of course these covenants have no legal force today. But afaic, they should be formally stricken from what is recorded at a county clerk's.

I remember sixty years ago my parents bought an old farmhouse in a subdivision about-to-be-built on what was then still farmland. The developer and realtors initially put a sign up, to sell lots, noting "restrictive covenants" applied. If one reads the article above, one will see that this was code, designed to keep out certain demographics. Where I grew up, "restrictive covenants" meant 'Blacks and Jewish people need not apply for purchase.' My parents "made" the developer get rid of the "restrictive covenants" part. A close relative being a partner in the biggest law firm in the state, and having gone on public record as wanting to get rid of these covenants, may have played a role. The neighborhood filled with Jewish families, both blue collar and professionals. Twenty-four of 26 homes were owned by Jewish families. At the time and as a kid, it seemed strange to me that the neighborhoods on all sides were all white but religion-wise, just the opposite of my subdivision: They were nearly all-Christian. Now I understand.

Unless some state laws say otherwise, removing the restrictions would require amending the covenants following the same procedure as any other amendment. Unless someone in the association is going to put some work into it, it won't happen.

To comply with fair housing laws, ours did not have to get owner approval to change the by laws. A simple resolution was added and recorded at the county, which amended the by laws to be in compliance with Federal Law.

Which makes sense. Following Federal law can't be left up to the members of the HOA to vote on.

I maintain there is no need to remove "illegal" restrictions as they are just that. Illegal thus they not need be paid attention to.

I agree. That said, cost to do so has to play a role.

Geno

I agree. That said, cost has to play a role. Also if it will take the typical 2/3rd's of all owners to approve Covenant changes, one has to ask is this doable when some do not even know the time of day?

All that is needed is to place the cover page, the link I provided and have that placed on top and recorded with your CCRs. Remember, this is federal law and it supersedes everything. There is no need to amend and remove language.

No, CCRS don't have to be amend and the cover sheet does not apply to any specific HOA. It is federal law and as we all know federal law supersedes all in the hierarchy of documents.

If you want to amend, or the proper terminology would be re-state your documents, by all means, knock yourself out. I would only recommend if you are changing substantial parts of the documents AND will have enough support to pass in the community.

I posted the link to the government code. I can lead you to water, but I can't make you drink.

I am not in California. As I said, it is highly doubtful to me that our HOA was the only one with the foresight to have language in the procedures required for by laws to be changed to include that these procedures gaining owner approval need not occur to change the by laws to comply with state or Federal Law.

A Resolution was all that was needed. The board said hey, we're changing the by laws to comply with federal law. It was approved by the whole board, of course, and filed with the county becoming part of our published docs.

No owners were solicited for their opinion, much less a vote.