Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
[...] People should read about J.C. Nichols and how these HOA's would make sure blacks who could afford to leave poorer neighrborhoods were blocked from living in certain areas. [...]
I made offhand reference to this in my post immediately above, the bit on the map that used to hang in the J.C. Nichols Company offices on the Plaza about "the most scientific protective restrictions."
In this, however, Nichols was merely reflecting the prejudices of his era.
After the U.S. Supreme Court managed to keep the nation from developing honest-to-God, legal "American apartheid" by ruling a racial zoning ordinance (that would have forced blacks and whites onto separate blocks) in Louisville, Ky., unconstitutional in Buchanan v. Warley (1917), the National Association of Real Estate Boards (today's National Association of Realtors) began to promote the drafting of covenants that ran with the land, prohibiting the sale of properties to blacks. (Some also excluded Jews, which is one reason why you find a rather common pattern in the 1950s and 1960s of Jewish neighborhoods becoming all black once restrictive practices fell. The Oak Park neighborhood on the East Side, where I was born and raised, was one such.)
The Supremes wouldn't get around to gutting those covenants until 1948, when it ruled them unenforceable in Shelley v. Kramer, which involved, perhaps ironically given later events, a white homeowner in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson who sold his home to a white buyer in violation of its covenant. The neighbors sued to enforce it.
But, of course, we all know that changing the law doesn't change the way people think. More on this below.
Quote:
-East of Troost is an economic desert. Most people from that side of town want to work, and how no problem working but most of the jobs are not in those areas and transportation in and out of that side of town is horrible. You look in those employment magazines and all the jobs are in Lenexa and Overland park. It's stupid. And it's hard as hell to make it up outta that. And the worst part is it was designed that way back in those early city planning days.
Even when I was growing up, the major employment centers were largely west of Troost, but there were St. Joseph's Hospital at Linwood and Prospect, Research (nee German) Hospital at Meyer and Prospect, and there still is the Kansas City VA Medical Center (where my Mom spent much of her career as a nurse and nursing administrator) on Linwood in the 4900 east block. And Prospect hadn't yet been stripped of all its commercial activity; though most of the street seemed to me to be lined with used-car lots, there were some shopping districts along it. Two of them, at 31st and 35th, got torched in the riots following Martin Luther King's assassination in 1968, and the street never recovered. (I recall reading in some book or article about a nearby resident remarking bitterly about Gov. Warren Hearnes sending the National Guard to the Plaza as the business districts burned.)
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovekcmo
There shouldn't be any "black " area of the city, it should be mixed with whites. If people don't have the transportation they need to get to work then they should move to where the transportation will take them to work. If one get's a job in Overland Park and lives east of Troost but can't get to work on the bus to Overland Park, well then, move to Overland Park. People want jobs, well move to where they are. Because, those businesses aren't going to move to 39th and Prospect.
Um, you seem to have slept through most of modern American history.
Were you around for the "49-63 Neighborhood Coalition"?
This was a valiant but ultimately unsuccessful attempt to preserve racial integration in the neighborhood bounded on the north and south by the two streets in its name and on the east and west by The Paseo and Troost in the 1970s. It foundered for the same reason most such efforts failed: White fear and prejudice.
Those few neighborhoods that did manage to integrate successfully and stay that way did so only through measures I consider heroic: Oak Park, Ill.'s practices of banning all "For Sale" signs within the city and tracking where home buyers were looking: blacks would be deliberately steered to mostly-white blocks, and whites vice versa. The refusal of real estate agents in Philadelphia's Mt. Airy section, just up the road from where I live now, to engage in blockbusting or encouraging panic selling and working with white residents to consciously attract black middle class buyers to their blocks. (And even with that, Mt. Airy's integration looks more like a mosaic than a mixing bowl: its eastern side is more heavily African-American than its western side.)
What was true then remains so to a disturbingly high degree now: Bigotry and racism remain the default condition when it comes to residence, and one must make a conscious effort to counter it. The people who need to make that effort, by and large, are NOT African-American; survey after survey has shown most blacks express a preference for living in integrated neighborhoods. They define "integrated neighborhood" as one where blacks and whites make up roughly equal shares of the population. But other research has found that once blacks rise past 30 percent of a neighborhood's population, the remaining whites move out.
"Just move to Overland Park"? I know it's possible. I briefly dated a black girl who attended Shawnee Mission South when I was in high school, and the son of my family dentist, a Pem-Day '76 classmate of mine, moved along with his family from over his Dad's office at 4134 Prospect to a brand-new subdivision south of the Barstow School at 127th and State Line Road when he was about 12. But it's not as simple as you make it out to be.
Besides, I consider it both morally and environmentally wrong to simply write off an entire swath of already-developed city the way you keep recommending people do.
There shouldn't be any "black " area of the city, it should be mixed with whites. If people don't have the transportation they need to get to work then they should move to where the transportation will take them to work. If one get's a job in Overland Park and lives east of Troost but can't get to work on the bus to Overland Park, well then, move to Overland Park. People want jobs, well move to where they are. Because, those businesses aren't going to move to 39th and Prospect.
do you not see where I pre-covered all your points?
-There shouldn't be any "black " area of the city
it was designed this way. keep all the blacks in one part of the city, then neglect that part of the city
- If people don't have the transportation they need to get to work then they should move to where the transportation will take them to work.
have you ever tried to take the bus from 31st & Prospect to Lenexa? East of Troost is largely and economic desert. it's not as easy as "just go get a job and move out".
- People want jobs, well move to where they are
with what money? Where is this money supposed to come from if you live in an economic desert. It takes money to make money. And if you do get a job you're going to be spending a lot of time and money getting to and from there everyday. The money you could be saving for the big move is going to crappy public transpo or saving just to get a car.
-those businesses aren't going to move to 39th and Prospect
EXACTLY. and like I said and others have covered. It was designed this way and not by black people.
Companies do want to be in those areas, but it takes a huge risk and often they end up losing money. This is why they don't go back when something happens (like the QuikTrip destroyed in Ferguson riots or the CVS destroyed in Baltimore riots). Those locations already take on extremely high theft (internal by employees and shoplifting) as well as very high insurance, more vandalism etc.
Sure there is buying power in these poor areas and most people that live there are not criminals, but that buying power is often offset by the negatives.
Retail already operates on a relatively small profit margin. Basically, the only national retailers that will go into "ghetto" locations are those that can take a loss on those locations for the greater good for the company (PR). Not many willing to do that and those that are such as walmart (recently trying to enter urban areas) are vilified.
Companies do want to be in those areas, but it takes a huge risk and often they end up losing money. This is why they don't go back when something happens (like the QuikTrip destroyed in Ferguson riots or the CVS destroyed in Baltimore riots). Those locations already take on extremely high theft (internal by employees and shoplifting) as well as very high insurance, more vandalism etc.
Sure there is buying power in these poor areas and most people that live there are not criminals, but that buying power is often offset by the negatives.
Retail already operates on a relatively small profit margin. Basically, the only national retailers that will go into "ghetto" locations are those that can take a loss on those locations for the greater good for the company (PR). Not many willing to do that and those that are such as walmart (recently trying to enter urban areas) are vilified.
If more people have jobs the crime will decrease. And I'm not talking about crappy retail jobs. The ones I see in some of those jobs "magazines" seem like decent entry level jobs that could lead to a career. I'm not calling you wrong, but can you post the theft rates per neighborhood that you are sourcing this from? I'd be willing to bet places like Oak Park Mall and the Plaza experience more theft than some of the black areas. But, that aside, these are the excuses people use. It's like a self-fulfilling circle. Make it so these people are all squared off in one area, neglect the area, poverty related crime happens, use poverty related crime as excuse to keep the cycle going.
If more people have jobs the crime will decrease. And I'm not talking about crappy retail jobs. The ones I see in some of those jobs "magazines" seem like decent entry level jobs that could lead to a career. I'm not calling you wrong, but can you post the theft rates per neighborhood that you are sourcing this from? I'd be willing to bet places like Oak Park Mall and the Plaza experience more theft than some of the black areas. But, that aside, these are the excuses people use. It's like a self-fulfilling circle. Make it so these people are all squared off in one area, neglect the area, poverty related crime happens, use poverty related crime as excuse to keep the cycle going.
I knew Darryl Forte personally back when he was just a street cop and worked part time as loss prevention at several retail places. He is now the KCPD Chief of Police.
I can give you an example.
The amount of internal and external theft at the Benjamin Plaza shopping center (next to Bannister Mall) was literally off the charts. Product was just flying out of the buildings. That Hypermart was losing more product than many small walmarts actually sold. This started happening after the bus lines came out there. Troost, Prospect and Blue Ridge (three of city's busiest bus lines) all had major stops or terminated at Hypermart.
Again, the vast majority of people shopping there were not thieves, but if only 5-10% were, that would make a huge store like that unprofitable.
Of course Oak Park Mall and the Plaza have crime and theft, but the amount of crime and theft in high crime areas of KC or in areas where a lot of criminals are likely to shop are obviously going to be higher.
Yes, they need jobs, real jobs. I do agree with that. So many companies have left KCMO for suburban locations. Not just retail but everything has left. This is why companies like Cerner should not be getting massive tax breaks to build in suburban areas. That only make things worse.
NOTHING will ever get fixed in our urban ghettos until urban parents step up and take responsibility for their children. There is nothing anybody can do so long as these people in the inner city continue to raise children in such a poor home environment with no supervision or guidance. 12 year old kids out at 3AM doing whatever the hell they want. They end up growing up to be criminals and have a bunch of uncontrolled children of their own. It's a vicious cycle. The government can't fix that.
I understand that white people basically created these ghettos, but it's going to take the black people living there today stepping up to fix this problem too.
If more people have jobs the crime will decrease. And I'm not talking about crappy retail jobs. .
Well, what kind of jobs are you talking about? At some point people have to take responsibility and get an education in order to have a better job/better life. I know that's not easy, but it's not realistic to expect people to be handed something better than a crappy retail job when they haven't earned it/aren't qualified for it.
Well, what kind of jobs are you talking about? At some point people have to take responsibility and get an education in order to have a better job/better life. I know that's not easy, but it's not realistic to expect people to be handed something better than a crappy retail job when they haven't earned it/aren't qualified for it.
what types of jobs? better than a fast food or gas station clerk. And as stated earlier in the thread, Kansas City, MO was designed this way back in the early stages of city planning. People just keep using excuses to neglect everything east of troost, when people in that area didn't really create the mess. The vast majority of people in that area want to work and have better jobs but like i said before, it's hell getting up out of an economic desert like that. You're going to be spending money to make money on some level for a long long time just to "make it".
what types of jobs? better than a fast food or gas station clerk. And as stated earlier in the thread, Kansas City, MO was designed this way back in the early stages of city planning. People just keep using excuses to neglect everything east of troost, when people in that area didn't really create the mess. The vast majority of people in that area want to work and have better jobs but like i said before, it's hell getting up out of an economic desert like that. You're going to be spending money to make money on some level for a long long time just to "make it".
1. Not the city as a whole was "designed this way," just the Country Club District, which was the work of one developer; the rest wasn't the product of planned development but rather real estate industry policy that was promoted after the U.S. Supreme Court made it illegal for cities to bake racial separation into their zoning ordinances in 1917.
2. We may not have created the mess, but that doesn't mean we can't clean it up. Can we do it without outside help? That's the $64k question.
Edited to add bona fides since my header identifies me as living elsewhere: There's a plot of grass atop a slight rise, with a driveway running up one side of it, at 4138 Bellefontaine Avenue. What used to sit on that plot of grass was a two-story Dutch Colonial home, one of three in a row: 4126 and 4130 still stand (4134 is an empty lot that's attached to 4130). That home was where I spent the first 18 years of my life on this planet. I can, but won't unless asked, tell you how it came to be a plot of grass.
That home was where I spent the first 18 years of my life on this planet. I can, but won't unless asked, tell you how it came to be a plot of grass.
Do tell!
Everybody knows about how JC Nichols did not allow blacks in his developments. I'm not going to defend him, but that was pretty much a common thing during that time period, which is a big part of what created wide spread ghettos in American cities.
However few people seem to realize how difficult it was for blacks to move to Johnson County for decades beyond those early JC Nichols years. There are reasons why black flight in KC went every direction out of the core into the suburbs except southwest and why blacked barely migrated from KCK to JoCo at all.
No matter how many laws were passed, you were not going to find many developers, real estate agents or private home owners in the developing parts of JoCo that were interested in selling homes to blacks. Leawood wanted no part of anything to do with KCMO, even though they shared a border when them. It took Overland Park widening all the east west thoroughfares (major routes to KCMO such as 75th, 95th, 103rd etc) forcing Leawood to widen those roads out of necessity relatively recently.
Today it seems like Leawood, and JoCo in general, is not like this anymore, but the damage has been done and JoCo today is still not all that appealing to many middle class black families that are familiar with the local history. Most will move clear out to Lee's Summit before considering JoCo.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
