Mrs. SPENCER. My experience there has led me to these conclusions. There was a tremendous interest engendered by the urban redevelopment program and all of the forces in the community of any influence, the chamber of commerce, all of the service organizations, the Stockton Record, which is the only newspaper there, all of the officials, every person of any prominence, was rallied to the cause of urban redevelopment. Which incidentally I want to say that I am all in favor of. I think the urban redevelopment is a wonderful program if properly administered. However, when the homeowners did not immediately accept the offers which were made, and there is no question that the offer which was made was not necessarily the highest offer, based upon the agency's own appraisals, own appraisal report. They adopted a "concurred in" approach, you know. And then when they didn't accept this-many did. Many did, incidentally, under the belief that their property would be condemned, meaning that it would be taken anyway, and they would get nothing if they didn't accept the offer. Now those that held out were then treated with a great deal of hostility, as though they were responsible for holding up the progress, and everything closed against them.

Mr. Knox. Hostility by whom? By the agency, or by everybody?

Mrs. SPENCER. By the community, as far as the influential sources in the community are concerned. And the agency as a broker.

Mr. Knox. Excuse me. I'm sorry. You mean the agency disclosed to other people in the community that certain individuals were not accepting the concurred in values, and therefore

Mrs. SPENCER. Oh, yes. This was well publicized.

Mr. KNOX. Then it was discussed publicly-the individuals, the names involved?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes. As a matter of fact, when I first commenced the file of these cases, the situation was completely out of hand in that someone gave the press misleading information as to what had been offered and they published the alleged offer.

Mr. KNOX. They published in the paper the offer?

Mrs. SPENCER. The alleged offer. And this would appear 2 or 3 days prior to the trial and during the entire course of the trial, and obviously the jury would be prejudiced by this information. Frequently the information was I won't say frequently, in every instance the information was incorrect. And they also published the asking price, in other words, what the defendants contended their property was worth.

Mr. KNOX. This was just prior to the trial.

Mrs. SPENCER. Two or three days before and during.

Mr. KNOX. Let me ask you this, did the agency in the plaintiff's case come up with that amount that they thought the property was worth? Or did they come up with less? Customarily they will offer an amount, and if you don't take it, they will come into court with a lesser figure.

Mrs. SPENCER. That is right.

Mr. KNOX. Now, did they do that in this case?

Mrs. SPENCER. In every instance. In other words, I had received by virtue of stipulation at the pretrial, copies of their appraisal reports, which were made in 1958 and 1959. Now, in every instance, their-I won't say that-in one instance there was a variation. But in all but one case, their appraisers came in and testified to a lower valuation than their 1958 or 1959.

Mr. KNOX. You were able, in deposition, to get their appraisal as part of the trial?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes. The pretrial, by stipulation.

Mr. Knox. Did you two other gentlemen want to make some comments? Mrs. SPENCER. This is Mr. Nickerson who has had some experience I was referring to.

Mr. KNOX. Did you testify as an appraiser, sir, in Stockton?

Mr. NICKERSON. No, I did not. I testify in court as an expert witness in the area in which my office is located. It seems to me there is some injustice. I have appraised in the Los Angeles area for approximately 10 years and this appraisal institute which is sponsored by the national board is similar, I would take it, to the, to a doctor, perhaps, wanting to become a member of the American Medical Association, who has passed the State boards and has, perhaps, his specialty, and applies for membership, and in certain cities, because he happens to be of the wrong racial group, is denied membership. The same for other professional groups-the American Bar Association. Now, it may be that in my lifetime I will never, perhaps, be a realtor, or perhaps even apply for mem

bership in this professional organization. But my presence here is dedicated to the principle that at some future date fair play will come to all Americans who have qualified educationally and by experience for membership in this type of professional competence organizations.

Mr. Knox. Do you belong to the SRA?

Mr. NICKERSON. No, I do not.

Mr. Knox. Is that part of the real estate association?

Mr. NICKERSON. No, it is not.

Mrs. SPENCER. In connection with SRA, however, I would like to say that the appraiser whom I used on behalf of the defendants in Stockton, Lowell Stuart (?), is a member of the SRA. And they do not have this prerequisite for membership, that you must be a realtor. May I just say this, before closing, it has been brought to my attention by some of the members of consolidated realty board, that they have, as recently as April of this year, had experience with reference to loan applications before two of our insurance companies, they are life insurance companies, where they were contacted after having filed their plans with the city plan check department for new construction, they were contacted by the correspondent, the loan correspondent, for both of these life insurance companies with reference to asking that an application be submitted to their respective companies. And after application was submitted, in the course of subsequent conversations, they were advised that the policy of both of these companies was not to make loans to, or rather for property being purchased or built in areas that were not predominantly, or rather to Negroes if the area were not predominantly, Negro. And in both of these particular locations, the area was approximately 50 percent integrated. I wanted to comment on your assembly bill 1601, which I believe passed the assembly but failed to pass the senate. I certainly urge that everything be done for the passage of this bill. It is an excellent bill and would go a long way toward curing the abuses that we have talked about.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Did you want to make a statement? Will you speak into the mike, please? Will you state your name for the record?

WESLEY J. FAIRCHILD. My name is Fairchild, Wesley J. I am affiliated with Consolidated Realty Board. I would like to make this observation, based upon these things and certain acts as far as the State of California is concerned with reference to, well, this, I suppose, would be from the Governor down to the commissioner and his deputies. It appears to me that word “realtor” is copyrighted. It appears to me that under the law the State upholds that copyright. And it also appears that every broker must take the same examination to become a real estate broker in the State of California. He must be fingerprinted, etc. He is supposed to be qualified or they won't accept him as a broker. Since, then, the State upholds this copyright "realtor," certainly it would appear to me that you lawmakers should find somewhere along the line where if it is going to uphold that, every real estate broker should have the right to be a member of that board. Thank you.

Mr. MCMILLAN. I agree with you. Mr. Williamson.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. understand what your situation is. Now, as I understand it, the Consolidated Realty Board is an all-Negro group. Is this right? Are all nonwhites?

Mrs. SPENCER. No, it's not. It's an integrated board, but it is the only board that the Negro brokers can join.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. It's an integrated board. I see. Are there members of your board who have dual membership; that is, who belong to your board and also the Los Angeles Realty Board?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. There are. But, as I understand it, first, members of your board, in fact your board was originally formed because of the fact that the individuals had not been able to obtain membership in the Los Angeles Realty Board or any of the other boards in the area. I understand, also, that some white real estate brokers who cooperate with you in some of your business dealings have because of this, been denied membership in, what is it, the Southwest Realty Board?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes, that is correct.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I see. Now, let me ask you one other question. Do any of these boards, yours, or the Los Angeles Board, or the Southwest Board, provide multiple-listing services.

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes. All of them do.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Los Angeles Realty Board provides a multiple-listing service. Mrs. SPENCER. The branches-in other words, the Southwest Board, which is affiliated with the Los Angeles Realty Board, has a multiple-listing service.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I see. Now, let me be sure that I understand this, now. The Los Angeles Board is not on the same level, you might say then, as the Southwest. In other words, it is a sort of superstructure over many other boards.

Mrs. SPENCER. That is correct. It is the parent body, and, as I understand it, one must be a member of the Los Angeles Realty Board, as a condition to membership in any of the affiliate boards such as the Southwest. The other boards exist to cover areas. In other words, there is a Lynwood branch, a Compton branch, and several branches throughout the city. And the purpose of that, is because they service the brokers whose practice or business is confined to those particular areas.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. So, therefore, even though the Los Angeles Board, as a board, does not provide a multiple-listing service, other boards in which membership is dependent upon membership in the Los Angeles Board, do, and so therefore you folks are denied participation in multiple-listing activities that are engaged in by these other boards.

Mrs. SPENCER. That is correct.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I see. Do you provide a multiple-listing service for your members?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes. There is a multiple-listing service provided by this board. Mr. WLLIAMSON. see. How general among the individual boards in the Los Angeles area that are members of the Los Angeles Board, is a multiplelisting service? Is it a pretty general practice?

Mrs. SPENCER. You mean as far as the affiliate boards are concerned? Each one.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. Each one does.

Oh, yes.

Mrs. SPENCER. This is the lifeline of the real estate business, as far as the brokers are concerned.

Mr. WILLIAMSON. I see. So, in other words, there is much of the market that you have no access to whatsoever.

Mrs. SPENCER. There is much of the market they have no access to, yes.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Mr. Knox.

Mr. KNOX. Do you happen to have any clippings on the press handling of the redevelopment trials in Stockton? Available?

Mrs. SPENCER. I don't have them with me, but I will certainly be glad to get them. I am going back Monday.

Mr. KNOX. If we could get some copies I think it might be interesting. Also, are the areas being taken by the redevelopment agency, or at least the projects now in activity up there, are they taking areas that are predominantly occupied by Negro people?

Mrs. SPENCER. The area comprised 185 acres, approximately 800 families, and all but 6 of the families were either Mexican or Negroes. The area is pretty evenly divided between the Mexican community and the Negro community.

Mr. KNOX. Do they have a relocation group working with these people? Mrs. SPENCER. They had a relocation center operated by the agency and I have many complaints about this, but that's

Mr. KNOX. Have they managed to relocate anybody?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes, the people have been relocated and through the efforts in part of the relocation center and the problem that has been called to my attention by some of the people who have been thus relocated is the fact that they have been relocated into substandard housing which is itself subject to be condemned under the police powers. And when I have in turn called this to the attention of the relocation center, their explanation is that this is a temporary relocation, and yet, they admit that there is no provision for, wherein they can, at any time, reacquire, I mean, that they can purchase this property from the homeowner who has put his money out. And obviously the seller isn't going to rescind the transaction 3 years hence. So I don't know what they are planning to do about permanently relocating the people once they have already purchased these other substandard homes.

Mr. KNOX. Are they building dwelling units in the area that they have already taken for redevelopment or is it for industry, or what?

Mrs. SPENCER. No, it's going to be partly for industry, but the present plan calls for most of the area to be used for residential purposes.

Mr. KNOX. Will the price of those units be such that the people who have been displaced can acquire them?

Mrs. SPENCER. This has not been determined. I have been endeavoring to get information on this. Other than the plan, with reference to the pictures of the type of structure, there isn't any detail available, on that. Unfortunately, though, there has been no effort made to relocate any of the people on a temporary basis with the thought that they may come back in, you know, or participate in the improvements in this area. And incidentally, under the 221 program, the other distressing thing to me, has been that there is no real effort made to qualify or even to advise the people who were being displaced, and who did relocate, that they were eligible for the 221 program. Mr. KNOX. That's the owner participation program.

Mrs. SPENCER. No, this is where they can get a 40-year loan, you know, up to $11,400 in that area financing for new houses. There were 150 allocations for 221 loans given to the area and 75 of these have been used, but they have been used by builders who use them and build property in areas where the brokers will not sell to Negroes. And after holding them for 30 days, as you know, under the law, they are permitted to put them on the open market and get all the market will bring in on them.

Mr. KNOX. Did they allow any owner participation in this area as far as you know?

Mrs. SPENCER. Yes, a small section, called the Burkend (?) Acres, comprising aproximately three short blocks, which is oh, less than one-twentieth of the whole area.

Mr. KNOX. Were those blocks occupied principally by Negro people or minority groups?

Mrs. SPENCER. Principally by Mexican-it is a pretty mixed situation as far as the two groups were concerned.

Mr. KNOX. Thank you.

Mr. MCMILLAN. If there are no further questions from the members of the committee, we want to thank you very much for your presentation.

Mrs. SPENCER. I want to thank you, and I also want to thank the assembly for the many wonderful bills that you have passed, from which we have certrainly benefited.

Mr. MCMILLAN. It looks as though we need some more bills.

Mrs. SPENCER. We certainly do.

Mr. MCMILLAN. Thank you.

APPENDIX I
BIBLIOGRAPHY

[The Library of Congress Legislative Reference Service]

SELECTED REFERENCES ANNOTATED

A. Discrimination because of race, color, creed, or national origin (including a few general references)

NATIONAL

Bullock, Paul. Combating discrimination in employment. California management review, v. 3, Summer 1961 :18-32.

Focuses upon economic necessity for merit employment, the problems confronted and techniques used by employers in combating discrimination.

Merit employment: nondiscrimination in industry. Los Angeles, Institute of Industrial Relations, University of California [1960]. 101 p. (HD 4903.5.U58B8)

Surveys nature and history of discrimination and the measures to establish merit employment.

David, Harry. Under-used sources of employees. Washington, U.S. Small Business Administration, 1959. 4 pp. (Small Marketers Aids No. 38)

Brief discussion of three categories of forgotten workers: (1) middle aged and older employees; (2) handicapped workers, and (3) members of minority groups. Emphasizes merits of each group and reasons for hiring them. Emerson, Thomas I. and David Haber. Political and civil rights in the United States. Buffalo, N.Y., Dennis & Co., Inc., 1958. 2 v. (2d ed.)

Ch. VII. Discrimination, D. Employment, p. 1422-1483: Excerpts of cases and material on problem of discrimination in employment.

Ferman, Irving. Discrimination in employment. New York law forum, v. 6, January 1960:59–68.

Predicts end of discriminatory practices in view of future labor supply demand.

Fleischman, Harry. Is labor colorblind? Progressive, v. 23, November 1959:24– 28.

Discrimination in labor unions has lessened, but "labor still has a long way to go before full equality prevails in all unions." Greenberg, Jack.

Race relations and American law. New York, Columbia University Press, 1959. 481 p.

Ch. VI: Earning a living, pp. 154–207.

Development of antidiscrimination in employment and role of law in reduction of discrimination.

App. A, Sec. 8-16: Citations to State and municipal legislative material dealing with discrimination in employment.

Hill, Herbert. Discrimination in employment. Congressional Record (daily ed.) v. 107, August 31, 1961:A6912-A6914.

Statement as labor secretary of the NAACP before House Committee on Education and Labor, August 22, 1961.

Racism within organized labor: a report of 5 years of the AFL-CIO, 1955-1960. Journal of Negro education, v. 30, Spring 1961:109–118.

Gives examples of discrimination against Negroes in unions, particularly craft unions. Finds that regardless of the stated aims of AFL-CIO regarding Negro rights, little has been done to assure them.

Holleman, Jerry R. The job ahead for the President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity. Labor law journal, v. 12, July 1961 :618–621.

The Vice Chairman of the President's Committee explains the methods used by Committee to attain objective. Hope, John, II. Equality of opportunity; a union approach to fair employment. With introduction by Hubert Humphrey. Washington, Public Affairs Press [1956]. 142 pp. (HD 4903.5.U56H6).

Javits, Jacob K.

1960. 310 pp.

Discrimination-U.S.A. New York, Harcourt, Brace & Co.,

Ch. 5: Discrimination in employment

Ch. 6: Equality of opportunity in employment.

Surveys Federal and State actions against racial discrimination.

Koversky, Irving. Racial discrimination in employment and the Federal law. Oregon law review, v. 38, December 1958: 54–85.

Assumes that antidiscriminatory laws protecting employment rights are inevitable. Describes attempts and measures by Federal Government to prevent discrimination.

Maloney, Walter H., Jr. Racial and religious discrimination in employment and the role of the NLRB. Maryland law review, v. 21, Summer 1961: 219-232.

A presentation of the development of the Federal law respecting racial discrimination with special reference to the NLRB.

National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. The Negro wageearner and apprenticeship training programs: a critical analysis with recommendations. New York [1960]. 60 pp.

Study shows that Negroes are widely excluded from apprenticeship and training programs. Restrictions must be eliminated for effective use of manpower.

Norgren, Paul H. and others. Employing the Negro in American industry; a study of management practices. New York, Industrial Relations Counselors, 1959. 171 pp.

Results of a 2-year study based on interviews with management people in 44 companies.

Plan for equal job opportunity at Lockheed Aircraft Corp. Monthly labor review, v. 84, July 1961: 748–749.

Excerpts of agreement signed by Lockheed and President's Committee on Equal Employment Opportunity.