Turn up the volume on your real estate success at Inman On Tour: Nashville! Connect with industry trailblazers and top-tier speakers to gain powerful insights, cutting-edge strategies, and invaluable connections. Elevate your business and achieve your boldest goals — all with Music City magic. Register now.
“Why do we even need a diversity and inclusion council?”
For this question, I say “thank you.” This is a question that I have heard from some Realtors in various parts of the nation (some of whom have started rollbacks due to the current political climate), particularly before I teach a fair housing course.
For those of you familiar with basketball, it is like a layup question. I often jokingly say, I did not plant this person or pay them to ask this question because it perfectly leads into the course sections of “How did we get here, Where are we today and Where do we go from here?” which help us to contextualize how rampant unfair housing has been, including the exclusion of real estate professionals based on various demographics.
In other words, I encourage all diversity and inclusion advocates whenever you are posed with, “Why do we even need a diversity and inclusion council?” (or some variation), to answer the meta-questions of
- How did we get here?
- Where are we today? and
- Where do we go from here?
It never fails that, after class, the same questioners typically say how they had no clue and plan to share all they have learned.
Neighbors
I have written before about the historical context of fair housing in ‘There goes the neighborhood’: The history of race and U.S. homeownership, so I will not revisit those particular points. Instead, let’s review just one (of many) historical figures who is the personification of why professional diversity and inclusion matters.
The short answer to “Why do we even need a diversity and inclusion council?” is, “Not everyone only sees green.” I am quick to acknowledge that some who ask this are asking from a place where in their transactions, they are focused on the deal and not the external traits of people (they have no malintent).
Here are examples of what seem to be earnest comments to this point on one of my posts:
Social media comments on Dr. Lee’s posts.
However, make no mistake, that is not everyone’s reality (which I have documented in numerous articles and videos over the past several years.
We work for those people who are not in a protective bubble; that’s why we need to continue to prioritize diversity and inclusion among professionals. Ultimately, this all means we must steer clear of the McNamara Fallacy and honor the experiences of people who have been treated unfairly in real estate over the percentages of those who have not.
Do you know who the ‘Fathers of Fair Housing’ are?
You probably know that the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King’s horrific assassination is what spurred the passage of the 1968 Federal Fair Housing Act legislation after years of protests, filibusters, and delays.
Also, you might readily know that former Vice President Walter Mondale was a co-author of what became the historic 1968 Federal Fair Housing Act. But do you know who also wrote it?
It was none other than a Martha’s Vineyard regular, Senator Edward Brooke (R-MA). He was the first black attorney general of Massachusetts and the first black U.S. Senator of the 20th century.
Notably, the election and professional inclusion of Brooke’s diverse experience has been consequential to many of us having someplace to call home, whether purchased or leased, regardless of our:
- Race
- Color
- Religion
- National origin
The above are the original protections in the 1968 Act, which has been amended to now include some or all of the following, depending on the local market:
- Sex (federal and local)
- Familial status (federal and local)
- Disability (this has evolved to “a person that uses an assistive device”) (federal and local)
- Age
- Ancestry
- Sexual orientation
- Gender identity
- Marital status
- Military status
- Domestic violence victims
- Source of income
- Genetic information
- Pregnancy
- HIV/AIDS
- Fair chance/reentry/criminal record history
Senator Edward Brooke and ‘The American Problem’
Senator Edward Brooke meets with President Lyndon B. Johnson
Martha’s Vineyard historian Thomas Dresser shared the following during my interview with him:
Senator Brooke grew up in Washington, D.C., and, because of the tragedy of Pearl Harbor, Brooke, like many, joined the military.
While stationed in Italy, Brooke fell in love, got married, and returned to the U.S. to start and raise a family. Naturally, his family wanted to buy a home.
With the G.I. Bill, homeownership was well within his means. But, like many Black, Asian and Hispanic/Latino WWII military veterans, although the G.I. Bill benefits were theirs to use because of their valiant service, lenders, real estate agents and homesellers were under no obligation to work with people of color.
Senator Brooke, like 1.2 million Black veterans, was denied access to his G.I. Bill homeownership benefits for his first attempted home purchase only because he was Black — while conversely, access to the G.I. Bill helped to create and expand the white middle class.
To add insult to injury, Brooke also faced real estate discrimination while vacationing. “He was known around here as Uncle Ed. He was friends with everybody. He taught kids how to swim at the Inkwell,” fondly remembered Dresser, who has been a Vineyard resident for decades.
Brooke started vacationing on Martha’s Vineyard in the early 1950s and continued to maintain a presence there for the rest of his life. His house is on the African American Heritage Trail in Oak Bluff.
Brooke wanted to have a social group since the East Chop Beach Club would not at that time allow Black vacationers or residents to join. Brooke tried to form a social group that Black islanders, along with anyone else, could access, but the town resisted and would not allow him to purchase additional real estate for such gatherings.
The blatant denial of his earned military benefits, plus his continuous experiences with real estate discrimination, set the tone for his whole career as an attorney, leading him to not only champion fair housing laws, which are foundational to diversity and inclusion in real estate, but to cowrite the landmark 1968 legislation.
The Brooke Amendment
The next year, the senator’s name became the moniker for the Housing and Urban Development Act of 1969, known as the “Brooke Amendment,” which limited out-of-pocket rent expenditure by a tenant in federal publicly assisted housing programs to 25 percent of one’s income (raised to 30 percent in 1981).
From the National Archives.
You probably recognize this percentage because it is still often the universal benchmark for measuring U.S. housing affordability – the Brooke Amendment was its first use.
As a fair housing educator, what an honor it was to see the summer home of one of the “Fathers of Fair Housing,” the late Senator Edward Brooke. He spent his career advocating for fair and affordable housing partly because of the good and not-so-good he experienced in D.C., New England and Martha’s Vineyard.
Ultimately, Sen. Brooke helped to shape our modern experience of Martha’s Vineyard as a summer breeze, a healing balm, and a slice of heaven, and helped codify our modern form of federal fair housing for all.
An American problem
Sen. Edward Brooke | Feb. 17, 1967, Time Magazine
When asked by Time Magazine in 1967 about the housing crisis, Brooke asserted, “It’s not purely a Negro problem. It’s a social and economic problem … an American problem.” This holds true today.
Let’s continue his non-partisan legacy (he was a Republican senator, while his co-author Mondale was a Democrat); let’s continue to advocate for fair housing for all, including the proactive inclusion of real estate professionals from all walks of life.
Dr. Lee Davenport is a real estate coach/educator and author who trains real estate agents to provide access and opportunity in real estate. Connect with her on Instagram.