The Struggle for Fair Housing in Cleveland Heights: The St. Ann Audit
By Sven H. Dubie
Only in the 1960s did the United States begin seriously coming to terms
with some of its institutionalized racial inequities. As part of this
process, Congress passed several pieces of landmark legislation designed
to eliminate racial discrimination in key areas of daily life, including
access to public accommodations, employment, education and voting. One
such law, the Civil Rights Act of 1968—commonly known as the Fair
Housing Act—specifically banned discrimination based on race and
several other categories with respect to the sale, rental, or financing
of a home.
The City of Cleveland Heights is not often thought of as a proving ground
for civil rights reform. In fact, in the early decades of the 20th Century,
racially biased deed restrictions were fairly common in Cleveland Heights.
And it is only in the last 20-30 years that the community has come to
pride itself on being open and welcoming to people of all colors, countries
and creeds. The passage of the Fair Housing Act in 1968 provided an opportunity
to examine the extent to which citizens of Cleveland Heights were genuinely
committed to the idea of open housing. The driving force was inauspicious:
As more and more prospective minority homeowners sought to buy properties
in suburban Cleveland in the 1960s and 1970s, rumors abounded that they
were being steered toward certain communities and away from others. In
1972, to investigate these allegations and ensure compliance with the
Fair Housing Act, the St. Ann Catholic Church in Cleveland Heights sponsored
what came to be known as the St. Ann Audit of Real Estate Practices. Charged
with the task of systematically examining and documenting the experiences
of minority homebuyers in Cleveland Heights, the St. Ann Audit would prove
to be one of the most important, if at times unsettling, exercises in
social justice in the history of our community.
Volatile Roots
The St. Ann Audit occurred against a backdrop of striking racial transformation
in large metropolitan communities like Cleveland. Through the early part
of the twentieth century, the black population in most northern cities
was relatively small, and it was even more limited in emerging suburbs
like Cleveland Heights. However, that began to change when thousands of
blacks left the South, seeking greater economic opportunity and a less
oppressive racial environment in the industrial centers of the North.
Never before, and never again, were employment opportunities as extensive—sparked
primarily by the blossoming of the auto industry and the highly restrictive
immigration laws that characterized the 1920s. As black families became
more prosperous during the economic boom of the 1940s and 1950s, they,
like many urban whites, migrated out of Cleveland to communities on the
city’s eastern periphery like East Cleveland, Cleveland Heights
and Shaker Heights. Here they could aspire to own their own homes, have
a bit of property and send their children to excellent and less crowded
schools.
Still, as late as 1960, African-Americans constituted only one percent
of the population of Cleveland Heights. However, as more and more blacks
sought to establish residences in the community, more than a few people
sought to halt the racial transformation. Over the course of the 1960s,
there were a series of violent incidents designed to intimidate new and
prospective black residents. Vandals attacked several properties occupied
by blacks; there were bombings of black-owned homes and businesses that
caused substantial damage (but, fortunately, no loss of life); and there
was at least one shooting that was clearly racially motivated. As disturbing
as these incidents were, it was some of the more subtle practices designed
to promote residential re-segregation, as well as lessons drawn from the
dramatic transformation of neighboring East Cleveland, that ultimately
prompted the St. Ann’s Audit.
In 1967
this home on East Overlook, owned by J. Newton Hill, was bombed. (Cleveland
Press Collection)
East Cleveland in the 1960s experienced
an influx of black residents looking to avail themselves of the many assets
the city had to offer. The racial transition of the city occurred rapidly
as unscrupulous real estate agents employed practices such as steering,
red-lining and block-busting to capitalize on racial fears. East Cleveland,
already buffeted by a decline in manufacturing, experienced a precipitous
drop in the value of its homes as panicked white residents were induced
to sell well below market value. Properties were then sold to less affluent
black buyers at inflated rates or divided up into multifamily units, often
owned by absentee landlords. These factors combined to undermine the quality
of housing stock and intensify the exodus of whites.
Aggressive Action
Determined to prevent what had occurred in East Cleveland from happening
in their community, citizens in Cleveland Heights mobilized to face the
challenges of integration. As early as 1964, a grassroots organization
called Heights Citizens for Human Rights was formed to promote racial
justice and the peaceful integration of the community. Two separate initiatives
then were launched in the early 1970s, both of which sought to promote
non-discrimination in housing. The first of these was a series of meetings
by prominent religious leaders held at the Carmelite Monastery. The “Carmelite
Group,” as the participants came to be known, provided a forum for
addressing problems related to race relations and for developing a means
to promote interracial harmony in Cleveland Heights. It was from this
group that the vital organization known as the Heights Community Congress
would be formed.
The second undertaking was started in response to an ongoing initiative
within the Cleveland Catholic Diocese known as “Action for a Change,”
sponsored by the Commission on Catholic Community Action. Action for a
Change amounted to an intensive seminar on contemporary social justice
issues and was designed to nurture in its participants a passion and commitment
to advance the cause of social justice. Individuals were charged with
identifying an area of social injustice in their community and taking
concrete steps to address the problem. Accordingly, a group of five women
parishioners—working mothers and homemakers—took it upon themselves
to address the problem of housing discrimination in the Heights. Under
the auspices of the St. Ann Parish in Cleveland Heights, these women formed
the St. Ann Social Action Housing Committee—better known simply
as the St. Ann Committee—in 1971.
Led by Suzanne Nigro, these women were drawn to this issue not simply
because they were aware of the hostility that some black Americans were
forced to endure when they tried to establish residency in Cleveland Heights,
but because several of them had experienced first-hand the practice of
real estate steering. As Nigro would later recall, upon arriving here
in the early 1960s she and her husband were subtly discouraged by their
real estate agent from considering purchasing a home in the Heights. Instead,
they were directed toward properties in other communities. However, because
the methods of steering and other manifestations of discrimination in
the real estate industry were not overt or readily apparent, the central
challenge of the St. Ann’s Committee would be to prove that, in
fact, discriminatory practices did exist.
After looking at how other communities were responding to allegations
of housing discrimination and monitoring compliance with the Fair Housing
Act, the Committee learned that some cities were experimenting with a
new practice that involved conducting “undercover” audits
of real estate practices to determine whether there was discrimination.
As it turned out, one such audit was underway in nearby Akron, Ohio. In
this scenario, prospective renters (one black couple and one white couple)
known informally as “checkers,” made separate inquires about
renting the same piece of property. The backgrounds of the checkers were
virtually identical in every respect except race, so the logical inference
one could make was that any difference in the treatment they received
must be the result of racial discrimination. Inspired by this model, the
St. Ann’s Committee developed a plan to conduct a similar audit
of real estate practices in Cleveland Heights. In the spring and summer
of 1972, what came to be known as the St. Ann Audit was undertaken. Like
the Akron audit, it called for numerous pairs of black and white checkers
with similar backgrounds and interests to make inquiries about property
listings with the approximately ten real estate companies active at that
point in the city. When the audits were complete, the collected data were
compiled in a report set to be released in early September 1972. The controversial
findings of the St. Ann Audit Report sent shock waves through Cleveland
Heights and the reverberations from the report are still in evidence to
this day.
Responses to the Audit
The findings of the audit, released in the late summer of 1972, proved
deeply troubling to a community that prided itself on its openness and
diversity, forcing business and civic leaders, as well as private citizens
to reexamine their own racial attitudes and to address more squarely the
insidious nature of housing discrimination. It was unsettling and difficult
work, but the civic response that transpired over the ensuing months and
years stands as model of grassroots self-evaluation and reform of which
our community can be rightfully proud.
When all the data from the St. Ann Audit were gathered, they revealed
clear racial bias and discriminatory practices in the real estate business
in Cleveland Heights. Indeed, instances of discrimination were documented
at each of the ten companies covered by the audit. Additionally, the audit
found that “steering” (i.e., using race to direct clients
toward or away from particular communities) was commonly practiced by
seven of the ten companies, confirming Nigro’s own experiences when
she was discouraged from looking at properties in the Heights in the 1960s.
The audit further revealed that white and black clients received very
different treatment from realtors. For instance, a white client was much
more likely to get a callback from a realtor than a black client; whites
were usually shown a wider range of homes; and whites were taken on as
clients much more quickly than were their black counterparts. In sum,
not only did it appear the letter of the law set forth in the federal
Fair Housing Act of 1968 was being violated in the Heights, but the spirit
of the law was being thwarted as well.
Reports on the audit’s findings were prominently featured in both
the Sun Press and the Cleveland Plain Dealer in September 1972, and the
revelations rocked the community. Many in the Heights were dismayed by
the reports of pervasive discrimination and, as the St. Ann Committee
hoped, residents saw the audit as a call to action. Others however, particularly
in the real estate industry, were angered by the findings and felt they
had been blindsided by the study. Indeed, some accused the Social Action
Housing Committee of being nothing more than a cabal of troublemaking
housewives. City government in Cleveland Heights acknowledged the significance
of the findings of the St. Ann Committee, but obviously was embarrassed
by the evidence of widespread housing discrimination in a city that touted
itself as welcoming people of all races. Nevertheless, it would take several
years before the city developed and implemented a plan to address the
housing situation.
Sun Press
10-12-72.
Making Reform Happen
It was not the nature of those on the St. Ann Committee simply to spotlight
a problem and leave others to grapple with solutions. Rather, the Committee,
anticipating a sharp reaction to its audit and desiring to work constructively
toward the resolution of serious social and political problems, developed
a set of specific proposals to address the problems their report exposed.
Toward this end it made a series of recommendations, including that the
government of Cleveland Heights:
ß Take a proactive role in addressing the issue of housing discrimination
and promote compliance with all federal, state, and local fair housing
laws.
ß Enact and enforce legislation prohibiting the practice of steering.
ß Strengthen its housing department to help enforce laws and identify
instances of discrimination.
ß Help develop educational programs to promote positive attitudes
about integration.
Central to the implementation of these recommendations was the concurrent
establishment of the Heights Community Congress (HCC), a private interfaith
initiative begun in late 1972 by leaders of local Catholic, Jewish and
Protestant congregations, and held at the Carmelite Monastery. These sessions
led to the creation of the Heights Interfaith Council, whose purpose was
to promote interdenominational social action across a range of issues,
but especially with respect to racial integration. As reaction to the
St. Ann Audit spread, the Interfaith Council sought specifically to create
an organization to promote open housing, leading to the formal organization
of the HCC in early 1973. This marked a milestone in the struggle for
social justice in Cleveland Heights, as there is perhaps no organization
that has played a greater role in promoting equal access to housing and
racial integration in the Heights than the HCC.
That the initial mission of the HCC was to promote open housing in the
Heights was made evident by virtue of its sponsorship of the Heights Housing
Service, an agency tasked with sustaining the audit work of the St. Ann
Committee and funded by the City of Cleveland Heights. Appropriately,
Sue Nigro, the driving force behind the St. Ann Audit, was named director
of the Housing Service. Nigro oversaw an extensive network of volunteers
covering virtually every street in the city. Their mission was to monitor
real estate activity in their immediate neighborhood to help ensure that
discrimination did not occur. In light of the collaborative efforts of
the city and grassroots organizations such as HCC, Cleveland Heights was
twice named an All-American City for its creative and constructive efforts
to address serious issues impacting the community.
Two Heights
Housing Service "escorts" with Suzanne Nigro, March, 1974.
In 1976, oversight of the Housing
Service was transferred from the HCC to the city itself. Some in HCC expressed
reservations about the transfer, fearing that bureaucratic mechanisms
would replace the principled commitment to the ideal of fair housing in
the operation of the Housing Service. However, such fears were assuaged
when the city unveiled a comprehensive plan to enforce fair housing laws
and to promote residential integration. The city plan drew heavily from
the St. Ann Committee’s recommendations, reflecting its own maturing
commitment to the ideal that all people should have fair and equitable
access to housing, regardless of race.
HCC Carries On
While the more formal functions related to monitoring real estate practices
were transferred to the city, the HCC continued to move forward with its
mission to “promote part of this work, the HCC has strived to help
maintain an open, balanced, and high quality housing market in the Heights;
supported a strong, integrated public education system; encouraged grassroots
involvement in developing solutions to community problems; and promoted
programs and services that respond to the needs of a diverse population.
In pursuing these goals over the past three and one-half decades, the
HCC has proven to be one of the most valuable and enduring institutional
legacies to emerge from the controversy over housing discrimination in
Cleveland Heights.
Cleveland-area realtors
weren't the era's only housing-discrimination culprits. On February
8, 1977, The Plain Dealer announced that "Study Indicts FHA (Federal
Housing Administration) for segregation, " alleging (a show in
the graphic) that FHA loans were disbursed largely on the basi of
a particular area's racial makeup.
Though the 1968 Fair Housing Act may be the
least known of the major civil rights laws of the 1960s, it had a far-reaching
impact on cities like Cleveland Heights, where racial discrimination was
more subtle. Though few could have anticipated it, Cleveland Heights emerged
in the early 1970s as a bona fide test case of the public’s commitment
to the idea of fair housing. To be sure, there were moments when that commitment
was sorely tested. But thanks in large part to the work begun by a small
but highly dedicated group of women, and carried forth with support from
countless volunteers who shared their commitment to the ideal of equality,
a genuine grassroots movement helped to ensure that the Cleveland Heights
experiment in equal housing has enjoyed a remarkable and sustained level
of success.
Note: Information for this
article was drawn from several important sources on this topic including
W. Dennis Keating’s study of suburban housing integration, The Suburban
Racial Dilemma (1994); Marian J. Morton’s Cleveland Heights: The
Making of an Urban Suburb (2002), and Suzanne M. Nigro’s The 1972
St. Ann Audit: Person Reflections (2006), issued by the Heights Community
Congress.