the liberty of people. Does not this manifest the very unfortunate fact that these churchmen have more faith in the coercive power of manmade law than they do in the persuasive power of Christianity?

Mr. WOODWORTH. It shows to me, yes, sir, that they have more faith in the power of mobs and masses to accomplish their own human end than they do in the power of the word of God and in prayer. These ought to be their major points.

Senator ERVIN. I want to thank you for your appearance today. It seems to me that the most precious value of civilization is freedom, and that this bill is one of the most drastic assaults on freedom ever proposed in America.

Mr. WOODWORTH. Yes, sir; I am deeply concerned about this.

Senator ERVIN. Thank you and Miss Zimmerman for your appear

ance.

Mr. WOODWORTH. Thank you.

Senator ERVIN. Counsel will call the next witness.

Mr. AUTRY. The next witness is Mr. Norman L. Kilpatrick, corresponding secretary, Prince Georges County action project and legislative chairman, Prince Georges County Fair Housing, Inc., Riverdale, Md.

Senator ERVIN. Mr. Kilpatrick, I want to welcome you and thank you for appearing before the subcommittee.

STATEMENT OF NORMAN L. KILPATRICK, CORRESPONDING SECRETARY, PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY ACTION PROJECT, AND PRESIDENT, PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY FAIR HOUSING, INC., RIVERDALE, MD.

Mr. KILPATRICK. Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to be here.

I would like to say that I am very concerned, because in my opinion a basic issue and a basic right of homeowners, of protection, is being ignored and even distorted in much of the testimony that I have heard or read that has been presented to this committee concerning title IV.

I would like to join my colleagues from Maryland, Mr. Setta and Mr. Williams, in opposing title IV of Senate bill 3296 as it is presently worded. This title as now written, I do believe, could pose a threat, and a threat that has not been properly discussed, to many American communities. To protect the stability of many neighborhoods it is likely to affect, this section must be amended to include an antiblockbusting clause. I would, on behalf of Prince Georges County (Md.) Fair Housing, Inc., like to suggest that the wording of the Maryland antiblockbusting law be considered for addition as such an amendment to this bill.

Now, let me state that blockbusting is not the coming of a colored family into an all-white neighborhood. That is simply desegregation. Blockbusting is active attempts by real estate agents and agitators to panic white homeowners out of desegregated neighborhoods. These real estate operators often pressure white owners into selling their homes to them at less than market value, then resell this housing to colored buyers, at more than its market value, reaping huge profits from such transaction.

This practice should be stopped because it is wrong. I must criticize the seeming lack of concern of many civil rights leaders with this problem. This highly profitable practice is, likewise, not fairly explained to the public or to this committee, in testimony presented by the real estate industry. Blockbusting can only be wiped out when it is not possible for a real estate firm to say to a qualified colored buyer, "We will not sell to you in Belair, but we have a nice house for you in Pepper Mill Village (an area being blockbusted)." This requires legislation to forbid discrimination due to race by real estate agents in one part of an area, and legislation to forbid blockbusting panic campaigns in other areas. Thus, both colored customers and houses sold by whites can be taken from these unethical businessmen, and the interests of both colored buyers and white homeowners can be protected. The present bill seems well worded to deal with the first part of this problem but must have wording added to deal with the second aspect of this matter.

It appears that some supporters of fair housing, including the National Committee Against Discrimination in Housing, seem to feel that racial bigotry is a major motive in the opposition of a major segment of the real estate industry to open occupancy. Our experience in Prince Georges County indicates that this is an unfair charge. Realtors and other real estate operators are in business to make money—we know this and we should accept this and their opposition to open occupancy is mainly motivated by fear of loss of excessive profits from blockbusting in homes and slum apartments.

How can I say this? What is the logic behind this? Many decent colored Americans pay rents of over $110 per month for slum property with perhaps only one bedroom and wall to wall roaches. They are not slum families but they are forced to rent such property because the apartment industry keeps them from renting in decent apartments. Naturally, charging middle-class rents for an old apartment that has almost no upkeep charges is profitable. Most colored Americans would prefer not to be forced by discrimination by the real estate industry to purchase newer housing in an area with tension caused by blockbusting, at higher price than the white homeowner sold it for. However, the practices of most of the real estate industry give qualified colored families little choice in where they may purchase a home today. Thus, the restricted market created by segregated real estate patterns creates a profitable market for housing in areas being changed into all-Negro areas by real estate firms. This has gone all over the country. I speak with assurance only about Maryland, but this is a well-known phenomenon. Details of this sort of thing and its relationship to discrimination in housing appeared in 1962 when the Saturday Evening Post ran an excellent article called, "Confessions of a Blockbuster," which was written by a respected real estate broker in which he explained how he did. this and how much money he made.

A Congressman from my former home State of North Carolina has made the statement, "But there is no such thing (compulsory residential segregation) in existence." This is, of course, true in the small southern towns in which I was raised. But it is not true, and Prince Georges fair housing has a huge quantity of evidence on this point,

in large city areas where a powerful real estate industry controls the housing market, unlike the situation in most of the South. I do not see how the real estate representatives that oppose open occupancy have the nerve to claim that they only oppose laws to promote this goal, but really down deep they are in favor of open occupancy. For example, just 2 months ago Prince Georges conducted a voluntary fair housing pledge campaign, prior to which we asked the leading firms in our board of realtors to support our efforts. Not one firm even replied to our letter to their different companies. The realtors always seem to claim that they do not approve of or engage in blockbusting. If you ask them, I am sure they will tell you this. However, when the Maryland anti-blockbusting law was being supported by civic groups in the State, the only opposition to this legislation that appeared before the State legislature came from the Maryland Association of Real Estate Boards. In Prince Georges County a local anti-blockbusting law was opposed in Annapolis only by the Prince Georges County Board of Realtors. The real estate interests opposed the recently enacted Baltimore City anti-blockbusting law, also, I would like to add.

The question has been raised as to why States like New York continue to have racial ghettos long after they have fair housing laws. This is a good question. I believe that one good answer to this question is that New York State has no anti-block-busting law, and thus colored buyers generally go where the real estate interests make it easy for them to go, into high priced new ghettos, formed by blockbusting. I have attached a newspaper reprint that gives details of such tactics, for the information of the committee, let me add. The National Association of Real Estate Boards has claimed that fair housing laws will, legitimize the contemptible blockbusting procedure." This claim may well be true, but can easily be dealt with by an anti-block-busting clause to such legislation. I think the answer to the problem is to amend this bill to have an anti-blockbusting clause.

66* * *

Another point. The realtors often claim that forcing an unwanted person into a neighborhood only creates ill feeling. I think they are trying to distort the issue, to get away from the point. Prince Georges' fair housing has had hundreds of experiences in helping to move in Negro families into areas which are predominantly white where, if you took a vote, the majority of the neighborhood would say, "No, we do not want a colored neighbor," yet in a few months learned the neighbors have accepted the family as individuals. Education takes place after desegregation of a neighborhood, and not before. Unless real estate agents go from door to door to fan the fears of white residents they will accept the colored family.

Finally, I feel an anti-blockbusting clause is needed for this legislation for a very political reason. Many white voters have seen an area with a few colored residents rapidly change into an all-Negro section. This is a fact. They need to be reassured that unethical real estate operators will not continue to fan fears when a few colored citizens buy a home in their neighborhood. Also, many blockbusting firms claim they are fair housing firms as they bust white residents from one area to another. I believe adding an anti-blockbusting

clause will allow many Congressmen and Senators who support open occupancy to explain to their voters that fair housing is not blockbusting, and this bill is designed to protect the white homeowner as well as the colored buyer from unethical real estate firms. White residents do not run from decent colored neighbors, unless pushed by speculators. The amendment I suggest, it surely seems, will promote open occupancy and protect the rights of all concerned. Particularly what I think is the very neglected right of the white homeowner or the colored homeowner in an integrated community from the constant pressures and tensions, caused by real estate speculators or anybody else that chooses to agitate.

Senator ERVIN. Do you want the other exhibits printed in the record?

Mr. KILPATRICK. Yes, sir; if they could be.

Senator ERVIN. The article from the Washington Afro-American of October 23, the Maryland statute and the article from the Washington Post will be printed in full in the body of the record. (The three documents referred to follow :)

[From the Washington Afro-American, Washington, D.C., Oct. 23, 1965]

Dear AFRO:

OUR READERS SAY: BLOCK BUSTING

More racial misunderstanding is preached in the Washington suburbs today by certain members of the real estate industry than by the Nazi Party, the White Citizens' Councils, and the John Birch Society combined.

These real estate operators create or increase ill will, fear, and misunderstanding about colored Americans among the white home owners who they reach with their propaganda in order to reap huge financial gains from the panic they create in white communities.

These same "block-busting" real estate interests oppose state-wide "fair housing" laws in Virginia and Maryland, in order to prevent colored buyers from being able to buy freely in the open market and in the location of their choice. Colored families interested in suburban housing can not buy property in four different ways. They can buy a limited amount of new housing in all-colored developments being sold by a few companies.

They can purchase older housing in traditionally colored sections of the suburban counties. They can often obtain both new and older housing through local "fair housing" organizations, who also can direct interested colored buyers to the small but growing group of real estate dealers who will deal fairly with colored citizens.

Houses listed with Prince Georges County Fair Housing, Inc., for example in areas not formerly available to colored customers, often range in price down toward $10,000. Details of those houses currently listed as for sale to all can be obtained from Mrs. Nancy Falk, 8 Olive Wood Court, Greenbelt, Md. (ph. 345-8553), in Prince George County. The fourth way for colored families to obtain suburban housing is to pay the "segregation tax" and buy from a blockbuster.

Block-busting real estate speculators are currently creating a housing and racial crisis in Prince Georges County, and are hard at work in Seat Pleasant, Chillum, Carmody Hills, and Palmer Park.

The basic purpose of these real estate persons is to pressure white home owners to sell property to them at less than its market value, and to resell it to colored buyers at more than its fair market price.

The basic plan used by block-busters, in Washington, in Ohio, and now in Maryland, is to first quietly buy up houses that come up for sale in the normal market turnover, in a particular community or neighborhood, until they own a house in each section of the all-white target area.

They then plant, by renting or selling, colored families in each of their houses. Often the colored families scattered in this manner throughout the area, are carefully chosen as to size of family, general appearance and conduct, income level, etc. so as to make the worst possible impression on their white neighbors.

A number of cases appear to exist where families from slum areas are given special low rent rates to live in all-white neighborhoods for a certain period of time, to help raise the level of apprehension about colored neighbors, in the nearby whites.

The speculators or speculator then start a massive campaign to pressure and panic the neighborhood into selling is homes quickly. This campaign will usually include the use of mass mailings, direct phone solicitation, door to door contacts and the use of white "plants."

The white "plants" are generally persons working for a real estate firm, who are given a rental house owned by the real estate company. This family will move into the target area before the first colored family is moved in, and becomes accepted by their neighbors as regular residents.

Shortly after the real estate firm moves a colored family into the area these persons spend a great deal of time talking to their neighbors, spreading all types of lies and rumors, especially about how, ". . . the colored are going to take over," "... the neighborhood is going to go all-colored," and, ". property values always go way down when colored move in. These persons often start rumors that civil rights groups are behind the block busting operations, while other members of the real estate company concerned go around buying the houses put up for sale as a result of the agitation of the "plants."

It is the intent of those real estate firms that block-bust to prevent the education of the white residents from coming to pass.

They work to gain a sale from a white home owner while the owner's fear and prejudice are at their highest, and tell the seller that since only colored buyers will purchase in the area now, and all colored citizens are poor, they must sell their house at less than its market value.

They often turn around and tell a colored prospect for the house that the hostility he experiences after he buys in an area being "busted," from white neighbors, is a "natural" reaction of these persons to colored persons. Thus, neither white nor colored are aware of how the "friendly" real estate agent is responsible for directing their fears at each other, while he sets up and profits from, the entire situation.

NORMAN KILPATRICK, Palmer Park Citizens Association.

THE MARYLAND ANTI-BLOCKBUSTING LAW'S WORDING

Article 56, Annotated Code of Maryland (1964 Replacement Volume), title "licenses", subtitle "Real Estate Brokers", Section 230-A:

"230A. (a) It is unlawful for any person, firm, corporation or association, whether or not acting for monetary gain, knowingly to induce or attempt to induce another person to transfer an interest in real property, or to discourage another person from purchasing real property, by representations regarding the existing or potential proximity of real property owned, used, or occupied by persons of any particular race, color, religion, or national origin, or to represent that such existing or potential proximity will or may result in: 1. The lowering of property values; 2. A change in the racial, religious, or ethnic character of the block, neighborhood or area in which the property is located; 3. An increase in criminal or antisocial behavior in the area; or 4. A decline in quality of the schools serving the area.

"(b) A violation of this section is a misdemeanor, punishable upon conviction by a fine of not more than five hundred dollars ($500) or imprisonment for one year, or both; and a conviction of any real estate broker or real estate salesman for a violation of this section shall be referred to the Maryland Real Estate Commission for action."

The introduction to Maryland Senate Bill 453, which was signed into law as the above section, on April 28, 1966, was as follows:

"Whereas, the practice known as 'blockbusting' is disruptive to the peace, tranquility, and general good order of the State of Maryland, and is usually engaged in by firms or individuals interested in reaping excessive financial profits from such activity. This practice cheats homeowners, increases inter-group tensions, promotes neighborhood instability, and creates ghettoes which do harm to the citizens of Maryland; and

"Whereas, it is essential to the peace and welfare of the community that public as well as private efforts be made to stamp out this unscrupulous practice,