Descendants of former slaves would be eligible for housing payouts from the state under a pair of bills approved by California lawmakers last week. The state Assembly overwhelmingly voted in favor of Assembly Bill 57 and Assembly Bill 62, which are being described as a step toward reparations for Black Californians. But it’s worth asking how much difference they will really make.
For generations, Black families have been locked out of homeownership and stripped of property by government policy and private discrimination. The new bills are supposed to help fix that. The reality, however, is more complicated, and the solutions being offered are far from the kind of direct, transformative action that would really close the wealth gap.
First, let’s look at what the bills do. AB 57 would require that at least 10% of the state’s Home Purchase Assistance Program funds go to descendants of enslaved people. That means if you’re Black, can trace your ancestry to enslaved people, and meet the income and eligibility requirements, you might be able to get help with a down payment or closing costs when you buy a home.
AB 62 is aimed at Black families who lost property to racially motivated eminent domain. If you can prove your family’s land was taken by the government for reasons tied to race, the state would have to look into your claim and, if it checks out, give you the land back, offer you other public land or pay you compensation.
It sounds good on paper, but the reality is that these are targeted, limited programs.
California’s housing market is one of the most expensive in the country and even with down payment assistance, many Black families will still be priced out. The 10% carve-out in AB 57 is just a slice of an already small program, and it won’t reach anywhere near the number of families who have been shut out of homeownership for generations.
And even if you do qualify, you’re still up against high home prices, rising interest rates and a system that has not stopped discriminating against Black buyers. Appraisal bias, higher mortgage rates and a lack of family wealth to tap for emergencies are all still part of the picture.
AB 62, meanwhile, asks families to prove their property was taken unfairly, sometimes decades ago. Anyone who has tried to track down government records or family deeds from the 1950s or earlier knows how hard that can be. The emotional toll of digging through family history, the bureaucratic hurdles and the uncertainty of whether the state will agree with your claim all make this a tough road.
And even if you win, there’s no guarantee the compensation will come close to what your family lost, especially when you factor in the value that land would have today.
This echoes the case of Bruce’s Beach, where Los Angeles County returned oceanfront land to the Bruce family nearly a century after Manhattan Beach officials seized it to drive out Black business owners. The family later sold the land back to the county for $20 million.
Santa Monica is also considering how to compensate descendants of Silas White, a Black businessman whose land was seized before he could open a beach club.
The critical issue is that these bills are being talked about as reparations, but they’re not quite that. Real reparations would mean direct payments to families who have been harmed, not just targeted programs or the promise of help if you can jump through enough hoops.
The Black-white wealth gap in America is massive and has been built over centuries through policies that favored white families and locked Black families out of wealth-building opportunities. Homeownership is just one part of the story, but it’s a big one.
When Black families were denied the chance to buy homes in growing neighborhoods or had their property taken for highways or “urban renewal,” they lost not just a place to live, but the chance to build and pass down wealth.
These new bills might help a handful of families, and they might even set a precedent for other states. But the idea that a couple of programs can undo generations of harm is wishful thinking. The scale of the problem is so much bigger than what these bills address.
The wealth gap isn’t just about who owns a home — it’s about income, education, access to credit and the ability to weather financial storms. Until there’s a serious conversation about direct compensation, these kinds of programs will be more about political symbolism than real change.
California’s AB 57 and AB 62 are a solid first step and a good start to restorative justice, but they are unlikely to reach most Black families. The real work of closing the wealth gap will take more than targeted housing programs.
It will take a willingness to confront the full history of how wealth was taken and a commitment to making families whole, not just offering them a chance at a piece of what’s left.
Dion Rabouin is The Wave’s new business and digital editor. Feel free to send suggestions and story ideas to Dion@wavepublication.com.
