Intro
[Charles Latibeaudiere] Evanston has approved what they believe to be the first reparations - and they are calling it reparations - but it is reparations for housing discrimination. So if you, or someone - or one of your ancestors lived in the town of Evanston from 1919 and 1969, you can get $25,000. Now, where that $25,000 goes, is part of the problem here. Because not everyone is thrilled with this - even some Black people are not happy with this. So joining us right now is a City Councilman in Evanston who actually voted against this, and she’s going to explain why.
1:38-1:43
[Harvey Levin] But you can use it as a primary residence if it's outside of Evanston, right?
[Cicely] You cannot use it for primary residence outside of Evanston.
1:53-2:38
[Cicely] Yes. I mean, the money goes back to the bank or the mortgage lender or the contractor, but yes. Part of the goal is kind of to counter gentrification, or the loss of our Black population. Which is fine, as a housing bill, as a housing plan, but you know, there’s many things that go into why Black people don’t live here anymore, economics might be one of them.
So I don’t know how many people are going to move back and relocate because of the $25,000 grant. But my opposition has nothing to do with reparations, I want to be really clear, I think we’re way delayed and overdue for reparations. It is that I think that this is a housing plan, which is great, I’m happy to have a housing plan, but
“I think that in terms of under the guise of reparation it falls very short compared to what people think reparations should be, and also what we have seen it be for other populations of people.”
2:41-3:07
[Cicely] And again, it’s the first program where hopefully we’ll get it better next time. But for the first and the only and the precedent-setting and all the things that have been said in the media, I don’t think it qualifies as reparations.
We do $25,000, we only have $400,000--that’s sixteen people. But you know I don’t think we should be giving money to the banks, who really have harmed people in so many ways for so many years, on behalf of Black folks and call that reparations.
3:08-3:52
[Charles Latibeaudiere] So Councilman, if they had removed the name, the word reparations from this, and it said “this is a housing discrimination ‘make-good’,” would you’ve voted for it?
[Cicely] Oh for sure, yes, yes. Again, my issue is that we are calling this reparations. I’m concerned we’re setting a really bad precedent for other municipalities that say “hey, we’re going to do the same thing” even if it’s just one of their things they’re gonna do, “and call it reparations,” because the Black families will benefit, ideally they’ll, you know, get a new home or get to stay into their home or remodel their home, whatever their choice is. But the banks are really benefiting, right? The Black person has to take a loan from the bank. They have to pay the bank back, you know, there’s a lot of beneficiaries that aren’t necessarily the family.
3:53-4:30
[Cicely] … we’re starting to fall under, you know, the greater kind of white supremacist narrative of “Black people are so poor, they need money to help them do all these things.”
“And I think we neglect Black people’s humanity and the ability they have to make choices for their family. ”
You know, if I get sued, and the judge tells me to pay you whatever money I owe you, I pay you that money, I don’t pay someone else on your behalf, I pay you, and as a human, you are allowed to dole that out as best you see.
I think we miss that part when we talk about reparations as well. We’re taking away the humanity and the ability for Black people to decide how best to manage the funds that we owe them.
4:41-4:58
[Cicely] I think words matter, and if we’re the government, and we’re saying “we’re repairing harm,” we also can’t do that and say “you can only do this with the repair.” Even again, I understand people who support it say “it’s just step 1, and we have to take a step,” and I agree we have to take a step. But we have to take the right step.”
5:11 to 5:29
[Cicely] but lots of Black people are saying, “hey, this is not what I want.” And for seniors, who maybe own their home and don’t want to do any of the the three things, we’re telling them “well hold on, something else is coming, although I don’t know what it is, when it is, or if you’ll qualify”
Original coverage from TMZ >
Evanston, Illinois just made history by becoming the first U.S. city to offer reparations to Black residents, but one member of its City Council doesn't want its plan to be the way of the future ... because she thinks it misses the mark.
Alderwoman Cicely Fleming was the lone vote against the Chicago suburb's proposed reparations program, but not because she's against reparations ... she doesn't believe this program qualifies to be called that.
If ya don't know, the City Council voted 8-1 to distribute $400,000 to 16 qualifying Black households. Each can get up to $25k, but it must be used for home repairs or home down payments.
Fleming was on "TMZ Live" Wednesday and said she considers it more of a housing plan -- and a good one -- but it falls way short of being a precedent-setting reparations system for others to emulate. Watch the clip ... the alderwoman explained why all the strings attached to the program will end up benefitting the very banks that have harmed Black citizens by discriminating against them.
To sum it up ... Alderwoman Fleming agrees a first step needs to be taken toward proper reparations, but this isn't it ...
