Homeownership

New Cal Law Addresses Anti-Black Bias in Home Appraisal Process

“Black homeowners in predominantly White neighborhoods are getting their homes appraised for far less than their neighbors,” Holden said. “It’s just another example of how bias, whether explicit or implicit, creates inequity for Black Americans. This is redlining 2.0.”

Published

5 years ago

October 19, 2021

Isabelle Price

Before she puts the home on the market, the mid adult realtor evaluates the property.

Paul Austin and his wife Tenisha Tate, a Bay Area Black couple, were confident that the sale of their Marin City home would net them a sizeable profit. They had invested hundreds of thousands of dollars into renovations before putting it on the market.

But that process turned sour when the couple discovered alarming race-based discrimination baked into the system of home appraisals.

Austin shared that harrowing experience with the California Task Force to Study and Develop Reparation Proposals during its fourth meeting on Oct. 13.

California’s Assembly Bill (AB) 3121, signed into law in 2020, created the nine-member task force to investigate the history and costs of slavery in California and around the United States. The group is charged with studying and developing reparation proposals for African Americans and recommending appropriate ways to educate Californians about the task force’s findings.

Austin’s testimony added to the growing body of evidence that the wealth gap that exists between Black and White families in the United States was created — and has been maintained throughout history – by deep-rooted racial biases and intentional government policy at the federal, state and local levels.

“We had an appraiser come out in 2019 to appraise our home,” Austin said, talking about selling of his home, which is located five miles north of San Francisco. “She was an older White woman, and she appraised our house for just under a $1 million after we had already put in an additional $400,00 into our property. We did our homework because we should have appraised for $1.4 million. We had to fight against it.”

Austin and his wife added an additional 1,300 square feet to the home’s original 1,300 square footage, he told the Task Force

A qualified appraiser is responsible for creating a report based on a visual inspection. The property’s lot size, square footage, amenities, and number of bedrooms and bathrooms are expected to provide the basis for an unbiased valuation.

When Austin and Tate found a second appraiser, they decided to ask a White female friend to pose as the seller. This time around, they actually netted a surprisingly higher offer of $500,000 more.

When Austin and Tate’s story went viral and made headlines in news reports around the world, other Black families emerged to share disturbing stories of how they, too, were given deceptively low estimations of their homes’ values.

“We’re right at the beginning. The story is now being told,” Austin told the task force. “But within our community, we have not had the opportunity to galvanize people to start looking at their loans and appraisals and comparing them with others, and I mean White folks, to see what’s going on in this industry.”

On Sept. 28, Gov. Newsom signed Assemblymember Chris Holden’s (D-Pasadena) legislation Assembly Bill (AB) 948, which would address discrimination in the real estate appraisal process, such as the prejudicial treatment of Austin and his wife received.

AB 948 would require the Bureau of California Real Estate Appraisals to gather demographic information on buyers and sellers of real estate property and compile data of homeowners from protected classes who file complaints based on low appraisals. The legislation also requires appraisers to take anti-bias training when renewing their licenses.

“This bill reflects a starting point in a much-needed conversation about how discrimination is still prevalent in the home buying and selling process, and I am committed to addressing this inequity,” Holden said.

Less than one in five Black California households could afford to purchase a home valued at the statewide median-price of $659,380 in 2020, as compared to two in five White California households that could buy a home at the same price, according to the California Association Realtors (CAR).

CAR also stated in a February report that the affordability gap is “stark in expensive counties like San Francisco,” where a median-priced home of $1,650,000 was only affordable for 8% of Black households, 15% of Latinx households, and 22%of Asian households, compared to 35% of White households.

The 2019 homeownership rate in California was 63.2% for Whites, 60.2% for Asians, 44.1% for Latinx and 36.8% for Blacks, according to the Census Bureau’s American Community Survey.

Austin said that his family was part of the “second wave Great Migration” of Black people from the Deep South that settled in California around the 1940s. Many of them worked in the Sausalito shipyard in Marin County.

Many of the Black families that came to California during that period lived in government housing in Marin City while working in the naval shipyards in and around San Francisco. When World War II ended, Austin’s grandparents had enough money to purchase a home anywhere in Marin County.

“Due to redlining, they did not have that opportunity. Blacks weren’t able to buy land outside of Marin City,” he said. “If you look at Marin County, currently it’s arguably the richest county in California. The data also shows, when race counts, that Marin County, as a whole, has the largest disparities anywhere. It’s such a huge gap.”

Austin, who attended the Historical Black College and University, Texas Southern University in Houston, said that he doesn’t want to see his children or other Black Californians deal with the same types of issues.

“Just think that if we didn’t have the will to fight the appraisal company,” Austin said. “It’s the systems that have been created by White people for White people that continuously, negatively affect people that look like me. Now it’s time to take those steps and right the wrongs.”

Isabelle Price

Posts by Isabelle Price

Up Next

Reparations: How ‘Intentional’ Government Policy Denied Blacks Access to Wealth

Don't Miss

The Way West: Reparations Task Force Looks at Black Migration to California

Isabelle Price

Click to comment

Commentary

Oakland Probate Dispute Raises Questions About Court-Ordered Property Transfer and Missing Notice

A legal dispute over an Oakland property has intensified following a tentative ruling that favored occupant Zakiya Jendayi, who claimed she was not properly notified before a judge ordered the property transferred into an estate. After the ruling, the estate’s administrator successfully challenged the presiding judge and requested the case be returned to the judge who signed the original transfer order. The First District Court of Appeal has now intervened to review the disqualification process and recent changes to the court docket. Read more.

Published

2 weeks ago

October 25, 2026

Post News Group

By Quintella Griffin, Legal Writer

Opinion and documentary analysis | Part 2 of 2

A tentative ruling found that Oakland property occupant Zakiya Jendayi had not received notice before a judge ordered its transfer into an estate.

The ruling was not final. Attention shifted to the assigned judge.

The estate’s special administrator, Phillip Campbell, invoked California Code of Civil Procedure Section 170.6 to disqualify Judge Stephanie Sato. The trial court granted the challenge Sept. 9, 2026.

Five days later, Campbell requested reassignment specifically to Judge Sandra Bean, who had signed the property order Jendayi sought to overturn.

The sequence raises questions about procedural fairness.

A Challenge After an Unfavorable Ruling

Sato’s Sept. 8 tentative ruling concluded that California’s notice requirement protected Jendayi as an occupant, regardless of whether Jendayi held a valid ownership interest.

Her proposed decision would have vacated Bean’s Oct. 8, 2025, order.

Section 170.6 permits challenges under certain circumstances. Whether Campbell’s challenge was timely was disputed.

On Sept. 14, Campbell sought Bean’s reassignment, citing her familiarity with related trust litigation, judicial economy and consistency. Jendayi opposed the request the following day.

The timing invites serious public scrutiny but does not establish misconduct.

The Appellate Court Intervenes

In Kaiser Foundation Hospitals v. Superior Court (1987), a California appellate court examined the danger of allowing litigants to learn a judge’s likely decision before seeking disqualification.

The decision also recognized that changed assignments and insufficient notice can affect when a challenge is permissible.

On Sept. 17, 2026, the First District Court of Appeal stayed the order granting Campbell’s challenge and requested briefing addressing Kaiser.

That intervention did not vacate Bean’s property order, restore the invalidated trust or conclusively decide whether Campbell’s challenge was improper.

It did place the reassignment dispute under appellate review.

Questions in the Docket

Two versions of the court docket present another unresolved issue.

A printout preserved through Sept. 15 lacked reassignment entries that appeared in a later version. The later docket listed reassignment to Bean and a clerk’s notice under Sept. 9.

The difference warrants an explanation of when the entries were created, entered and made publicly accessible.

It does not establish deliberate backdating.

Accountability Beyond an Order

Judges generally enjoy immunity from damages claims arising from judicial acts, even when serious error is alleged. That protection does not make their decisions immune from review.

Appellate courts can correct legal errors; California’s Commission on Judicial Performance can investigate misconduct but cannot reverse judgments.

For Jendayi, the central concern remains practical: How much litigation must an occupant undertake to enforce a notice requirement intended to protect participation before property rights are adjudicated?

The U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in Mullane v. Central Hanover Bank & Trust Co. underscores the importance of meaningful notice and an opportunity to object.

The record establishes contested filings, a tentative ruling and appellate intervention, not anyone’s private motives.

The public deserves a transparent, documented explanation of this consequential judicial process.

A judge’s signature should resolve a lawful dispute, not silence legitimate questions about how the decision was reached.

The case is Estate of Laura Dean Head, Alameda County Superior Court case RP20066047. Records are available through the court’s eCourt Public Portal.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Commentary

Jendayi Arrest Raises Community Concerns Regarding Sheriff’s Chain of Command

Judge Sandra K. Bean ordered a legally inherited home to be taken from beneficiary Jendayi, citing “undue influence,” and gave it to Court Administrator Phillip Campbell, who Jendayi believes will quickly sell the house and pay himself more than $600,000 in court fees. The disinherited sisters will get the remainder of the proceeds of the sale.

Published

4 weeks ago

October 13, 2026

Post News Group

Supporters continue to gather outside the home of Zakiya Jendayi a week after sheriff’s deputies boarded up doors and windows, changed the locks and fenced off the property. Photo by Lindsay Imai Hong.

By Tanya Dennis

Last Thursday, Zakiya Jendayi parked on the side of the René C. Davidson Courthouse in Oakland to file an emergency stay request in what Jendayi asserts was the “legal” theft of her home of 13 years by a court administrator in her ongoing battle for her rightful inheritance in a probate battle.

But before she could fully emerge from the car at 12th and Oak streets, she was arrested by Alameda County Sheriffs for disobeying a court order and obstruction.

According to observers who have read the transcripts, the Hamlin v. Jendayi case, now in its sixth year, has resulted in what they describe as a gross miscarriage of justice.

Dr. Laura Dean Head named Jendayi as the beneficiary and executor over her estate after Jendayi took care of her during the last months of her life. Head’s disinherited sisters, Della Hamlin and Helaine Head, challenged the validity of Head’s will and trust, despite not being able to recognize Head in a photo during the trial, and Della stating she hadn’t spoken to her sister since 1997 or 1998 and would not have taken care of her during her hospice.

The appellate court upheld Bean’s ruling, which Jendayi asserts was based on a failure to fully consider the transcripts. “They never read the transcripts because if they had, they would have seen the truth,” Jendayi said.

Accompanied by Alameda Couty Sheriff’s Department deputies, Campbell arrived unannounced at Jendayi’s home on Oct. 1 – at the same time Jendayi was being arrested – to change the locks, board up the windows, and place a fence around the property.

Neither Jendayi, nor her supporters who had been in touch with Alameda County leadership and the Sheriff’s Department and been given the impression that nothing would happen without warning had been told Campbell was coming.

“I went to the courthouse to file an emergency stay document, and while getting out of the car, a sheriff immediately approached me and put handcuffs on me before I could stand up,” Jendayi said in recounting the events of Oct. 1. “I asked him if he had a warrant. He said ‘yes,’ and seven other officers immediately approached and surrounded me, with an additional three sheriffs standing back observing.

“I asked why it was necessary to have 10 officers to arrest me. They would not answer. I asked if the sergeant was there and asked if I could speak to him, but the sergeant refused to approach while another officer started taunting me over and over, stating, ‘I was at your house. I was at your house when you refused to surrender. We got you now.’

“The officer put the handcuffs on tight. I asked him to please loosen them. He refused and said they weren’t too tight. Then a Black, female deputy named Lewis, came over and asked him to loosen the handcuffs. Three times the white male officers were overly aggressive with me, and each time Deputy Lewis would step up and they would fall back. They said I was under arrest for refusing to surrender the house on Aug. 25.

“I asked them if I could file my paperwork, and they said, ‘No.’ Several officers asked me if I was on drugs. I felt like my life was in danger. I asked to speak to Deputy Lewis, and she came. I said, ‘Please tell my mother and Joyce Gordon that I would never kill myself.’ I did not want to end up like Sandra Bland, who was murdered by police officers in a Texas jail.”

Zendayi said they then took her to a section in the basement of the courthouse, placed her in a holding cell, and confiscated her belongings around 3 p.m. “They went through everything, took both cell phones, and asked if they could turn off my phones. I said ‘no,’ so they placed them in airplane mode.”

Then she was taken in a van to Santa Rita Jail in Dublin, which, because of traffic took almost two hours. “They asked me if I was on drugs and asked me to give a urine sample. I refused. They took a mug shot, and I was told it would be Monday before I could go to court. They put me in a cell with feces on the wall.

An hour after being detained, a deputy asked Jendayi if she knew someone who worked for the county and then asked if knew someone from the Sheriff’s Office and answered ‘no’ to both questions. He said, “You must know someone because we received orders to release you immediately. You’ll be out of here in about 40 minutes.”

“Rev. Raymond Langford of the Oakland Private Industry Council has been helping me to negotiate for more time to stay in my home,” Jendayi said. “I have an appeal with the Northern District Court of Appeals, where I’ve been promised they will review my case based on its merits. I was hoping to stay (in my home) until they reached a determination.

Rev. Langford reached out to Alameda County Supervisor Nikki Fortunata Bas and Chief Administrator David Brown, and they’ve been in contact with Sheriff Yesenia Sanchez.

“They weren’t going to give me the time I requested, but they did say that I would have time to move my belongings and would also be notified when they were coming,” Jendayi said. “None of that occurred.”

Langford said he spoke to Brown, Fortunato Bas and Sanchez right after the first attempt to evict Jendayi on Aug. 25 as well as the Alameda County Counsel and others to negotiate a time for Jendayi to move her belongings.

“There is no truth to the statement that there was no contact [with court and law enforcement officials.] There was an obvious miscommunication between Sanchez and her officers. They don’t have to inform the public of their actions, I understand that, but Zakiya and the community were concerned after they confiscated her guns.”

(Jendayi relinquished her weapons on Aug. 25 when sheriff’s deputies came to forcibly evict her while her petition for bankruptcy was still pending and should have interrupted the eviction process.)

“The Sheriffs have their own trust issues, and they need to work on that. They are not following the chain of command. David Brown, Fortunato Bas’s chief of staff, was puzzled also. He was told they would be informed when they would be returning. He was also blindsided like all of us.”

“(The Sheriffs’ Department) can come to the supervisors and get millions of dollars, but they can’t exhibit the courtesy to inform a citizen when she needs to move.”

“We, our group, ‘Friends of Zakiya,’ took a letter to Sanchez’s office citing Zakiya’s health issues, asking for more time just last week. Sanchez was a person who ran on the platform that she would not run the Sheriff’s Department on a military strategy, which they did on an African American senior in a comfortable, safe community.

“We understand they have to do their job, but we don’t want them targeting and profiling seniors. There has to be some accountability to the community,” Lankford said.

Supervisor Nikki Bas, deeply concerned with what has occurred, is joining with Supervisor Nate Miley to request a meeting with Attorney General Rob Bonta to request an independent investigation.

Post News Group

Posts by Post News Group

Commentary

Community Action Group ‘Friends of Zakiya’ Ask Sheriff for Time

“Friends and Neighbors of Zakiya,” a community group of more than 60 neighbors, friends and community activists, is standing strong with Jendayi. The group holds weekly vigils every Tuesday from 6 p.m.-7p.m. at Jendayi’s residence at 3614 Randolph Ave. in Oakland.

Published

2 months ago

September 22, 2026

Post News Group

By Tanya Dennis

Zakiya Jendayi received good news Monday, Sept. 14, when the appellate court ruled in her favor in the Hamlin v. Jendayi case, agreeing to hear the case on its merits regarding her motion to have Judge Sandra K. Bean’s ruling invalidated based upon Laura Dean Head’s living trust.

The bad news is that, at the time of this writing, the Sheriff’s Department was scheduled to evict Jendayi from her home yesterday.

The group is asking the community to join them and to make calls to Congresswoman Lateefah Simon, Attorney General Rob Bonta, Sheriff Yesenia Sanchez and DA Ursula Jones Dickson to stop what they deem the illegal eviction of Jendayi from her home of 13 years.

“I would hope that the Sheriff listens because, unlike the courts, my friends and neighbors have read the transcripts and seen for themselves the 42 findings that result in 35 false, six misleading, and one that is an error, which unbelievably the appeals court upheld.” says Jendayi. “With this new appeal, the court quite possibly will return my home to me, and so this makes no sense. The Sheriff is threatening to move forward to remove me before my appeal is heard.”

“This makes no sense,” says group member Rev. Raymond Langford. “She’s not a criminal, and she’s never had a criminal record. This situation has been horribly impactful on her physical and mental health. She’s now medically compromised due to all this stress, and all we’re asking for is time to see if the courts are in error. She should be given the opportunity for the appeal to be heard. That’s called justice, nothing more, nothing less.”.

Friends and Neighbors of Zakiya are organizing future protest actions to secure more time for Jendayi. They will be seen in front of the offices of Bonta, Simon and Sanchez, demanding that she have the opportunity for her case to be heard.

The Post is asking that the public join Friends and Neighbors of Zakiya and use the information listed to join in this fight for justice.

Friends and Neighbors of Zakiya asks you to sign the petition by activating the QR code below to enact a stay in Jendayi’s pending eviction from her home and to pursue a full and independent investigation into the ruling that invalidated Dr. Head’s trust.