logo
Tulsa's new Black mayor proposes $100M trust to 'repair' impact of 1921 Race Massacre

Tulsa's new Black mayor proposes $100M trust to 'repair' impact of 1921 Race Massacre

TULSA, Okla. (AP) — Tulsa's new mayor on Sunday proposed a $100 million private trust as part of a reparations plan to give descendants of the 1921 Tulsa Race Massacre scholarships and housing help in a city-backed bid to make amends for one of the worst racial attacks in U.S. history.
The plan by Mayor Monroe Nichols, the first Black mayor of Oklahoma's second-largest city, would not provide direct cash payments to descendants or the last two centenarian survivors of the attack that killed as many as 300 Black people. He made the announcement at the Greenwood Cultural Center, located in the once-thriving district that was destroyed by a white mob.
Nichols said he does not use the term reparations, which he calls politically charged, characterizing his sweeping plan instead as a 'road to repair.'
'This is, I think, a very significant first step,' Nichols said. 'And it's something we can all unite around. I think we can unite around housing specifically for affected populations. I think we can unite around investing in the Greenwood district and making sure that we're able to revitalize it to be an economic power again.'
Nichols said the proposal would not require city council approval, although the council would need to authorize the transfer of any city property to the trust.
The private charitable trust would be created with a goal to secure $105 million in assets, with most of the funding either secured or committed by June 1, 2026. Although details of the trust programs would be developed over the next year by an executive director and a board of managers, the plan calls for the bulk of the funding, $60 million, to go toward improving buildings and revitalizing the city's north side.
'The Greenwood District at its height was a center of commerce,' Nichols said. 'So what was lost was not just something from North Tulsa or the Black community. It actually robbed Tulsa of an economic future that would have rivaled anywhere else in the world."
Nichols' proposal comes on the heels of an executive order he signed earlier this year recognizing June 1 as Tulsa Race Massacre Observance Day, an official holiday for the city.
Nichols also realizes the current national political climate, particularly President Trump's sweeping assault on diversity, equity and inclusion programs, provides challenging political crosswinds.
'The fact that this lines up with a broader national conversation is a tough environment,' Nichols admitted, 'but it doesn't change the work we have to do.'
Jacqueline Weary, is a granddaughter of massacre survivor John R. Emerson, Sr., who owned a hotel and cab company in Greenwood that were destroyed. She acknowledged the political difficulty of giving cash payments to descendants. But at the same time, she wondered how much of her family's wealth was lost as a result of the massacre.
'If Greenwood was still there, my grandfather would still have his hotel,' said Weary, 65. 'It rightfully was our inheritance, and it was literally taken away.'
Tulsa is not the first U.S. city to explore the idea of reparations. The Chicago suburb of Evanston, Illinois, was the first U.S. city to make reparations available to its Black residents for past discrimination, offering qualifying households $25,000 for home repairs, down payments on property, and interest or late penalties on property in the city. The funding for the program came from taxes on the sale of recreational marijuana.
Other communities and organizations that have considered providing reparations range from the state of California to cities like Amherst, Massachusetts; Providence, Rhode Island; Asheville, North Carolina; and Iowa City, Iowa; religious denominations like the Episcopal Church; and prominent colleges like Georgetown University in Washington.
In Tulsa, there are only two living survivors of the Race Massacre, both of whom are 110 years old: Leslie Benningfield Randle and Viola Fletcher. Both received direct financial compensation from both a Tulsa-based nonprofit and a New York-based philanthropic organization, but have not received any recompense from the city or state.
Damario Solomon-Simmons, an attorney for the survivors and the founder of the Justice for Greenwood Foundation, could not be reached for comment on the mayor's plan, but said earlier this year that any reparations plan should include direct payments to Randle and Fletcher and a victims' compensation fund for outstanding claims.
A lawsuit filed by Solomon-Simmons on behalf of the survivors was rejected by the Oklahoma Supreme Court last year, dampening racial justice advocates' hopes that the city would ever make financial amends.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

The war on woke…energy?
The war on woke…energy?

Yahoo

time18 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

The war on woke…energy?

An electrical substation near Imboden, Va. (Sarah Vogelsong/Virginia Mercury) I've been thinking a lot about language lately, and the strange way words that used to mean good things are now attacked as bad, and vice-versa. Diversity, equity and inclusion are radioactive. Mentioning environmental justice or climate change will get your federal program canceled. Coal is clean, even beautiful, and pointing out the connection to global warming makes you an alarmist, because speaking up when your government steers you towards disaster is now a bad thing to do. Recently I received an email excoriating 'woke' energy policy, which seemed especially curious. I can see how awareness of historic racial injustice against Black people might nudge policy makers into greater support for renewable energy, given that pollution from fossil fuels tends to have a disparate impact on communities of color. But judging from the hostile tone of the email, I believe we may have different understandings of wokeness. Sometimes, though, words mean different things to different people without anyone realizing they aren't using the same definition. That may be the case when Virginia leaders talk about the reliability of the electricity supply. Everyone agrees reliability is critical – but they may not be talking about the same thing. We suspected data centers were creating an energy crisis for Virginia. Now it's official. Virginia's need for power is growing at a terrific pace. Data centers consume so much electricity that our utilities can't keep up, causing them to increase imports from out of state. That's okay for now; West Virginia is not a hostile foreign nation. Also, Virginia is a member of a larger grid, the 13-state (plus D.C.) PJM Interconnection, which manages thousands of generating facilities to ensure output matches demand across the region. But even across this wider area, demand is increasing faster than supply, pushing up prices and threatening a shortfall. Unless we tell data centers to go elsewhere, we need more generation, and fast. Democrats and Republicans are divided over how to increase the power supply. Democrats remain committed to the Virginia Clean Economy Act, which requires Virginia's electricity to decarbonize by 2050. Meeting the VCEA's milestones requires investments in renewable energy and storage, both to address climate change and to save ratepayers from the high costs of coal and fracked gas. Gov. Glenn Youngkin and members of his party counter that fossil fuels are tried-and-true, baseload sources of energy. They advocate abandoning the VCEA and building more gas plants, arguing that renewable energy just isn't reliable. Note that these Republicans are not alarmists, so they ignore climate change. If they were the proverbial frog in a pot of water on the stove, they would consider it a point of pride that they boiled to death without acknowledging the reason. Youngkin takes every chance he gets to slam the VCEA. As I've previously described, the governor sought to amend various energy-related legislation to become VCEA repeal bills, regardless of the original subject matter or how much good it could do. With vetoes and destructive amendments, Youngkin acts to deepen Virginia's energy woes Last month, Youngkin's Director of the Department of Energy sent a report on performance-based utility regulation to the State Corporation Commission. With it was a cover letter that had nothing to say about performance-based regulation, but a lot to say about the big, bad VCEA. The letter insists that 'By all models, VCEA is unable to meet Virginia's growing energy demand' and urges the SCC to 'prioritize ratepayer affordability and grid reliability over long-term VCEA compliance.' Unfortunately for the Youngkin administration, affordability hasn't been an argument in favor of fossil fuels for many years now. A new solar farm generates a megawatt of electricity more cheaply than a new fossil gas plant, and that will still be true even if Congress revokes renewable energy subsidies – though doing so will make electricity less affordable. The argument from fossil fuel defenders then becomes that the cheapest megawatt is not a reliable megawatt. And that's where meaning matters. Reliability is so important that even the decarbonization mandate of the VCEA contains an important exception: a utility can build fossil fuel generation under certain circumstances, if it is the only way to keep the lights on. Dominion Energy is relying on this escape clause as it seeks regulatory approval to build new fossil gas combustion turbines on the site of an old coal plant in Chesterfield. The move is opposed by local residents, environmental justice advocates and climate activists. (No word on whether they are alarmists or simply alarmed.) They argue Dominion hasn't met the conditions set out in the VCEA to trigger the escape clause, including achieving energy efficiency targets and proving it can't meet its needs with renewable energy, energy storage and demand response programs. Virginia Republicans not only side with Dominion on this, they increasingly favor building gas plants over renewables as a general matter, urging the reliability point. It's an argument that never made much sense for me, given that renewables make up only 5% of PJM's electricity. That's way less than the national average of over 21%, and other grids aren't crashing right and left. The light bulb went off for me while I was watching the May meeting of the Commission on Electric Utility Regulation. A PJM representative showed a chart of how the grid operator assigns numbers to different resources according to how they contribute to the electricity supply. Nuclear plants get the highest score because they run constantly, intermittent wind and solar sources get lower scores, with fossil fuel plants in the middle. PJM calls that a reliability score. For some Republicans, that's a slam-dunk: the chart proves renewable energy is unreliable. But in spite of its label, the chart doesn't actually measure reliability; it gives points for availability, which is not the same thing. As I once heard a solar installer testify, few things are as reliable as the sun rising every morning (or rather, the earth rotating). With modern weather forecasting, grid operators can predict with great precision how much electricity from solar they can count on at any given time from solar facilities arrayed across the region. Solar energy is highly reliable, even though it is not always available. Add storage, and the availability issue is also resolved. Obviously, the grid would not be reliable if solar were the only resource operators had to work with. But it isn't. PJM calls on a mix of different sources, plus storage facilities and demand response, to ensure generation precisely matches the peaks and valleys of demand. Reliability is a matter of keeping resources in sync and ensuring a robust transmission and distribution system. The threat to reliability today comes from the mad rush to connect new data centers. PJM has been roundly criticized for not approving new generating and storage facilities' connection to the grid at a fast enough pace to keep up with the increase in demand and retirements of old, money-losing fossil fuel plants. Scrambling to recover, recently it decided to prioritize a smaller number of big, new gas plants over the thousands of megawatts of renewable energy and storage still languishing on its waiting list. Meanwhile, PJM wants utilities to keep operating coal plants even though it will make electricity less affordable and violate state climate laws. In this it is joined by the Trump administration, which wants to require utilities to keep running coal plants explicitly to support the coal industry. Analysts say this is the wrong way to achieve reliability. A recent report from the consulting firm Synapse estimates that PJM's approach will raise residential electricity bills by 60% by 2036-2040. By contrast, reforming its interconnection process and enabling more renewable energy and storage to come online would lower bills by 7%. By Synapse's calculation, Virginia would see the most savings of any state. In other words, Virginia Republicans are pursuing reliability the wrong way. Instead of pressuring Democrats to back away from the VCEA, they ought to be pressuring PJM to reform its approach. Reliable power doesn't have to be expensive, if you take the politics out of it. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE

Schwarzenegger tells environmentalists dismayed by Trump to 'stop whining' and get to work
Schwarzenegger tells environmentalists dismayed by Trump to 'stop whining' and get to work

San Francisco Chronicle​

time19 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

Schwarzenegger tells environmentalists dismayed by Trump to 'stop whining' and get to work

VIENNA (AP) — Arnold Schwarzenegger has a message for environmentalists who despair at the the approach of President Donald Trump's administration: 'Stop whining and get to work.' The new U.S. administration has taken an ax to Biden-era environmental ambitions, rolled back landmark regulations, withdrawn climate project funding and instead bolstered support for oil and gas production in the name of an 'American energy dominance' agenda. Schwarzenegger, the former Republican governor of California, has devoted time to environmental causes since leaving political office in 2011. He said Tuesday he keeps hearing from environmentalists and policy experts lately who ask, 'What is the point of fighting for a clean environment when the government of the United States says climate change is a hoax and coal and oil is the future?' Schwarzenegger told the Austrian World Summit in Vienna, an event he helps organize, that he responds: 'Stop whining and get to work.' He pointed to examples of local and regional governments and companies taking action, including his own administration in California, and argued 70% of pollution is reduced at the local or state level. 'Be the mayor that makes buses electric; be the CEO who ends fossil fuel dependence; be the school that puts (up) solar roofs," he said. 'You can't just sit around and make excuses because one guy in a very nice White House on Pennsylvania Avenue doesn't agree with you,' he said, adding that attacking the president is 'not my style' and he doesn't criticize any president when outside the U.S. 'I know that the people are sick and tired of the whining and the complaining and the doom and gloom,' Schwarzenegger said. 'The only way we win the people's hearts and minds is by showing them action that makes their lives better.'

Corcept: Q1 Earnings Snapshot
Corcept: Q1 Earnings Snapshot

Yahoo

timean hour ago

  • Yahoo

Corcept: Q1 Earnings Snapshot

REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) — REDWOOD CITY, Calif. (AP) — Corcept Therapeutics Inc. (CORT) on Monday reported first-quarter net income of $20.3 million. The Redwood City, California-based company said it had net income of 17 cents per share. The results met Wall Street expectations. The average estimate of four analysts surveyed by Zacks Investment Research was also for earnings of 17 cents per share. The drug developer posted revenue of $157.2 million in the period, missing Street forecasts. Four analysts surveyed by Zacks expected $178 million. _____ This story was generated by Automated Insights ( using data from Zacks Investment Research. Access a Zacks stock report on CORT at Sign in to access your portfolio

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store