Santa Clarita is often described as a safe, family-friendly community, a place where people come for good schools, low crime, and well-maintained neighborhoods. But beneath that polished image lies a rarely discussed reality: the unspoken but persistent racism and classism that shape who feels truly welcome here.
While discrimination in Santa Clarita doesn’t always manifest in obvious ways, it is embedded in policies, social norms and coded language that maintain the status quo. Conversations about housing, policing and economic development all reveal an underlying resistance to diversity and inclusivity, even as the city becomes more diverse. If we are serious about fostering a strong, united community, we must be willing to name these barriers and work to remove them.
Santa Clarita’s housing policies reflect a deep discomfort with socioeconomic diversity. Whenever affordable housing proposals arise, there is immediate backlash from homeowners citing concerns about “increasing crime” or “lowering property values.” These arguments are rarely stated outright in racial terms, but the message is clear: Certain people are seen as undesirable neighbors.
For example, the hostility toward renters — particularly those using Section 8 housing assistance —reveals class-based prejudice wrapped in economic justifications. The assumption that renters don’t take care of their homes or don’t contribute to the community ignores the reality that many middle-class families, seniors and working professionals rely on rental housing due to high costs and limited homeownership opportunities.
These attitudes are reinforced through zoning policies that favor large, single-family homes while limiting multi-family housing developments. This ensures that lower-income families, disproportionately Black and Latino, remain excluded from many parts of the city. If we are serious about inclusion, we must question whether our policies reflect a true commitment to diversity or simply a desire to maintain exclusivity.
Beyond housing, community conversations around growth and change frequently include coded language that serves as a thinly veiled resistance to diversity. Phrases like “keeping the area nice” and “preserving the character of the neighborhood” often appear in discussions opposing new developments, schools, and businesses that would bring greater racial and economic diversity to Santa Clarita.
Similarly, discussions around public safety often assume that more policing equals more safety — but for whom? While Santa Clarita touts its low crime rates, this doesn’t mean everyone experiences law enforcement equally. Black and Latino residents have spoken about feeling disproportionately scrutinized while doing routine activities like shopping or driving through certain neighborhoods. But raising these concerns is often met with denial or defensiveness, as though acknowledging disparities is an attack on law enforcement rather than a call for fairness.
These patterns — exclusionary housing policies, coded language, and unequal policing experiences — are not unique to Santa Clarita, but they thrive here because they are rarely confronted. Many residents believe that because there are no explicit racial segregation laws, racism isn’t an issue. But systemic racism isn’t about individual bigotry — it’s about the ways policies and norms quietly reinforce racial and economic stratification.
So, what can we do?
• Acknowledge the problem. Racism and classism in Santa Clarita are not always overt, but they are deeply embedded in how we talk about housing, safety, and community identity.
• Challenge coded language. The next time you hear concerns about “keeping the area nice” or “protecting property values,” ask what that really means and who is being excluded.
• Advocate for inclusive policies. Support efforts to expand affordable housing, improve renter protections, and increase economic opportunities for all residents, not just those who can afford to buy into exclusivity.
• Listen to marginalized voices. Rather than dismissing concerns from Black, Latino, and lower-income residents as “divisive,” engage with their experiences and perspectives.
Santa Clarita has the potential to be a truly inclusive community, but inclusion requires action, not just rhetoric. If we continue to ignore the quiet barriers that shape who feels welcome here, we are not building a stronger community — we are simply maintaining a more polite version of exclusion.
The question is: Are we ready to change that?
Maggie Bowman
Valencia