Exclusionary Zoning: A Wrong in Search of a Remedy

This article discusses affirmative approaches to providing effective relief in two types of exclusionary zoning cases: (1) remedies specific to a particular proposed development or a given site and (2) regional remedies, which provide a generalized framework for meeting what courts are increasingly identifying as a regional problem: the need for decent housing for all families. In the first instance (the single-site case) a court would remove obstacles in order to facilitate development of low- and moderate- income housing on a particular suburban site. In the second case (the regional approach) a court would specify the obligation of the municipalities in a region in terms of the number of units of low- and moderate-income housing to be provided in each particular community. This obligation would be a proportionate share of the low- and moderate-income housing needed in the region as a whole, and would constitute the measure of relief to which an aggrieved plaintiff would be entitled. The court would also adopt mechanisms to insure implementation of this regional housing distribution system. Under either approach invalidation of exclusionary zoning schemes by the courts would be converted into the only form of effective relief, increased housing opportunities in suburban areas for low- and moderate-income families

School Desegregation Versus Public Housing Desegregation: The Local School District and the Metropolitan Housing District

This Article argues that Milliken is not applicable to the public housing context because the appropriate housing district is the metropolitan area rather than simply the central city

State Mandates, Housing Elements, and Low-income Housing Production

In order to create low-income housing opportunities and mitigate exclusionary zoning, in 1968 Congress mandated that municipalities receiving comprehensive planning funds must create a housing element. In tandem, many states mandated that municipal housing elements must accommodate low-income housing needs. After examining empirical research for California, Florida, Illinois, and Minnesota, this review found aspirational success because those states rewarded the municipal planning process. In order to increase low-income housing, this review argues for state housing policy reform. Under US Department of Housing and Urban Development’s revised fair housing rule, which requires an assessment of local data, states can no longer ignore the exclusionary behavior of municipalities

Metropolitan Public Housing Desegregation Remedies: Chicago's Privatization Program

This article examines the opportunities and constraints encountered in attempts to provide housing for low-income Black families through the Gautreaux program. This examination begins with an analysis of the violation and remedy in both the Chicago Housing Authority and Housing and Urban Development cases. Professor Rubinowitz then reports on the implementation of the Gautreaux program over the last fifteen years, discussing the reasons why interest in the program grew and why the supply of housing available to these families did not

Exclusionary Zoning: A Wrong in Search of a Remedy

This article discusses affirmative approaches to providing effective relief in two types of exclusionary zoning cases: (1) remedies specific to a particular proposed development or a given site and (2) regional remedies, which provide a generalized framework for meeting what courts are increasingly identifying as a regional problem: the need for decent housing for all families. In the first instance (the single-site case) a court would remove obstacles in order to facilitate development of low- and moderate- income housing on a particular suburban site. In the second case (the regional approach) a court would specify the obligation of the municipalities in a region in terms of the number of units of low- and moderate-income housing to be provided in each particular community. This obligation would be a proportionate share of the low- and moderate-income housing needed in the region as a whole, and would constitute the measure of relief to which an aggrieved plaintiff would be entitled. The court would also adopt mechanisms to insure implementation of this regional housing distribution system. Under either approach invalidation of exclusionary zoning schemes by the courts would be converted into the only form of effective relief, increased housing opportunities in suburban areas for low- and moderate-income families

Delayed Synergy: Challenging Housing Discrimination in Chicago in the Streets and in the Courts

During the Montgomery Bus Boycott, the Montgomery Improvement Association combined a boycott with a successful constitutional challenge to bus segregation laws, producing more progress to desegregate the buses than either strategy could have brought about on its own. The Montgomery Improvement Association’s approach was a paradigm of the synergy between a social movement and social change litigation. This Article argues for opportunities for synergy between social movements and social change litigation in three ways: 1) extending the time frame; 2) joining the forces of two separate organizations to produce change, unlike the single organization in Montgomery; and 3) creating an innovative new program that is different from either of the earlier separate strategies. The Article takes housing desegregation in metropolitan Chicago as a case study. As a result of close, ongoing collaboration between two organizations, substantially more low-income Black families in metropolitan Chicago secured affordable housing of their choice than in the decade before the two organizations joined forces and produced “delayed synergy.