Democratic Excess in the Use of Zoning Referenda

Karin M. Mika, Aaron J. Reber

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

    Abstract

    This article argues that while mandatory referenda may be legal, it is an unnecessary step that thwarts zoning legislation. The article further argues that the Supreme Court's conclusion in Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises, Inc. is not a realistic vision of the zoning process. Rather the previous standards of Euclid v. Ambler Realty Co. and Moore v. East Cleveland are sufficient to ensure an efficient process of municipal management.

    Original languageAmerican English
    JournalUrban Lawyer
    Volume29
    StatePublished - Jan 1 1997

    Keywords

    • mandatory referendum
    • zoning legislation
    • Eastlake v. Forest City Enterprises Inc.

    Disciplines

    • Urban Studies and Planning

    Cite this