Unintentional Redlining? Zoning Ordinances and the Living Wage‪.‬

AS SOCIETY BECOMES INCREASINGLY MULTICULTURAL, LAWSUITS involving discrimination by race and national origin are likely to become more prevalent. While many such cases are filed under the 14th Amendment Title VII, and Section 1981 of the Civil Rights Act of 1991, other types of discrimination cases may be filed under the Fair Housing Act of 1968, which prohibits discrimination based upon race, color, religion or national origin in the sale or leasing of housing. The Community Reinvestment Act of 1977 outlawed the practice of "redlining" in which lenders and insurers deny loans or insurance on property in certain low-income areas rather than the decision on the applicant's qualifications for their services. Of course, anything that restricts or inhibits the use of property or imposes extra costs on its use will unambiguously reduce the value of the real estate. Mayor Richard M. Daley of Chicago recently opposed a city council proposal to raise the minimum wage for big-box retailers within the city limits as a form of redlining, since the stores and associated jobs would migrate from lower-income sectors to peripheral areas. While the intention to raise wages may be good, the overall effect is the same as redlining, which is so vilified. Thus, this may be considered unintentional redlining. Further, the overall effect may change the social composition of the neighborhood. This paper will review case law in the area. USE OF ZONING ORDINANCES TO LIMIT BIG-BOX RETAILERS IN THE INNER CITY