try Sunnyvale, an eastern suburb of Dallas.
It faced a lawsuit similar to the one pending against Kyle.[1] Here's the federal judge's description of Sunnyvale's set-up:
Nestled in the midst of towns defined by the shopping malls and dense apartment development for which the Dallas Metropolitan Area has become famous, Sunnyvale presents a stark contrast. It is a beautiful, rural, Texas town with almost 11,000 acres of rolling hills and green grassland and only 2,000 residents. Sunnyvale has no shopping malls and no apartment developments. The secret to Sunnyvale's success is its unusual zoning laws, including an outright ban on apartments and a one-acre zoning requirement for residential development.
The judge ruled that Sunnyvale's zoning had a disproportionate effect on African-Americans. More damning, he ruled that the city had adopted the regulations with the intention of discriminating against African-Americans.
The judge was probably persuaded by citizen comments like this one, made at a zoning hearing on the town's first proposed multi-family project:
We'll build that fence up, we'll hold that gate there and as long as we can hold those Indians off, fine. And, when they bust through then we pay the price . . . there's an over abundance of multi-family housing around here and we're not like that. But, we're boxed in . . . personally, I'd rather not see any apartments or any cottage homes in Sunnyvale. Period.
I've discounted the possibility that Kyle was actually motivated by race. I suspect that's unlikely with fast-growing suburbs because they're less likely to be racially homogeneous. But obviously, if the plaintiffs have turned up hard evidence of discriminatory intent, Kyle will be in real trouble. The hit to its reputation would dwarf any impact on its zoning authority.
[1]Dews v. Town of Sunnyvale, Texas, 109 F. Supp.2d 526 (N. D. Tex. 2000).
