Letter: Discrimination ruling goes against logic
Hempstead village residents, NAACP officials and members of civic groups during the "Freedom Ride" bus trip to Garden City where they held a rally for change against housing discrimination on June 11, 2013. Credit: Newsday / Alejandra Villa
The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Arthur D. Spatt against the Village of Garden City is a classic case of judicial activism ["Judge: Village zoning change discriminatory," News, Dec. 7].
If a developer wants to build 100 percent apartments at high density on a site, and the local zoning board says no, that's "discrimination" due to a "disparate impact" on minorities, in the judge's opinion.
Never mind that the revised zoning wasn't limited to single-family homes, but also allowed town houses and apartments. The ruling implies that every time there's an available housing site, it must be used for affordable housing at maximum density, or else discrimination has occurred.
There is no law that says this. Shall we also decree that a developer should not be allowed to build $2 million-plus individual co-op apartments in Manhattan because there's a disparate impact on those who cannot afford them?
Douglas Hoffmann, Garden City
