## Facts

- Forest City Enterprises, Inc., owned land in Eastlake, Ohio, zoned for light industrial use and sought rezoning to allow construction of a high-rise, multi-family apartment building.
- While Forest City’s rezoning request was pending, Eastlake voters amended the city charter to require that any land-use change approved by the city council also be approved by 55% of voters in a referendum.
- The city planning commission recommended approval, and the city council voted to rezone the parcel.
- The commission later denied Forest City’s related “parking and yard” application, citing the lack of voter approval required by the charter amendment.
- Forest City sued in Ohio state court seeking a declaration that the charter amendment was invalid as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power.
- During litigation, the rezoning was submitted to referendum and failed to secure the required 55% approval.
- The trial court and intermediate appellate court upheld the charter amendment; the Ohio Supreme Court reversed on federal due process grounds, finding an unconstitutional delegation without standards.

## Issues

1. Whether a city charter provision requiring voter approval (by a 55% referendum) for rezonings approved by the city council violates the Fourteenth Amendment Due Process Clause as an unconstitutional delegation of legislative power lacking standards.

## Decision

- The U.S. Supreme Court reversed the Ohio Supreme Court and upheld the charter amendment.
- The Court held that requiring a referendum for rezoning does not, by itself, violate federal due process.
- The Court reasoned that the referendum reflected a legislative power reserved to the people under the Ohio Constitution, rather than a delegation to an administrative body.
- The Court indicated that particular referendum outcomes could still be challenged if arbitrary and capricious and unrelated to legitimate police-power objectives.

## Legal Principles

- A referendum requirement for rezoning is not an unconstitutional delegation where the electorate is exercising a legislative power reserved to it under state law.
- Due process “standards” requirements associated with delegations to regulatory or administrative bodies do not apply in the same way when the people exercise reserved lawmaking authority.
- The referendum process, standing alone, does not offend the Due Process Clause when applied to rezoning ordinances.
- Even with voter-controlled rezoning, a specific land-use decision may be subject to due process challenge if it is arbitrary and capricious and bears no relation to legitimate police-power purposes.

## Conclusion

The Court upheld Eastlake’s charter amendment requiring 55% voter ratification of council-approved rezonings, holding that direct popular control through referendum is an exercise of reserved legislative power and does not, by itself, violate federal due process, while leaving room to contest arbitrary referendum results.


City of Eastlake v. Forest City Enters., Inc., 426 U.S. 668 (1976)