Others have pointed out the historical nature of this policy, so I won't dwell there. But instead I do want to highlight that a key aspect of our legal segrega

Others have pointed out the historical nature of this policy, so I won't dwell there. But instead I do want to highlight that a key aspect of our legal segregation regime was enacting policies that did not appear to be explicitly racist, so that they could achieve buy-in from moderates who might not share the racist aims. (The secondary benefit is that they were more resilient to legal challenges.) So your response makes absolute sense: there are reasons for wanting to live in a less-developed SFH community. But there are also valid-sounding reasons that we might want voters to have to put a few dollars up as skin in the game before casting votes. Or why we might want to make sure voters meet some literacy requirements before voting. Et cetera. This is about a 100-year-old policy. It's not crazy to raise aspects from the history of US housing policy in this discussion.