California politics haven’t kept up with the state’s housing costs

On the list of topics important to California’s future, housing costs top almost everything else.

When housing costs are high, Main reasons why people quit situation.

Costs reduce the number of workers available for work and limit economic growth.

These are key factors in the unusually long commutes many Californians endure as people seek affordable housing far from job centers.

High costs also contribute to the homelessness crisis.Yes, there are a significant number of people living on the streets. serious mental illness, but they are in the minority. Most people can’t afford a place to live.

a New poll conducted by Los Angeles Business Council Our partnership with the Los Angeles Times reveals the impact.

In reporting the results of the poll, Times reporter Liam Dillon wrote: 60% of Los Angeles voters have considered leaving This is because of the high cost of housing, with 35% saying they had “seriously considered” it. It is based on the fact that the majority of people are satisfied with where they live on most other measures, such as safety and security, grocery stores, parks, transportation, and general quality of life. Despite this.

Not the top of politics, but the top of the heart

But housing affordability has never emerged as a defining issue in state politics, even though rising housing costs are causing many of the state’s worst problems.

Over the past four decades, major issues have swept the state and reshaped politics. A 1978 property tax revolt led to Proposition 13, a heated debate over immigration culminated in his 1994 Proposition 187, and a campaign around reproductive rights helped solidify the state’s Democratic support. . The majority supported the state’s environmental movement in its fight against offshore oil drilling.

Housing affordability has never been at the forefront of politics.

That doesn’t mean the state has ignored the issue. In recent years, the Legislature and Gov. Gavin Newsom have legislate Several Main housing measuresprimarily designed to limit the ability of local governments to block housing construction.

However, while this issue was a major issue in Sacramento, its impact on state politics was limited. A new poll provides some clues as to why and what it will take to change that.

lack of political imagination

The city’s voters supported the idea of ​​building significantly more housing in Los Angeles by a nearly two-to-one margin, according to the poll. The majority supported the idea of ​​building affordable rental housing in their neighborhoods, as well as housing for low-income seniors, veterans, and public servants.

However, according to opinion polls, most people Voters see these measures as steps to help otherssignificantly limiting its political appeal.

“People are very directly aware of the role of government, and they know what they want government to do,” the Washington-based author said of the issues that have a huge impact on state politics. said Irene Cardona Arroyo, senior vice president at Hart Research. New poll.

“There is a similar intensity of concern” about housing affordability, but “there is less clarity about what the role of government is or should be.”

Cardona-Arroyo noted that in focus groups conducted at the same time as the poll, voters expressed strong opinions about how high housing costs limit opportunity. Renters worried about whether they could afford their homes, and homeowners worried they wouldn’t be able to afford a bigger home.

“But when I asked what the government could do about these issues, I was met with stares,” she says.

In part, this reflects the scope of California’s problem.

“The scale of the problem makes it difficult for voters to see a path to a solution,” said Mary Leslie, president of the Los Angeles Business Council.

But the lack of voter response partly reflects the narrow definition of the issue by elected officials.

In public discourse, high housing prices have been discussed primarily in terms of its most serious symptom: the unhoused and the homeless.

in him 2018 campaign, Newsom calls for big increases Number of housing units built in the state.But in the office it’s The goal is far away. Last year, the governor focused on: Rebuild the state’s dysfunctional mental health system And we will push forward with bond measures. Voters in March approved it by a narrow margin.will fund the construction of a facility with 10,000 new treatment beds.

Given the crisis facing the state, it’s understandable that elected officials have focused their discussions on the plight of the homeless, but it has left many voters wondering about the role public policy plays in the housing market. We now have only a limited concept of

“When people think about affordable housing, they have a very narrow concept in mind,” Cardona-Arroyo said. “They think it’s a very low-income thing. They’ll say, ‘It’s great that we’re building affordable housing, but I’m a teacher and I don’t work. “And I have a job.” It’s not for me. ”

Expanding the concept of affordable housing does not necessarily mean large-scale government construction programs. However, this is an option successfully pursued by the United States and adopted by several European countries in the decades following World War II.

For example, Leslie’s organization advocates for steps that governments can take to make construction faster, easier and more predictable. Los Angeles has eased the path to building housing for the homeless, she points out. In the future, this could be extended to a wider range of affordable and mixed-income housing.

Developers need “certainty” about where they can build and on what schedule, she said.

But whatever the specific policy, the key to politics is convincing voters that it will directly benefit them.

“The residents, the voters, are saying, ‘We want it, but we have to say it’s for us,'” Leslie said.

fear of loss

For now, voters are not convinced.

Renters stand to benefit most from increased housing supply. But when pollsters asked whether building more housing would make their communities more affordable, respondents said more rental housing would raise costs and displace existing residents. Only 40% of renters said yes, compared to 49% who said yes.

Only 22% of renters said they would reduce their own costs by building apartments in low- to moderate-income neighborhoods.

Among homeowners, 56% said building new apartments for low- to moderate-income residents would reduce property values.

The reaction stems from multiple factors, but the most important one is simply that “most voters own a home,” said Sacramento Mayor Darrell Steinberg.

One of the lasting results of human psychology research is the power of loss aversion. When faced with the possibility of change, people react much more strongly to fear of losing what they have than to expectations of what they might gain.

As anyone who has sat through contentious zoning hearings can attest, there are few areas of public life where that fear is more vividly expressed than in development planning.

U.S. public policy exacerbates the problem of loss aversion by increasing risk. Most middle-class Americans have most of their wealth tied up in their homes, further complicating the debate over property values.

“People believe there’s a housing crisis,” Steinberg said. As a legislator and mayor, he was a leader in state housing policy for generations. “It’s the question of our time.”

“They’re not stubborn,” he added. “Yet, when we analyze the concrete solutions, most of them involve building more housing, and people are reluctant,” he added.

People who have invested in homes are “becoming more cautious,” he says.

Over the past decade, Steinberg says he has seen California housing policy change significantly. The driving force comes from younger generations who are more constrained by the status quo and who have less to lose from change.

“The younger you are, the more you feel it,” he says. “They are rightly demanding that the system create more opportunities for them.”

The onus is on political leaders to propose solutions that truly meet that demand. Then, if it can energize voters with programs that offer a realistic path to lowering housing costs, California may still find a way to solve one of its most intractable problems. .

what else to read

This week’s must-read: what do you mean The biggest way presidents influence the economy? It’s probably not what you think.?

This week’s poll: Americans say this value local newsBut they pay very little.

LA Times Feature:California’s attorney general has already Plan to thwart Trump’s policies If the former president is re-elected.
—
Was this newsletter forwarded to you? Sign up here to get it in your inbox.