Ballot box zoning does far more harm than good
The La Habra Citizens’ Initiative for Open Space, Measure X, presents a false choice: preserve the city’s open space, tranquility, and community character or allow runaway housing development and traffic congestion to invade La Habra. The real choice is: allow elected officials to guide development to meet the city’s current and future housing needs, or allow NIMBYism, driven by an impassioned group, to fully take root and freeze out new development.
This initiative proposes to make zoning change of private property subject to a vote of the people. These types of citizen-driven initiatives aimed at reducing or stopping housing development are referred to as “ballot box zoning,” and they cost cities a lot both in direct expenditures and in missed opportunity. Subjecting zoning changes and individual housing developments to a vote of the people introduces uncertainty, lengthens the approval process, and adds costs to a project, which are passed onto future residents in higher housing costs. In the case where a proposed housing development is defeated, this ballot box zoning exacerbates the housing shortage.
Discourages new housing development
In 2016 the city of Costa Mesa passed Measure Y, which requires voter approval of residential development projects that require a change to the general plan or zoning ordinance and are 40 or more units. As a result of the increased time and uncertainty associated with Measure Y, Costa Mesa has lost several applicants for major redevelopment projects, losing out on development fees and future tax revenue from new development. Costa Mesa is also at risk of not meeting their Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) goals. It will be impossible for Costa Mesa to have a compliant housing element with Measure Y in place, which could lead to fines or legal consequences under new state legislation.
Increases costs to cities
Yorba Linda has had a similar measure in effect since 2006. Measure M requires voter approval for any changes in land use designations in the city’s general plan, or changes to the zoning code that would intensify residential uses.
During the 5th Cycle RHNA process, Measure M required the city to hire a public outreach consultant to do voter engagement about the need for more affordable housing since the changes needed to accommodate new housing had to be put on the ballot in accordance with Measure M. The city also incurred the cost to place two ballot initiatives before the voters.
They passed, but if they hadn’t the city would have found itself in a similar position at the city of Encinitas—unable to comply with state housing law because the voters refuse to make room for new housing development. In the Encinitas case, the city government had to effectively sue their own residents to adopt a compliant housing element.
Increased risk of legal action from the State
It should be noted that Yorba Linda’s RHNA for the 5th cycle was 360 new homes. For the upcoming 6th cycle, it is estimated at more than 2400. Measure M puts the city at risk of being out of compliance with state law if they are unable to convince voters to make changes to their land use policy documents to accommodate the higher numbers, which opens the city up to fines or other legal ramifications including lawsuit from the state. In 2019, the Newsom administration sued the city of Huntington Beach for failing to zone to accommodate the number of affordable housing units required by its RHNA numbers.
In sum, land use policies are important, and the public should scrutinize them. But there are ways to do it that do not require the public to vote on every proposed zoning change or approve every proposed development.Residents can elect representatives that support responsible development. Cities are required to hold public review periods for each new development that is proposed that requires rezoning. Residents should engage in this process.
Ballot box zoning, however, is the wrong way to go. It causes unnecessary delays and costs to development that discourage responsible developers from building much-needed housing.
Residents of La Habra already have numerous ways to influence the planning and development process through local elections, public meetings, and public review sessions. The way to preserve open space is by engaging with local government and participating in local elections, not by putting every proposed development on trial.
Elizabeth Hansburg leads the YIMBY movement in Orange County. She is the co-founder and executive director of People for Housing OC, a non-partisan, grassroots housing advocacy organization in Orange County. You can reach her at elizabeth@peopleforhousing.org.
Comments
Post a Comment