Page 59 - AAGLA-JULY 2022

Feature Story
The Politics of a Housing Crisis
LBy Roderick Wright, California State Senator (Retired)
isten to any political discussion today and apart from inflation and crime, the dual crisis of homelessness and the lack of affordable housing will be front and center. There have been numerous solutions thrown around, but none that I’ve ever heard truly addresses the problem. Mark Twain once said, “Everybody talks about the
weather, but nobody does anything about it.” Housing and homelessness have been handled about the same way as the talk about weather, only with a lot of squandered money.
Homelessness and scarce affordable housing in California are the confluence of several issues. First and foremost, we have a housing crisis that is the result of years of regressive fiscal policies imposed by both of our primary political parties. Reductions In the private investment in housing caused by federal, state, and local policies are a principal cause of the housing crisis we face today. This is also a major contributor to the homeless dilemma.
Over the last 40 years, Wall Street, with the complicity of government has waged an effective war against private investment in real estate with the intention of diverting those investment dollars into Wall Street investments. “Mom and pop” rental housing investors have been particularly targeted. Oddly, on the political right, conservatives object to spending tax money on poor people. Then, on the political left, progressives object to private industry, and often in this case, “mom and pop” rental property owners making a profit, even when that profit would actually be better for renters. This leaves us where we are today, in a severe crisis.
The lack of private investment in housing has been a major cause leading to the housing crisis and thus homelessness. There are many causes for this lack of investment, but first let’s highlight some of the other causes of homelessness, including job loss and low wages. For a variety of reasons, the cost of real estate, houses and apartments have grown much faster than personal incomes. This differential is growing wider as demand for housing further overtakes housing supply.
Other factors that contribute to the homeless crisis are the lack of sufficient drug addiction and mental health services, prison inmates being released without any support services, military veterans with various health
issues in need of care. Other states today are ”shipping” some of their homeless population to us right here in California! Other causes of homelessness include foster children ageing out of care without needed services, and high student loan debt payments, among other things. We also suffer from the misguided perception of civil liberties here in California. The idea that people can just camp out on the streets irrespective of the adverse health effects it creates for themselves and everyone else is insane. Finally, some people are just trifling. Homelessness is an extremely complex issue, and a person or family could actually be victims of more than one of the causes I’ve outlined.
Three points are often overlooked when looking at problems and for their solutions: How did we get here in the first place? What caused this problem? What do we consider to be a solution to the problem? And, finally, what are the consequences of the proposed solution, or in other words, what are the unintended consequences?
Regulations Increase Cost of Land and Construction
Urban land in California is becoming more valuable as demand continues to overtake supply. One way to reduce costs in developed areas would be to increase density. However, local zoning rules and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) make building here far too difficult and expensive. Zoning rules often limit how many units can be built on a lot. A term for this in urban planning circles is “exclusionary zoning.” An interesting historical fact is that this type of zoning became more prevalent after the federal government banned the enforcement racially restrictive covenants on real estate in 1948. The goal of exclusionary zoning was to make the property more expensive such that it would limit Blacks and other “undesirables” from moving into certain neighborhoods.
NIMBY-ism (Not in my back yard) has also become a deterrent factor in the housing business. Just as when laws were passed to make it more difficult for Black people to own property, laws were then passed making it more difficult to build “affordable housing” this drove-up the cost and had the effect of limiting supply. The California Constitution has a provision that says a vote of the people is required if government money is going to be used to build affordable housing! This was an industry sponsored initiative. I guess everyone is a Christian so long as someone else is carrying the cross!
APARTMENT AGE • JULY 2022 59