New York Voters Say Yes to Faster Housing Approvals
Does that mean they want more housing generally?
Making it over the finish line in last night's New York City election were three proposed charter amendments that would collectively limit the power of the New York City Council to review and reject individual housing projects and smaller-scale zoning changes.
According to the preliminary results, all three charter amendments passed with nearly 60 percent of the vote. That's a commanding victory and a notably higher margin than Mayor-elect Zohran Mamdani won in his own race.
Mamdani did eventually endorse a 'yes' vote on all three charter amendments on Election Day. Andrew Cuomo, his main rival, also supported them. Republican Curtis Sliwa was opposed.
Supporters of the amendments, plus a fourth that simplifies city zoning maps, are naturally celebrating.
NEW: ALL FOUR PRO-HOUSING BALLOT QUESTIONS PASS!!!
For the first time, New Yorkers had the chance to choose more housing at the ballot box—and they chose it overwhelmingly. This is a historic victory for housing that will help make NYC more affordable. ????
— Open New York (@OpenNYForAll) November 5, 2025
Victory is victory, and it makes sense that New York's YIMBYs would be pleased with amendment votes. And yet, for housing advocates there's also a pessimistic takeaway from last night.
Together, Mamdani and Cuomo, the two pro-amendment candidates, earned some 90 percent of the vote. In other words, a larger percentage of the electorate was willing to support candidates who supported the charter amendments than support the charter amendments themselves.
Surveys of voters typically find that they're skeptical of policies that aim to improve housing affordability through lifting regulatory limits on new supply.
On surveys, rent control, property tax cuts, and cracking down on institutional investors almost always get a warmer reception than zoning reform and eliminating parking minimums.
The one exception is policies that promise to speed up permitting and approval times. In a recent survey conducted by the Searchlight Institute, streamlining housing approvals was the only pro-supply policy that polled well.
That's what New York's charter amendments propose to do.
The city's current Uniform Land Use Review Process (ULURP) gives the city council power to review and veto both rezoning proposals and zoning relief requested by individual projects.
Questions two and three on last night's ballot would end the City Council's review and veto powers over publicly subsidized affordable housing projects, certain private projects that contain affordable housing units, and zoning changes that allow for mid-rise apartments and certain types of infrastructure. Question four creates an appeal board that can override City Council vetoes of affordable housing projects.
The simplified ballot language more bluntly describes the charter amendments as a way to "fast track" and "simplify" affordable housing reviews.
That sounded appealing enough to some 60 percent of New York voters, who were also not swayed by City Council ads decrying the charter amendments as a threat to "democratic" votes.
As always, though, it's wise not to overinterpret election results. New York's top mayoral candidates were more supportive of the housing questions than their voters. Voters opted for faster housing production. But that might not translate so readily into support for more housing construction.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Does that mean they want more housing generally?
No grasshopper, it does not.
That dovetails with mayor-elect Mamdani. Not.
I love that you believe these referenda do a damned thing against rent control.
They mean nothing. And Mamdani has promised to make rent control more harsh (though if he refuses a rent control increase next year, he likely will face legal challenges over it)
*thinks* what we need is an emergency, some kind of situation like, I dunno, a pandemic that could freeze rents for years!
How about we shove another 2-3 million illegals into the city by promising no ICE action in NYC only while cutting funding to any program caught supporting illegals. I'm sure giving them what they want will solve their problems, or at least entertain me.
I think you're posting this as some sort of hypothetical lol-what-if. That's literally what's been going on for at least a decade because again, the thing is never the thing, the thing is always the revolution.
As Peter Hitchens once recalled about his time as a young revolutionary Trotskyist, "Yes we wanted open borders, but in reality, we didn't give a good god damn about immigrants, what we wanted was to destroy the nation-state, and opening your borders was a central part of that".
What a brilliant display of ignorance.
Voting for charter amendments to 'increase' housing, and electing a mayor who promises to confiscate housing.
Genius!
Now that the election is over, can we take a break on New York City stories?
Yes In My Back Yard!
No. Too many Reason editors and staffers live there. And it's a surfin town.
Ask Google about NYC and the top 100 surfing sites.
"No, New York City is not considered one of the top 100 surfing sites globally, which are dominated by spots in Hawaii, California, Australia, and other more renowned surf destinations."
Sorry but these down ballot referenda are meaningless. It's basically a coin toss for the average voter.
FYI, major blue city downtowns are suffering what some analysts call "a staggering oversupply" of office space.
Manhattan has already been in the process of converting something like tens of millions of square feet into residential.