Fresh Starts on Starter Homes
Lawmakers in Arizona and California are attempting to overcome local resistance to meaningful starter home reforms.
Lawmakers in Arizona and California are attempting to overcome local resistance to meaningful starter home reforms.
"The effects were immediately seen by everyone and they were all beneficial," says the former vice president of Argentina's central bank.
From insurance to affordable housing mandates, California's regulatory noose tightens over wildfire rebuilding efforts.
The right to a reasonable accommodation has produced some absurd results.
When regulations limit what kind of housing can be built, the result is endless arguments about what people really want.
"The effects were immediately seen by everyone and they were all beneficial," says the former vice president of Argentina's central bank.
Some of California's architectural wonders were consumed by the flames.
Johnston, Rhode Island, Mayor Joseph Polisena promised to "use all the power of government" to stop the privately financed 252-unit project.
The right to a reasonable accommodation has produced some absurd results.
Inflation and rent prices are down, and the country has a budget surplus.
Allowing duplexes and triplexes in single-family neighborhoods doesn't increase housing supply much. But it does give people more choices.
Anyone who thinks state regulatory agencies will help them doesn't understand how these agencies actually operate.
A thicket of red tape has made the island's rebuilding efforts painfully slow.
Lawmakers across the country introduce bills to strengthen private property rights, crackdown on out-of-control regulators, and get the government out of micromanaging stairways.
Zoning laws, occupancy limits, and short-term rental restrictions are keeping housing off the market and driving up costs.
California Gov. Gavin Newsom must allow prices to rise if he wants homes to be rebuilt as quickly as possible.
Needless regulation on fire insurance, "speculators," and duplexes means fewer dollars are going to rebuild Los Angeles.
The California governor is using state of emergency powers to make unsolicited offers to buy people's property in fire-affected areas "for an amount less than the fair market value."
It shouldn't take a disaster for the state to consider fixing the rules that make it so expensive to building housing there.
The Golden State has many bad policies in desperate need of reform. It's not obvious they had more than a marginal effect on the still-burning fires in Los Angeles.
Decades-old, voter-approved restrictions on insurers raising premiums have created a regulatory disaster to match the natural one.
The destruction of numerous homes exacerbated the city's already severe housing crisis. Curbing exclusionary zoning is crucial to addressing the problem.
Milton Friedman once observed that you can't have open immigration and a welfare state. He was mostly right.
Cities become affordable when lots of new housing is built, not when a larger percentage of a small amount of new housing is made "affordable" by regulation.
The latest federal homelessness survey finds an 18 percent annual rise in the number of people living without permanent shelter.
Cities and states are passing lots of productive reforms, local courts are increasingly striking them down, and local governments continue their harassment of homeless shelters.
Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac distort the housing market, explains Mike Pence's former chief economist.
To the bewilderment of many, North Carolina's hurricane relief bill includes the nation's strongest property rights protections against new zoning restrictions.
Internal tensions within the movement are real, but far from irreconcilable. Litigation and political reform are mutually reinforcing, not mutually exclusive pathways to curbing exclusionary zoning.
A new paper by housing expert Salim Furth shows it does so by making it harder for marginal people to find housing with relatives and friends.
Plus: New York City moves forward on zoning reforms, Utah city moves backward on granny flats, and D.C. considers a ban on landlords' pit bull bans.
The Yakama Nation has won a temporary restraining order preventing the City of Toppenish, Washington, from closing its new cold weather shelter.
The final version of New York's "City of Yes" reforms makes modest liberalizing changes to the city's zoning code.
With the help of New York’s environmental review law, local NIMBYs halted an approved housing project, adding to delays and costs in a city facing a housing shortage.
Plus: Democrats' housing-lite postelection recriminations and yet another ballot box defeat for pro–rent control forces in California.
Justice Gorsuch shows more interest in property rights challenges than his colleagues on the Court.
Golden State voters decisively rejected progressive approaches to crime and housing.
As skyrocketing costs and mass exoduses define the Golden State, Democrats face a crucial reckoning.
A related initiative preventing the state's most prolific rent control–supporting nonprofit from funding future initiatives is headed for a narrow victory.
Victory in the fight for cheaper housing, a more liberal land-use regime, and greater property rights won't come from the White House.
In this Texas Law Review article, Josh Braver and I argue that most exclusionary zoning violates the Takings Clause of the Fifth Amendment.
California would benefit from building more housing and having more experimentation with how public services are delivered.
Do you care about free minds and free markets? Sign up to get the biggest stories from Reason in your inbox every afternoon.
This modal will close in 10