[Capr-announce] I-933 . . . making urban property ownership more affordable, too!

[Rodney McFarland]

This message is one of a series about the Property Fairness Initiative to
address concerns raised
by the initiative's opponents. We hope that you find this information
useful.

If you find this helps you understand I-933 better, please feel free to
share it with your friends and neighbors. 

Please visit www.supporting933.org <http://www.supporting933.org/>  for
previous essays, property owner stories, and more!

 

  _____  


Washingtonians who live in rural areas are often more attuned to the effects
of land use regulations on private property than those who live in more
urban areas.  This can lead to the perception that property rights issues
are primarily a rural concern.  If you dig a bit, though, you'll find that
perception and reality are not joined at the hip where urban property
ownership is concerned.

This is underlined by a study from the Harvard Institute of Economic
<http://www.economics.harvard.edu/hier/>  Research, titled  Why Have
<http://www.economics.harvard.edu/hier/2005papers/HIER2061.pdf>  Housing
Prices Gone Up?  Authored by Edward L. Glaeser,  Joseph Gyourko, and  Raven
E. Saks, published in February 2005, the discussion paper notes that as of
2000, there were 27 cities in the United States where a home's structure
(the house itself) could account for no more than 60% of the total value of
the home's selling  price.  

Seattle was, and remains, one of those cities.

Most of the rest of the price of a home in Seattle represents the dollar
cost of land use regulations and fees paid to agencies for one purpose or
another.  As the authors put it, ". . . evidence points toward a man-made
scarcity of housing in the sense that the housing supply has been
constrained by government regulation . . ."

In Seattle, and in other Washington cities, a substantial portion of the
price you pay when purchasing a home is directly attributable to the kinds
of regulations that Initiative 933 seeks to bring under more direct citizen
control.  Because our local, county, and state government agencies and
elected officials have been unwilling to bring substantial reform to the
regulation of private property, the Washington <http://www.wsfb.com/>  Farm
Bureau accepted the challenge of being the lead organization in providing
the opportunity to put that reform into motion.  It's up to us to not only
vote YES for the Property Fairness Initiative, but to also help our friends
and neighbors to understand why I-933 is so important to our future.

In September 2005, a King County property rights advocate, working from the
calculations included in another paper by Glaeser and Gyourko,
<http://www.economics.harvard.edu/hier/2002papers/HIER1948.pdf> The Impact
of Zoning on Housing Affordability,  worked out the cost of regulation on
land inside Seattle's city limits.  Taken aback by the result, he confirmed
his calculations with the authors.  

The regulatory burden imposed on one-quarter acre of land in Seattle?  More
than $200,000 . . . and that's using data originally generated in 1999.  The
numbers have not gone down since then, because they go up as regulation
increases . . . and we have certainly not seen a downward trend in the
amount of regulation recently!

All over the state, governments are concerned about the lack of affordable
housing for families who are just starting out, or who have experienced
financial challenges in their lives.  The Property Fairness Initiative has a
role to play in helping to increase the supply of affordable housing
state-wide.

As we've just learned, one of the reasons there's a shortage of affordable
housing is that our government agencies' own regulations are constraining
the supply, and that the shortage actually results from that
over-regulation.  We've also learned that, in Seattle at least, the
regulatory burden per quarter-acre is more than $200,000.  This means that
what affordable housing there is tends to be located well outside our urban
core, which is where many of the better-paying jobs are located.  The
further away from those jobs people have to live, the longer their commute
to work, and the more commuting-related emissions and traffic our urban
regions have to endure.

Over time, an enacted I-933 provides the opportunity for municipal
governments to reduce the regulatory burden on their land bases.  The more
the agencies are able to work with the public to reduce property-use
restrictions and permitting fees, the greater the opportunity to develop
affordable housing within the urban growth boundaries.  Seen this way, the
Property Fairness Initiative offers urban areas new opportunities for
meeting the requirements of the Growth Management Act.

There's a whole lot more to I-933 than just saving farms and leading to less
oppressive property use regulation of other rural landowners.

Please help us pass Initiative 933 so that we can all roll up our sleeves
together and work with our government agencies to protect our property
rights and provide the best active stewardship for our ecosystems, too!



  _____  

Please join us in voting YES for I-933

If you wish to be added to or removed from this email list, please send your
request to messenger at supporting933.org.

  .

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.celestial.com/pipermail/capr-announce/attachments/20061030/797c99d5/attachment.html