In his opinion piece last week, "What's so important about cities' Comprehensive Plans?" Pat Cole brings up two subjects that are of particular concern to me: zoning laws and urban transportation, an issue which I hope to write about later.
Zoning has its roots firmly planted in our nation’s racist history. While that may not be the case today because of the courts, the impact is harmful to low-income people, which often means Blacks, Native Americans, Hispanics and others.
It is also expensive. While the well-to-do benefit when the value of their homes increase, others are left making higher mortgage payments with the funds going to financial institutions across the country and overseas.
If local governments are going to be serious about dealing with the racial issues they will benefit from reading these quotes:
Zoning needs to be repealed which will benefit people by increasing their disposable income some of which will be spent locally benefitting the local economy.
~ Michael Wilson, Olympia
The opinions expressed above are those of the writer and not necessarily those of The JOLT's staff or board of directors. You're free to post your response below. Otherwise, if you have something to say about a topic of interest to Thurston County residents, send it to us, and we’ll most likely publish it. See the Contribute your news button at the top of every page.
5 comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here
JohnGear
The outstanding book "Freedom to Discriminate" (available through Timberland library system or through Browsers or Orca Books) has a TON of information that has disappeared down the memory hole although it is still having huge influence today.
Anyone interested in any aspect of urban planning, civil rights, economic inequality, and racial justice should read it carefully -- it is an amazing book far too little known. The book "The Color of Law" rightly gets a lot of attention -- but "Freedom to Discriminate" is even more powerful. One of the most important books of this century for understanding our present situation in this country.
Freedom to Discriminate: How Realtors Conspired to Segregate Housing and Divide America
Hardcover – September 21, 2021
by Gene Slater (Author)
A bracing, original look at the connected histories of real estate, institutionalized racism, and our political polarization
A landmark history told with supreme narrative skill, Freedom to Discriminate uncovers realtors’ definitive role in segregating America and shaping modern conservative thought. Gene Slater follows this story from inside the realtor profession, drawing on many industry documents that have remained unexamined until now. His book traces the increasingly aggressive ways realtors justified their practices, how they successfully weaponized the word “freedom” for their cause, and how conservative politicians have drawn directly from realtors’ rhetoric for the past several decades. Much of this story takes place in California, and Slater demonstrates why one of the very first all-white neighborhoods was in Berkeley, and why the state was the perfect place for Ronald Reagan’s political ascension.
The hinge point in this history is Proposition 14, a largely forgotten but monumentally important 1964 ballot initiative. Created and promoted by California realtors, the proposition sought to uphold housing discrimination permanently in the state’s constitution, and a vast majority of Californians voted for it. This vote had explosive consequences—ones that still inform our deepest political divisions today—and a true reckoning with the history of American racism requires a closer look at the events leading up to it. Freedom to Discriminate shatters preconceptions about American segregation, and it connects many seemingly disparate aspects of the nation’s history in a novel and galvanizing way.
Thursday, August 1 Report this
Callie
Looking a bit more closely at those "expensive" regulations - they require new developments to share the cost of the roads, streetlights, adequate drainage, sidewalks, schools - costs that would be shifted to others from the developer and new owner - Another cost to consider is the shared cost of house-fires, more likely in poor construction. Many developers are great - yet my father was a city building inspector in another state, and was often offered bribes to pass on seriously deficient construction - the "regulation" explains upfront what the minimum standard is. This is useful.
My idea of great zoning would be to require that for every mansion built, there needs to be on the same property or within a set distance, 3- 4 more smaller dwellings, for that gardener, maid, barista, teacher, handyman, etc. to support the mansion inhabitants. This has been done elsewhere.
Friday, August 2 Report this
BobJacobs
Racial discrimination in the housing market is very real. I learned this first hand when I led a study that documented a 70% discrimination rate in the Palo Alto area rentals. That study became the basis for a Justice Department suit against a major landlord.
However, articles like this one don't help much. Repeated recitations of racist practices a hundred years ago prove nothing about today. We need to measure current discriminatory practices and actively work to overcome them.
As to the costs of government regulation. Those regulation are in place for very good reasons -- to assure public safety (e.g., electrical and plumbing codes) and assure that builders and developers pay for the public costs of their developments (e.g., impact fees) for instance.
In my experience, these regulations are often not stringent enough to protect us. Impact fees, for instance, are far too small -- by law! And Puget Sound is dying largely due to inadequate regulations.
The constant calls for "less regulation" by political candidates universally lack specificity. They don't tell us which regulations they find objectionable and why. Give us some specifics and then we can work for improvements.
Bob Jacobs
Friday, August 2 Report this
Southsoundguy
I completely agree that zoning should be abolished.
Friday, August 2 Report this
Yeti1981
@Callie - The best way to efficiently and effectively pay for all of the items you mentioned is through taxes evenly spread amongst everyone in the community. By placing stipulations on new development alone, you are creating a segregated society that requires an entry fee for new residents to enter your neighborhood. All the while, everyone is utilizing the new infrastructure and operations and maintenance become the greatest expense. These expenses are typically covered by sometimes decades-long bonds that overlap and more efficiently absorb these costs than the model you speak of. By attempting to put all of these costs on new development alone, you are severely increasing the cost of housing. In the end, the developer does not absorb these costs. In an industry with the 6th lowest profit margins of any industry, that would be devastating. Those costs are then passed directly to consumers in the end cost of a home.
Monday, August 5 Report this