Natch Greyes: Why fixing housing policy must begin at the state level

There’s an irony at the heart of the housing policy debate underway at the State House this session. Opponents of the many common sense, pro-housing bills being considered by the legislature frequently invoke the idea of “local control,” recycling familiar claims that any state-level reforms amount to “central planning” or impose “one-size-fits-all” solutions that won’t work. But these arguments unravel under scrutiny.

“Local control” sounds appealing. Who wouldn’t we want decisions made by those closest to the issue? In practice, though, local land-use control often amounts to control by a small, unrepresentative group — typically older, wealthier homeowners with the time and resources to dominate planning and zoning board meetings. According to the Brookings Institution, fewer than 1 percent of residents typically participate in local land-use hearings, and those who do overwhelmingly oppose new housing. That’s not democratic control; that’s gatekeeping.