Mayor Karen Bass watered down her early-term plan to speed up construction of affordable housing, explaining: “As a mayor, you have to listen to your constituents.” The implication was that Angelenos don’t want affordable housing added to their neighborhoods.
As a professor of public policy, I have to listen to data, and the data say Angelenos do want these developments.
Since 2016, UCLA has commissioned an annual survey of residents of Los Angeles County. In 2023, the survey asked “where new apartments could be built to make housing more available.” Respondents rated their support for four options: “your neighborhood,” “streets that primarily have single-family houses,” “streets that primarily have retail stores, office buildings and other commercial uses” and “streets that primarily have apartment or condominium buildings.”
I expected to find that people supported housing but just not near them — the classic NIMBY dynamic. However, when it comes to more housing, Angelenos want everything, everywhere, all at once.
Specifically, 86% of respondents support building apartments in at least one of these settings. That response is not surprising, as it is easy to support more apartments in areas that already have apartments or retail and commercial development. More novel, however, is that clear majorities want apartments built where they live: 64% support apartments on streets that primarily have single-family houses, which means most streets in Los Angeles. A clear majority, 59%, said yes to apartments in their own neighborhood.
The support is spread across the city. In 14 of 15 City Council districts, majorities support apartments on single-family house streets; in 10 of 15, more than 60% of respondents do.
These findings overturn the outdated perception that Los Angeles is a city of entrenched NIMBYism.
City leaders have an opportunity to turn this consensus into reality. At the least, the affordable-housing plan, known as Executive Directive 1, should be restored to its original scope. Bass, ideally with the support of the City Council, should even expand ED1 so that it is not income restricted.
The conventional wisdom says that when the private sector develops housing, it is luxury housing, yet affordable apartment buildings are growing across Los Angeles without the city spending a dime. ED1 shows that new market-rate housing is affordable when delays and red tape are eliminated.
More broadly, city leaders should develop the habit of evaluating policy options using representative survey data rather than responding to the vocal minority. UCLA’s Los Angeles Quality of Life Index, for example, also asks questions about crime, education, emergency services and many other issues critical to residents and elected officials. Responding to the people who send emails, call offices or attend public meetings almost certainly means listening to people who, by dint of having more time and education, do not fully represent Los Angeles’ diversity.
Bass was right that leaders should listen to their constituents, and a clear majority of Angelenos are saying, “Yes in my backyard.”
Los Angeles has a rare moment of agreement on its most urgent crisis, the extreme scarcity of housing. The only question is whether leaders will listen to the silent majority and pass and strengthen policies that permit more apartment construction across all of Los Angeles.
Zachary Steinert-Threlkeld is an associate professor of public policy at UCLA’s Luskin School of Public Affairs.
The post Contributor: Not so NIMBY, Angelenos want more housing in their neighborhoods appeared first on Los Angeles Times.
