Why Conservatives Support Exclusionary Zoning

When Joe Biden proposed withholding federal funds from municipalities that did not relax exclusionary zoning laws (aka single-family zoning), conservatives were quick to criticize the plan. Betsy McCaughey, former Lieutenant Governor of New York and one-time economic advisor to Donald Trump, called the proposal a “disastrous plan for America’s suburbs.” She went on to write,

Biden’s plan is to force suburban towns with single-family homes and minimum lot sizes to build high-density affordable housing smack in the middle of their leafy neighborhood—local preferences and local control be damned.

A guest on Tucker Carlson’s program asserted that it was a “Marxist land grab.”

For all of their talk about limited government and property rights, conservatives sing a much different tune when it comes to exclusionary zoning. They aren’t opposed to using government’s coercive power to control how individuals use their land, which is precisely what exclusionary zoning does. Conservatives just want that power to be vested in local governments.

Conservatives claim that eliminating exclusionary zoning will destroy property values and neighborhoods will be overrun with apartment complexes. But such doomsday predictions are not supported by the actual facts. At least two studies have found that denser housing development actually raises property values.

In early 2021, the Kem C. Gardner Policy Institute at the University of Utah, released a study that examined the impact of high-density apartments on single-family home values in suburban Salt Lake County. The study found,

Between 2010 and 2019, homes located within ½ mile of a newly constructed apartment building experienced a 10.0% average annual increase in median value, while the value of those farther away increased by 8.6%.

Similarly, an analysis of the impact of eliminating single-family zoning in Minneapolis (which occurred in 2017) compared home sales prices in single-family homes within three kilometers inside of the city border to sales prices within three kilometers outside the city border. The study found that homes within the city increased by 3 to 5 percent more than those outside the city. The study’s author notes

that this increase is to be expected, since greater development potential raises the immediate value of previously single-family properties, even though in the long-term it can encourage a broader housing supply, which can lower city-wide housing prices.

These two studies demonstrate that ending exclusionary zoning will not cause property values to plummet.

Despite conservative claims to the contrary, eliminating exclusionary zoning doesn’t force property owners to build more housing. It simply gives them that option if they so desire. That conservatives are opposed to allowing individuals to make choices for themselves isn’t surprising. They take the same position on two other controversial issues.

If an individual wants to immigrate to the United States, he must first secure the permission of the federal government. If he is deemed unacceptable, he will not be allowed to legally immigrate. His own desires, dreams, and choices are subordinate to the choices of government officials. Conservatives support the nation’s draconian immigration policies.

Or, if a woman chooses to terminate an unwanted pregnancy, conservatives are making it increasingly difficult for her to act on that choice. Indeed, they want to eliminate abortion as an option. A woman’s own desires, dreams, and choices are subordinate to the choices of government officials.

Whether it is land use, immigration, or an unwanted pregnancy, conservatives do not want individuals to be free to act as they think best. Conservatives want to impose their values upon everyone else. This is why conservatives support exclusionary zoning.

It is understandable that individuals lash out when they believe that their values are threatened. Conservatives believe that eliminating single-family zoning is a threat to their leafy suburban neighborhoods. And, while it is also understandable that they want to protect that value, the ends do not justify the means.

Conservatives want to use the coercive power of government to prohibit even the most innocuous forms of housing, such as duplexes and accessory dwelling units (also known as “granny flats”). They don’t want such housing nearby, and they want to make it illegal for anyone to act contrary to their desires.

Conservative support for individual freedom ends when they don’t like the choices that others make. However, if we want the freedom to act on our choices, then we must defend the freedom of others to do the same, even when we disagree with them. Conservatives don’t understand that principle. When they don’t like your choices, conservatives are more than willing to use the heavy hand of government to compel you to act as they think best.