If you told me six months ago that the biggest conflict in New Hampshire state government, and among those who follow it, would be “local zoning,” I probably would’ve cocked my head like a curious or confused puppy. But here we are.
There are several bills moving through the legislative process that address certain limitations on what municipalities can impose on local property owners through zoning and other regulations. On the face of that statement, a lot of us are screaming right now, “Local Control!” That was my first reaction. But, keep reading, because my opinion has now changed.
I’m not going to get into the specifics of the various bills, smart people have good reason to support and/or oppose the details, it’s the overriding philosophy that has people upset, that intrigued me enough to start paying attention to this topic.
What is “local control” when we’re talking about land use, regulations and zoning? Generally, the term is invoked to provide a town or city control over what those regulations can and should look like, but, I pose this question: What is more “local” than the local property owner him or herself?
Obviously, we have to have some limits within communities. No one is suggesting a tire factory be built in a residential area, but what’s wrong with a duplex? What’s wrong with an in-law apartment that houses tenants instead of in-laws — attached or unattached to the primary dwelling? Why are there communities that require one to have 5, 6, 8 acres just to build one house? Or, hundreds of feet of road frontage? Why are there tens or hundreds of thousands of empty feet of commercial buildings, just wasting away because local zoning laws won’t let them be made into apartments or houses and why aren’t they changing those zoning laws?
I believe in “local control,” however, when a municipality oversteps its bounds and those of the individual rights of a property owner, with unreasonable and even elitist (I’ll get back to that), regulations, that is precisely when the state should step in.
New Hampshire is facing a housing crisis. The biggest demographic that is struggling are young people and young families. It’s one of the main reasons we can’t keep people here after college. They simply have nowhere affordable to live and certainly nowhere affordable to raise a family. Well, that raising a family is one of the problems apparently. Yes, one of the arguments against the state’s efforts to have towns and cities loosen their rules is, if more homes are built, young families will move in and raise children. Is it watching little Billy kick a soccer ball around his yard that offends those of you with this argument? I can’t imagine wanting to literally and publicly “zone out” children from your neighborhood. Yes, I am aware children cost a lot of money in a school system, but that is the price of a shared society. You were all once children too and your neighbors who didn’t have children at the time, subsidized your education as well. Here’s a thought: these same towns with these intense zoning restrictions also don’t want commercial or industrial use on in their pristine circa 1825 communities. Lift those restrictions and you’ll get a whole bunch of property tax revenue with no increased school population.
Another voice of loud opposition to the state trying to add some much needed relief for current and future property owners can be summed up in one post made on a statewide social media page, “Some elected Republicans seem to think that NH’s future is a mobile home in every back yard.” OK, so we’re just invoking straight-up elitism? Translation: “I don’t want people who can only afford a manufactured home in my neighborhood.” Really? Is it because that may be a young family and little Billy will kick that ball around again? Nah. We know what you’re saying. Just like we know what those who said, “smaller homes will bring down the value of my house” means. Ya, so if that 8-acre lot nearby ends up with three homes instead of one, you’re suddenly living on the wrong side of the tracks.
There are some legitimate concerns when it comes to loosening zoning regulations. If a major commercial or residential project is being developed, water, sewer, police, fire, other municipal infrastructure may be impacted and those considerations can be worked out with the developer in the planning phase. But you know what else is impacted? Property tax revenue. Single family home? Other than school-aged children, which as noted is part of the social contract in which we all live, that new property tax revenue more than covers services.
I don’t believe in a blanket free-for-all in land use, but I do believe any restriction should be reasonable. In the absence of reason, I believe it is the duty of the state to step in, and again, while not weighing one piece of legislation or another, the concept of the the state’s role in protecting the rights of property owners is clear.
We have a housing crisis in New Hampshire. We have a young-worker retention problem in New Hampshire. The best way to fix it? Provide adequate housing. I’m hopeful that this legislature this year will stand against elitism and for the rights of little Billy to have somewhere to kick his ball. Guess what, if that eventually happens, it might feel good to go kick it around with him. It keeps you young.
Alicia Preston Xanthopoulos
Alicia Preston Xanthopoulos is a political consultant and former member of the media. She’s a native of Hampton Beach where she lives with her family and two poodles. Write to her at PrestonPerspective@gmail.com.
This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: ‘Local control’ stands in the way of more housing in NH: Commentary