4 major wins for YIMBYs on election night — and one loss

On Tuesday, voters in many states and cities had a chance to weigh in directly on housing proposals.

They voted for a slew of measures, most of which will create additional funding for affordable housing. On the whole, the pro-housing YIMBY — “Yes in My Backyard” — movement, which advocates for more housing construction — had a good night on Tuesday in those state and local races, with one exception.

At the same time, many parts of President-elect Donald Trump’s agenda are set to push up housing costs. Trump and the Republican Party have supported cuts to federal housing assistance, a reduction in the immigrant labor force that powers the homebuilding industry, and tariffs that would inflate the cost of building materials.

Here are five big housing measures that were on the ballot Tuesday night.

$1 billion annually to fight homelessness in Los Angeles

Perhaps the most significant affordable housing measure on any state ballot in the country this week was Measure A in Los Angeles County. The measure — which appeared set to pass on Wednesday, based on early returns — will send about $1 billion annually in perpetuity to initiatives to combat homelessness, build affordable housing, and expand mental health and addiction treatment. It will be paid for by replacing a quarter-cent county sales tax passed by voters in 2017 that also funded anti-homelessness programs with a permanent half-cent sales tax.

Pro-housing advocates celebrated Measure A as a major victory for the lowest-income households in LA — and a model for the rest of the country. Yonah Freemark, a researcher at the Urban Institute who’s closely followed this and other housing measures, said it offers a path forward for cities serious about boosting housing affordability.

Measure A, he argued, is “the kind of thing we’re going to need to see from state and local governments if the federal government pulls back on supporting affordable housing investments.”

LA Mayor Karen Bass, who pushed for Measure A, has made addressing homelessness a top priority in a city with tens of thousands of unhoused residents. Measure A was widely viewed as a test of whether Angelenos wanted to double down on her efforts.

Opponents of the measure, including small government conservatives, argued it would be a waste of taxpayer money. They cited the dramatic rise in homelessness since the 2017 sales tax was imposed to fund the County’s affordable housing and anti-homelessness initiatives. They also argued that a sales tax is regressive and that implementing it without an end date wouldn’t give voters a chance to evaluate its impact down the road.

Affordable housing bonds in Rhode Island, North Carolina, and Baltimore

Several cities and states along the East Coast voted on Tuesday to fund affordable housing bonds.

In Rhode Island, voters approved the state issuing $120 million in bonds for affordable housing initiatives, including boosting the supply of homes for low- and moderate-income renters and homebuyers. Part of the fund — $10 million — would go to acquiring and revitalizing property, in a new state initiative to directly create public housing.

Four North Carolina cities voted to invest in lots of new affordable housing. Charlotte voted to send $100 million to affordable housing efforts, mostly to produce new rental housing and boost supportive housing and shelter capacity. Chapel Hill similarly supported a measure to spend $15 million on affordable housing, while Asheville approved $20 million in additional bonds for its housing trust fund, which will mostly go toward low- or no-interest loans for affordable housing developers.

The city of Baltimore similarly passed $20 million in additional affordable housing bonds.

Shoring up housing trust funds in New Orleans and Orlando

In New Orleans, a majority of voters supported a measure to create a dedicated housing trust fund for affordable housing construction, boosting aid for first-time homebuyers, and rehabilitating affordable rental housing.

The measure will require the city, which faces a steep shortage of more than 47,000 affordable homes, to invest at least 2% of its annual general budget in the trust fund, amounting to about $17 million annually.

Orlando, Florida, also shored up its housing trust fund, which supports the construction and preservation of affordable housing.

Denver rejects $100 million a year for affordable housing

The pro-housing movement also took some hits on Tuesday, perhaps most notably in Denver, where voters are poised to reject a sales tax to fund affordable housing construction. Ballot Issue 2R would have raised the city sales tax by five cents on every $10 spent and used the revenue — an expected $100 million a year — to build new affordable housing. The measure was expected to create about 40,000 new homes over the next 10 years, as well as provide rental assistance for low-income tenants and downpayment assistance for certain homebuyers.

Mixed response to rent control

At the same time, voters across the country delivered mixed responses to rent control and stabilization measures.

In California, voters rejected Prop 33, which would have repealed a state law that limits how much cities can control rent — including by prohibiting rent control on single-family homes and on all housing built since 1995. The measure would have allowed cities to limit rent increases as much as they see fit and on all types of housing.

Rent control measures in at least two California cities — Larkspur and San Anselmo — also failed.

Meanwhile, on the opposite coast, voters in Hoboken, New Jersey, rejected a measure that would’ve allowed landlords to raise rents on vacant apartments as much as they want. Currently, the city limits rental increases to 25% between tenants.

Proponents of stricter rent control say preventing landlords from price gauging is key to protecting the most vulnerable tenants. But rent stabilization is controversial among pro-housing advocates. Some advocates and economists argue that it discourages new construction and investment in housing, worsening the housing supply shortage.

Freemark argued that it’s unclear what the mixed results on rent control mean for the pro-housing movement.

“Rent control is such a fraught subject in the housing world, so I’m not sure how much to read into it,” he said.