California’s Wildfire Response is Lesson for Housing Crisis

After disasters in California, it’s not unusual for the state to take action to fast-track rebuilding. Remember how quickly freeways reopened after the Northridge earthquake of 1994?

This year, before the wildfires in Southern California were even under control, Gov. Gavin Newsom set aside various procedures so red tape would not delay reconstruction. This was politically possible because the region was clearly in crisis.

But what about the housing crisis that has been plaguing the state for years? It’s not the equivalent of earthquakes and wildfires, but just like disasters, it disrupts and shortens lives. The life expectancy of a homeless person is just 48 years, according to the nonprofit Health Care for the Homeless.

There’s also a lesson here for New York City’s perpetual housing crisis and homelessness problem.

Homelessness, although commonly associated with poverty, domestic violence, addiction and mental illness, is largely a function of tight housing markets. That’s why homelessness is so much more likely in Los Angeles and New York than in, say, Detroit and Dallas. Every city has people with problems, but they are at greater risk of becoming homeless where housing is expensive.

“A large body of academic research has consistently found that homelessness in an area is driven by housing costs,” Pew Charitable Trusts wrote. “Much of the research looks at the variation in homelessness among geographies and finds that housing costs explain far more of the difference in rates of homelessness than variables such as substance use disorder, mental health, weather, the strength of the social safety net, poverty, or economic conditions.”

I don’t know how many Californians would say they value single-family zoning (which covers 78 percent of L.A.) and political gauntlets more than housing affordability. But the government’s energetic and determined responses to natural disasters speak volumes.

For perspective on Newsome’s action, I reached out to Anthony Luna, CEO of Los Angeles-based real estate advisory and property management firm Coastline Equity. He sent a thoughtful reply:

“Before the fires, California’s housing market was already in a state of crisis. High costs, limited supply, and prolonged permitting processes have been placing immense strain on renters and homeowners for years. The same red tape now being waived for rebuilding has been a major barrier to constructing the housing we need to address our long-standing shortages.

“This emergency order is an acknowledgment of the inefficiencies in our current system. It demonstrates that when political will aligns with urgency, we can remove obstacles and take swift action to meet housing needs. But we need to apply this same urgency to solving the broader housing crisis, not just in response to disasters but proactively, to create a more resilient and affordable housing market statewide.”

Californians do care about their homeless residents. L.A. has devoted billions of dollars to helping them. The latest initiative, Measure A, takes effect April 1.

But actually housing the homeless has been difficult for the same reasons that finding any housing in California is difficult: high demand, low supply, and bureaucracy. “Building anything in California is expensive and bureaucratic even in the best of times,” wrote New York Times housing reporter Conor Dougherty.

That is true as well in New York City, which spends $4 billion annually on homeless services. It’s hard to say how much it would spend if not obligated by a consent agreement to provide shelter, but the city is known for ample social services.

In any case, the bill would be a lot less if the rental vacancy rate were not 1.4 percent and market-rate rents were not among the highest in the country.

Anti-development activists argue that New York City’s thousands of vacant, market-rate units proves that building more of them won’t help, but they are wrong. Housing economists say a healthy market’s vacancy rate is between 5 percent and 10 percent, allowing tenants and homebuyers freedom of movement and negotiating leverage.

Newsom’s order reveals that the solutions are known. What’s unknown is whether they will only be employed for disaster recovery.

“The fires may have intensified the housing challenges in affected areas, but the underlying issues were there all along,” Luna said. “It’s time we take the lessons from this crisis and apply them to addressing California’s housing situation comprehensively.”