`Local control' is usually just a way of saying `get off my lawn'

SACRAMENTO >> A bipartisan coalition of Not In My Back Yarders (NIMBYs) remains aghast at two of the most significant and praiseworthy new laws that California has approved in years. They are gathering signatures to qualify a statewide initiative that would overturn Senate Bills 9 and 10, which jump-start housing construction throughout the state.

SB 9 allows property owners to build two units in neighborhoods now zoned for singlefamily homes. It also allows lot splits that potentially allow four units where one house now exists. Few owners will take advantage of the rules, but it will mean — clutch your pearls time — some homeowners will have stylish new duplexes on their blocks.

SB 10 streamlines approval of 10-unit properties, such as small condominium projects near transit lines or on underutilized infill lots. Currently, local governments restrict duplexes and make it extremely difficult for developers to create condo developments thanks to the usual litany of state and local environmental and anti-growth regulations.

Opponents' hypocrisy is rich. These “get off my lawn” conservatives claim to be upholding the principle of local control by arguing that local government officials rather than bureaucrats in far-off Sacramento get to make development decisions. It sounds good in theory given the Jeffersonian concept that the government closest to the people governs best.

The better quotation, actually used by Henry David Thoreau but often misattributed to Thomas Jefferson, is, “That government is best which governs the least.” The goal — for those of us who value freedom — isn't to allow the right government functionary to control us, but to have less government control overall.

Local officials are easier to kick out of office than officials