How Do Different Electoral Systems Impact Housing Supply and Public Goods?

Over the past couple years, Portlanders have consistently identified housing as a priority concern. We've experienced rising housing prices and homelessness. Development of affordable and market rate housing has not met demand. Our research team was interested to learn that local electoral systems may impact housing supply and the provision of public services. Read more below to find out what we learned.

1. Housing supply

Moving from an at-large system to single-member districts has suppressed housing construction in municipalities across the U.S.

• Sightline Institute recently highlighted a study that explored the effect of at-large and single-member district systems on housing supply in 2,500 U.S. municipalities. Places that moved from at-large systems to single-member districts between 1980 and 2018 decreased permitted housing units by 24% (source).

• Another study of cities in California found that “the California Voting Rights Act of 2001, which compelled over one hundred cities to switch from at-large to [single-member] district elections for city council” led to “a decrease [in] the supply of new multifamily housing, particularly in segregated cities with sizable and systematically underrepresented minority groups” (source).

This research offers insight into what Portlanders might expect for housing production if a single-member district proposal—like the one recommended by Commissioner Mingus Mapps—is chosen. Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find research on the effect of large multi-member district systems, such as the one proposed by Measure 26-228, on housing supply. But we will update you if we do!

2. NIMBYism

We've also learned that single-member district systems may reduce a variety of public goods that constituents generally approve of, but do not want close to their homes.

• One study of municipalities in the Chicago, Los Angeles, Newark, Cleveland, Dallas-Fort Worth, Denver, Portland, Orlando, and Atlanta areas found that “ward representation, which enhances constituency homogeneity, is strongly associated with the exclusion of group homes in municipal zoning ordinances” (source). The authors define group homes as homes that house or care for people living with cognitive disabilities, juvenile offenders, recovering alcoholics and/or drug users.

• Another study theorizes that, all else equal, there may be fewer community centers and libraries in municipalities that use single-member districts rather than at-large electoral systems; however this may not be the case for public goods such as parks that constituents prefer easy access to (source).