GROWTH CONTROL MEASURES: PREFERENCES AND STRATEGIES

Citizens of many California cities and counties have sought to restrict the rate of pop­ ulation growth in their localities. In 1988, Citizens for Limited Growth used the initiative process to place a pair of growth control measures on the ballot in the City and County of San Diego, respectively. The City Council and Board of Supervisors responded by placing less stringent, competing measures on the same ballot. This paper analyzes vot­ ing data from this election to examine the nature of support for such measures. We find strong support for the hypotheses that whites, homeowners, liberal / environmentalists, and those exposed to high levels of traffic congestion are more likely to favor growth con­ trols. This paper also investigates the behavior of voters when they confront competing propositions concerning the same issue on the same ballot, and finds strong evidence of strategic voting.

[1]  Peter C. Fishburn,et al.  Approval voting in scientific and engineering societies , 1992 .

[2]  Joseph Gyourko.  Impact fees, exclusionary zoning, and the density of new development , 1991 .

[3]  R. Carson,et al.  Growth controls: policy analysis for the second generation , 1991 .

[4]  Paul W. Wilson,et al.  The highway speed-volume relationship revisited , 1991 .

[5]  M. Baldassare.  SUBURBAN SUPPORT FOR NO‐GROWTH POLICIES: Implications for the Growth Revolt , 1990 .

[6]  R. Deleon,et al.  Growth Control and Electoral Politics: The Triumph of Urban Populism in San Francisco , 1989 .

[7]  G. Knaap.  Self-Interest and Voter Support for Oregon's Land Use Controls , 1987 .

[8]  Jeffrey A. Dubin,et al.  How Markets for Impure Public Goods Organize: The Case of Household Refuse Collection , 1987 .

[9]  P. Schmidt,et al.  Limited-Dependent and Qualitative Variables in Econometrics. , 1984 .

[10]  Douglas Muzzio,et al.  Approval Voting , 1978, American Political Science Review.

[11]  M. Baldassare,et al.  Growth Policies and Community Status , 1983 .

[12]  Thomas F. Cooley,et al.  A theory of growth controls , 1982 .

[13]  Richard K. Green,et al.  Suburban growth controls and the price of new housing , 1981 .

[14]  M. Gottdiener,et al.  Characteristics of Support for Local Growth Control , 1981 .

[15]  R. Dunlap,et al.  The Social Bases of Environmental Concern: A Review of Hypotheses, Explanations and Empirical Evidence , 1980 .

[16]  Thomas Romer,et al.  Bureaucrats Versus Voters: On the Political Economy of Resource Allocation by Direct Democracy , 1979 .

[17]  James C. Ohls,et al.  The effect of zoning on land value , 1974 .

[18]  Warren D. Smith.  Direct Democracy , 2002 .

[19]  R. Dunlap,et al.  THE SOCIAL BASES OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONCERN , 1992 .

[20]  Bernard H. Siegan.  Land Use Regulations Should Preserve Only Vital and Pressing Governmental Interests , 1990 .

[21]  Barbara Sherman Rolleston,et al.  Determinants of restrictive suburban zoning: An empirical analysis , 1987 .

[22]  D. E. Hansen,et al.  Research Design Issues and Pitfalls in Growth Control Studies , 1986 .

[23]  Frieden,et al.  Environmental protection hustle , 1979 .

[24]  R. Inglehart.  The Silent revolution: Changing values and political styles among western publics , 1977 .

[25]  D. McFadden.  Conditional logit analysis of qualitative choice behavior , 1972 .

[26]  H. Molotch.  The City as a Growth Machine , 1800 .