This study asks whether policy implementation creates political feedback not only for direct beneficiaries but also for the "policy adjacent" — residents who live near a project but are not its direct recipients. Using a unique, geographically precise case, the analysis identifies how nearby affordable housing systematically shifts neighboring opinions.

📍 What Was Compared

• A set of 458 geocoded affordable housing developments built between two nearly identical statewide ballot propositions funding affordable housing in California.
• Neighborhoods measured at the block level and classified by whether a block is majority-homeowner or majority-renter.

📊 What the Evidence Shows

• New, nearby affordable housing causes majority-homeowner blocks to increase their support for the housing bond.
• Majority-renter blocks either decrease their support for the bond or show no change.
• These effects are observed consistently across the geocoded sample of developments and neighboring blocks.

🔍 Why Residents React Differently

• Homeowner support rises because new housing tends to replace visible blight, producing tangible neighborhood improvements for owners.
• Renters do not show the same positive reaction; their lack of increased support may be driven by concerns about gentrification and displacement risks.

📈 Why This Matters

• Policy implementation can generate political support among unexpected beneficiaries (nearby homeowners) while failing to mobilize presumed allies (nearby renters).
• The findings expand understanding of policy feedback by showing that indirect, spatially proximate effects matter and vary by local housing tenure, with implications for ballot campaigns and housing policy design.