From Robert Whitcomb’s “Digital Diary,’’ in GoLocal24.com

Newton, Mass., has provided a strong example of why housing costs are so high: It’s tough for developers who propose projects that would increase local density in a nation where many still see the ideal as the one-family house.

While 60 percent of voters in Newton (an affluent and very liberal town) supported, in a referendum, the Northland Newton project, which will provide 800 units of housing, 140 of which will be classified as “affordable,’’ the road to the development has had a lot of potholes. Although the City Council also supported it, the developers had to go through an 18-month permitting process, and make many concessions, among other torments. Such delays drive away many developers and thus prevent the construction of new housing that could moderate housing costs by increasing supply, especially in places like Greater Boston and the San Francisco region, where these costs are astronomical.

In a Boston Globe essay, Katherine Levine Einstein and Maxwell B. Palmer, assistant professors of political science at Boston University, wrote:

“Across Massachusetts towns, from 2015 to 2017, only 14 percent of those speaking at permitting meetings about multifamily housing were in favor of the development. As the Northland referendum shows, true public support is much higher.’’ Opponents tend to be older and richer.

“Indeed, recent election results underscore an unfortunate liberal inconsistency on housing policy. On Super Tuesday, Democratic primary voters flocked to the polls to endorse candidates with robust plans to improve and increase the nation’s housing stock. The platforms of former vice president Joe Biden and Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren all advocate for housing policies that would make it easier to build more housing. In Newton, more than 90 percent of voters cast a vote in the Democratic primary. A sizable portion of those voters opposed those same principles when it came to their own backyards: At least 35 percent of Newton Democratic voters opposed the Northland project.’’

“Sanders’s positions illustrate this disjoint between national and local housing preferences. Sanders’s housing plan outlines regulatory and funding measures that would increase the supply of national housing for residents at a variety of income levels. Yet, he opposes local housing developments and endorses politicians in local races who fight critical zoning reform.’’

It’s a variant of the old “don’t tax me, don’t thee, tax the man behind the tree.’’

Forget rent control, which worsens housing costs by discouraging construction and expansion of multifamily owner-occupied or rental property. The way to control housing costs is to build more housing.