Housing Beyond Affordability: What Local Governments Can Actually Influence

Housing affordability has shifted from a policy concern to a structural crisis touching nearly every community. The pressures are no longer limited to coastal metros or low income households. A combination of rising rents, stagnant wages, constrained supply, shifting demographics, and financialization of the housing market has reshaped the landscape for renters, homeowners, and local governments.

In Polco’s recent webinar, Housing Beyond Affordability: What Local Governments and Communities Can Actually Influence, a panel of experts explored how we arrived here, what the data reveals about downstream impacts, and which levers local leaders can realistically pull to stabilize housing and community well being. The discussion featured perspectives from public sector practitioners, nonprofit leaders, data strategists, economists, and innovators working on the front lines of housing and homelessness.

Understanding the Landscape: A Structural Crisis, Not a Temporary Spike

Executive Strategist Michelle Kobayashi opened by framing housing affordability as a nation-spanning structural challenge. According to Polco’s national datasets, including GPAL, about half of renters are now cost burdened, meaning they spend more than 30 percent of income on housing. Many homeowners are nearing that threshold as well. Residents themselves confirm the strain. Only two in ten rate the availability of affordable, quality housing as good in Polco’s National Community Survey results .

Michelle traced the origins of these pressures. Post World War II zoning codified car centric, low density patterns. More recently, housing has become an investment asset rather than shelter. Home values have doubled in the last decade while wages have not kept pace. Investors and short term rentals have intensified price escalation in many destinations. Supply has lagged since the 2008 recession, and many communities still restrict multifamily housing, ADUs, and density through zoning rules .

The result is a mismatch between what communities need and what their policies allow. “It’s no longer just about building homes,” Michelle noted. “It’s about what we can do with our rules, our land, our infrastructure, and our partnerships to make housing more attainable.”

Demographic Pressure and Financial Constraints Are Tightening the Squeeze

CEO Nick Mastronardi expanded the context by walking through demographic and economic trends reshaping demand. As the population pyramid flattens, older adults remain in housing longer while large cohorts of millennials enter peak home buying years. This convergence increases competition for a limited stock of homes.

At the same time, boomers retiring and drawing down savings reduces the available loanable funds in financial markets, driving up borrowing costs for younger households. Combined with increased student debt and inequality, first time buyers find it harder to enter the market. More households remain renters for longer, which further elevates rental demand and rent burden .

A Critical Insight: Rent Burden Is a Leading Indicator of Community Health

One of the most compelling findings presented came from an analysis of the GPAL database, built over several years with partners such as Stanford University, the University of Wisconsin, and GFOA. Nick revealed a statistically significant relationship between rent burden and public safety outcomes.

“When a city experiences a 1 percent increase in its rent burden rate,” Nick explained, “we see a 9.5 percent rise in property crimes per 100,000 residents.” For a city like Indianapolis, that translates into roughly 72 additional property crimes a year for each percentage point increase .

This insight elevates rent burden beyond a housing metric. It becomes a barometer for fiscal risk, law enforcement demand, resident well being, and ultimately, governance outcomes. These patterns reinforce the urgency for local governments to understand and monitor their own data. As Nick put it, “Know your community’s data. If job growth is outpacing housing supply, you could face negative downstream consequences unless you act.”

What Local Governments Can Actually Influence

With big external forces at play, the natural question is what cities and counties can realistically control. Michelle outlined six levers firmly within local influence:

1. Land use and permitting.
Modernizing zoning to allow density, multifamily units, ADUs, and transit oriented development. Streamlining approvals.

2. Infrastructure and capital investments.
Aligning utilities, transit, and public improvements with desired housing patterns.

3. Public land and assets.
Repurposing surplus land or partnering with developers to enable attainable housing.

4. Financial tools and incentives.
Using fees, tax tools, and housing trust funds to guide development.

5. Stability and service policies.
Preventing displacement and supporting residents at risk of losing housing.

6. Convening and coordination.
Perhaps the most overlooked lever. Local governments cannot solve housing alone. They can, however, bring developers, nonprofits, utilities, philanthropy, and residents together around shared strategies. “The winners,” Michelle said, “will be those who collaborate, align, and act together toward a shared goal” .

On the Ground: What Collaborative Solutions Look Like

A Simple, Repeatable Framework for Reducing Homelessness

Venture capitalist Tim Connors shared compelling examples from Bozeman, Montana and San Jose, California. Both cities saw major reductions in homelessness by applying a three-step model:

1. Count unsheltered residents and build transitional housing equal to 0.6 times that number.
2. Enforce no tent or street camping, after ensuring sufficient shelter options exist.
   
3. Address root causes, including rent burden and gaps between jobs and housing.
   

The financial implications are stark. According to San Jose data, preventing homelessness at Day 0 can cost roughly $2,000 per household. Waiting until Day 180 can result in long term costs exceeding $300,000 per person annually due to public health, safety, and service burdens. Early intervention is both more humane and more fiscally responsible .

The Role of Nonprofits: Listening First, Then Building Capacity

Reverend Jay Height of Indianapolis emphasized that housing stability requires more than structures. “A building doesn’t change someone’s life, but it helps stabilize them,” he said. His organization, Shepherd Community, focuses on listening to residents and building personal capacity to reduce long term dependency. Empathy, trust, and tailored support are foundational to durable outcomes .

Engagement Tools That Make Tradeoffs Visible

Public administrator Zach Wolfe highlighted a real world application from Santa Barbara County, where officials used Polco’s Housing Simulation tool to help residents, planners, and the Board of Supervisors understand where 5,000 new units could realistically be zoned.

Built within the Polco Balancing Act suite, the simulation lets users explore actual geographic zones, income-level targets, and tradeoffs. Community workshops revealed that when people see real constraints, their attitudes shift. The process even caused the Planning Commission to revise their recommendations. The project earned recognition from the American Planning Association for its authentic, structured engagement approach .

This is where Polco’s value shines. Complex tradeoffs become easier to understand. Resident voices become more representative. Decision makers get clarity. And communities move from reactive argument to constructive dialogue.

Key Takeaways for Local Leaders

Across the conversation, several themes emerged for governments navigating today’s housing challenges:

• Know your data. Track job growth, housing supply, rent burden, and other indicators through platforms like GPAL.
  
• Monitor rent burden closely. It is one of the earliest signs of stress and a predictor of public safety and fiscal pressures.
  
• Address both supply and stability. Build housing to prevent residents from “falling in the river” and support those already affected.
  
• Use structured engagement tools. Simulations and data informed outreach help overcome NIMBY opposition and build shared understanding.
  
• Coordinate across sectors. Government, nonprofits, developers, and residents must act together to make meaningful progress.
  

Closing Thoughts

The housing crisis is complex, but the solutions do not need to be abstract. Local governments have real levers and real examples to follow. With strong data, structured engagement, and coordinated partnerships, communities can stabilize housing, reduce homelessness, improve public safety, and strengthen trust.

Polco’s mission is to help leaders make these decisions with confidence. Through powerful data infrastructure like GPAL, community engagement tools like the Housing Simulation, and trusted resident insight through The National Community Survey, we aim to empower local governments to understand their communities deeply and act effectively.