The rental landscape has also become increasingly hostile. As rents exploded unchecked, we saw a stagnation in essential housing attributes: energy efficiency, accessibility, and climate mitigation measures. Current solutions aren’t anything more than performative advertising to buoy laissez-faire real estate schemes without public blowback.  

The neo-YIMBY movement (YIMBY being short for “Yes, in my backyard”), not to be confused with the YIMBY movement of the 1990s, is at the forefront of many of these discussions. Their primary argument hinges on supply and demand: build more housing, even at market or luxury rates, and costs will inevitably drop due to increased availability. At a surface level, this approach seems logical. Flood the market with supply, and prices should decrease for older housing stock. It’s sometimes called “Trickle-down housing”. However, housing and the American economic and social landscape isn’t that simplistic.

Housing isn’t merely a product whose value drops when supply increases. It’s tied to land, whose value can increase, especially in desirable areas. Simply building more housing doesn’t guarantee affordability, especially when new constructions target higher-income brackets due to higher profitability.

An alternative consideration in this realm are 99-year land leases. These leases can provide residents with long-term security and stability, without associated land acquisition costs. Individuals or entities could utilize a piece of land for 99 years, effectively allowing them to develop or improve upon it, while the underlying ownership remains with a governmental body or trust.

Another oversight is the shift from the traditional benchmark of housing costs. Earlier, the belief was that housing shouldn’t exceed 25% of one’s income, and then Reagan increased that to 30% of one’s income, but newer metrics based on area median income have changed the narrative. As a result, discussions have veered away from homeownership as a vehicle for stability. This has forced a significant part of the middle class into unaffordable rentals, stymying their efforts at establishing generational wealth and upward mobility.

While the neo-YIMBY’s advocacy for measures like accessory dwelling units (ADUs) potentially helps homeowners become landlords, it is not a guarantee of lowered rents. The intense focus on just increasing the supply through popular solutions like Tiny Houses or container homes often neglects broader community-centered strategies. Concepts like community land trusts, neighborhood investment trusts, community investment trusts, housing cooperatives,  intergenerational cohousing, and mixed income social housing don’t get their deserved attention.

The best solution is a multifaceted approach that follows the practical lead of communities that have championed homeownership rights for ages. Strategies like reintroducing the Individual Development Accounts and Mortgage Reserve Accounts with modern modifications like progressive deposits and a higher match, can be instrumental. These accounts, combined with the support of financial institutions like Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI), can provide more attractive mortgage rates and safer terms for more people to own homes.

The U.S. doesn’t need to reinvent the wheel. Countries like Singapore and parts of South America, the Caribbean, and EU all have robust social housing systems that can serve as models. Housing solutions that are financially accessible and environmentally and socially conscious can be developed with the right strategies and partnerships. 

To be sure, constructing and renovating social housing comes with significant costs. Comprehensive green retrofitting, healthy housing standards, ensuring energy efficiency, inclusive design, and integrating climate resilience in new projects require substantial investment. However, juxtaposed with the long-term societal costs of inaction, these upfront investments seem not only justifiable but imperative. Community Benefit Agreements like retrofitting older homes, inclusive apprenticeships, and public-private collaborations can usher in an era where homeownership is within reach for many more Americans.

Young Montanans made a significant stride in their fight against climate change by winning a crucial lawsuit, emphasizing the growing urgency and acknowledgement surrounding environmental concerns. This victory stands in stark contrast to the stance taken by the U.S. Department of Justice. In Juliana v. United States, the Department filed a brief asserting that there isn’t a constitutional right to a stable climate system. This raises pivotal questions about the government’s role in its responsibility to provide housing that meets the challenges of our times.

Historically, the U.S. government has taken notable steps to promote housing stability and environmental sustainability, like providing programs like Individual Development Accounts (IDAs) to foster homeownership. The Justice 40 initiative highlights the dedication to address environmental challenges, augmented by allocations for climate funding. Federal agencies have seamlessly woven this funding into housing-centric policies, with initiatives like Zero Energy Homes grants for sustainable housing development. The GI Bill, provided by the government, assists veterans with more affordable mortgage rates. The Section 8 homeownership program and the 1940 workforce housing program recognized the dual importance of housing stability and homeownership as a vehicle for generational wealth creation. There are also programs that offer assistance to specific groups like first responders and teachers. However, these efforts are not all-encompassing. 

The correlation between the government’s obligation towards climate action and its duty to provide adequate housing is clear. Given the historical precedence of initiatives like IDAs, the Zero Energy Homes tax credits, workforce housing, and the GI Bill, the federal government has both an ethical and historical mandate to ensure housing that meets green standards, especially in the realm of social housing, while championing the broader cause of equitable homeownership for all.

The neo-YIMBY argument that building more will drive prices down is not entirely without merit. However, a comprehensive solution demands we look beyond just quantities and delve deeper into quality, accessibility, and community engagement. It’s about more than the homes we build, who the homes are for, or how they integrate into larger community and societal frameworks. The true measure of success will be when homeownership, a cornerstone of the American Dream, is accessible and achievable for all who desire it.

As a child raised in extreme poverty and unhoused during most of my childhood, I know what it’s like to live without a home, to struggle to maintain hygiene, to feel hungry, and to worry that our family would be split apart if Child Protective Services were to learn of our dire circumstances. Sadly, some survivors of our wildfires have been forced to live apart from their children: Without stable housing, they are unable to reunite.

In my work as a Housing Case Manager, I struggle to connect fire survivors to housing. I continuously run up against more barriers to housing than I could ever have imagined. Some of those barriers come from the very policies meant to protect people from discrimination, like the Fair Housing Act, which requires that applicants are treated equally in terms of consideration and eligibility.

Many property managers require ideal credit scores, spotless rental histories, and steep income-to-housing cost ratios from each adult in the home. While it’s absolutely fair to ensure tenants can reliably pay rent, it’s incomprehensible that the same screening conditions applied to adults are also required of their 18-year-old high school students. Families of children under age 18 are considered a protected class, while families with “adult” children find it difficult to secure housing.

One example among many highlights this terrible dilemma: Unable to find affordable housing after the fire, a recent client and her teenage son were prevented from staying together at a local shelter, because a parent and opposite-gendered teenage child are not permitted to do so. They have remained separated during their housing quest. The mom remains unhoused, while her son has managed to stay with friends. Poverty-stricken families like these have unfulfilled hopes of reunification; they face a Disparate Impact when their young adult children are unable to pass the extensive background checks required of anyone over age 18, such as a good rental history, decent credit scores, and a substantial income.

Extreme income requirements mandate that adults earn twice or three times the month’s rent. Cosigners who vouch for single-income households must make SIX times the rent before getting a green light. I reached out to a local property manager to confirm this, as some requirements seemed unrealistic to me. Are high school students really expected to work full-time so that their parents could put a roof over their heads? The answer was another surprise: The Fair Housing Act requires that every person, age 18 and older, be held to the same conditions, without discrimination. Even so, I cannot imagine how a student could work full-time between their math and science classes.

Poor credit scores are a “souvenir” of the fire. Survivors increased their debt from having been forced to live off of credit cards after disruptions to employment, in addition to lost housing. Transportation and employment challenges added to their struggles. Some vehicles burned in the fire, while others were repossessed after too many missed payments. Complications of living in housing limbo have increased onerous economic impacts that leave many people unable to pass housing background checks.

Our community, like many others, includes rising numbers of people who are a single paycheck, or natural disaster, away from losing their homes. Housing costs and barriers are increasing across the nation, and a recent report published by the National Low Income Housing Coalition (NLIHC) shared the reality of the struggles to rent.

As a nation grappling with increasing homelessness and increased occurrences of natural disasters, we must break down barriers and promote more equitable housing access by connecting people to housing immediately. Paradise survivors see a hard future for Maui as they work under housing limitations similar to what Camp Fire survivors still experience, five years later. To help stabilize families, the Fair Housing Act should include young-adult, high-school students under the protection of families with minor children. Otherwise, current Fair Housing policies are essentially, deeply unfair — setting up the next generation to be homeless from the start. It’s critical that our policies work for us, not against us, as we find more ways to connect people to housing.

Health experts have advised people to stay home as a first line of defense against the virus, even as hundreds of thousands of Americans have no place to call home. Officials have struggled to track and tally the number of illnesses and deaths among people experiencing homelessness, underscoring how little we know about the health and welfare of our neighbors who are homeless.

In late December, the United Nations General Assembly passed its first-ever resolution on homelessness. This is a watershed moment, as homelessness has historically been absent from international policy discussions. Homelessness is not even explicitly included in any of the United Nations 17 Sustainable Development Goals adopted by all UN member states in 2015 to end poverty, reduce inequity and spur economic growth.

As a researcher who focuses on global homelessness and housing insecurity, I draw hope from the fact that world leaders are beginning to grapple with this tremendously important issue, which has both moral and practical implications.

The new resolution describes global homelessness as living on the streets or other places not fit for human habitation, living in shelters or temporary housing, or living in inadequate or insecure housing. The resolution urges member states to gather better data on homelessness and use that data to implement programs that will meaningfully address homelessness in their countries and around the world. Currently only 44 countries publicly report data on homelessness, and only 12% of those 44 have reported data since 2017. As a result of the resolution, the UN Secretary General will now report on global homelessness every two years beginning in 2022, which will keep this important issue in international dialogues going forward.

This resolution comes on the heels of the European Union’s new Platform on Combatting Homelessness, an initiative implemented last June that seeks to eradicate homelessness in Europe through reliable data collection, person-centered and housing-led policy, and collaboration across all EU countries.

We must seize this window of opportunity to keep homelessness in the spotlight, to press for the policies that will meaningfully address it, and to gather the data that informs us on what is and isn’t working, always acknowledging that behind every number stands a person experiencing homelessness — a person with his or her own story and insights and contributions to the world.

Homelessness is a complex topic, driven by poverty, rising housing costs and stagnant wages, and many other factors. People living at the intersections of race, disability, or different sexual orientations are particularly likely to experience homelessness. These driving factors are consistent in communities around the world. And there are many types of homelessness from street to shelter to living “doubled up” with friends or family that require different forms of support. The complexity of the problem makes it particularly difficult to solve.

But international learning shows us that homelessness can be ended with the right mix of policy and programs. Bright spots exist like Glasgow, Scotland, where street homelessness has decreased dramatically as a result of a coordinated and sustained effort during the COVID-19 pandemic. Our colleagues there used assertive street outreach techniques to engage people living on the street, creatively leveraged hotel rooms to house people experiencing homelessness while there was no business travel or tourism, provided assessment and support services to people while housed in hotels, and effectively moved them on to permanent accommodation. As a result, in Glasgow, the use of communal shelters has been able to be ended. We also look to Finland, where over the course of thirty years, smart policy and programs have nearly eliminated street and shelter homelessness and they now work to end homelessness for people living “doubled up.”

We can take heart in these examples of success and we can commit to doing better. We need everyday citizens to understand that our health and security and prosperity are bound together, and that if we prevent and end homelessness globally we will all be better off.

We have a moral obligation to ensure none of our neighbors experience homelessness, yet there are also public health benefits, economic gains and civic advantages to be had by creating communities where everyone is housed. When people are housed, we see steep reductions in emergency room visits and other expensive forms of healthcare, we see less recidivism and police involvement, and we see increased engagement with mental health services, substance use programs, and other social services that help people and communities thrive.

We need strong local, national, and international leaders to put policy into place that funds housing and services for people experiencing homelessness, and measures and reports on progress. We need service agencies to implement and scale person-centered and evidence-based programs that actually end homelessness for individuals and families. COVID-19 made plain the connection between health and housing; let’s ensure that all our efforts to build back better after a global pandemic include the foundation of housing.

There are a plethora of organizations spread across both Dallas and Collin Counties that focus their attention and efforts on a segment of our community that is often overlooked and neglected. Many of these organizations understand the weight of the task at hand and continue day-in and day-out to lean into the work of making the experience of homelessness rare, brief, and nonrecurring. I have also stepped into this collaborative space at a time when unprecedented federal and local dollars have been pouring into our region to either stave off the devastating impact that COVID has had on someone’s housing stability and/or to quickly work on rehousing individuals that have experienced life on the street. 

There are individuals focused on serving our youth population who are often the most invisible part of our unhoused population. 

There are veterans who have served our country and now must rely on the service of others to help find and obtain stable, safe, and secure housing. 

And there are whole families who have been negatively impacted by the worse our society has to offer in the way of equitable services and opportunities that find themselves with no place to go at the end of the day and are forced to either crowd into relative’s homes, sleep in their cars, or turn to shelters. 

And then there are those who struggle with mental health issues or drugs and alcohol and just don’t have the same means as others to support themselves in getting appropriate care, services, and assistance and often spiral into homelessness. 

And even in thinking through the huge swaths of those experiencing homelessness, our unhoused neighbors are not unlike any of the rest of us. And in describing the situations of many, I am significantly reducing the nuanced situations of over 4,000 people in our own communities that at any given time, are in need of safe, stable, and secure housing. There are unique circumstances and even more unique solutions for our unsheltered brothers and sisters. 

The Homeless Response System continues to work to respond and meet those unique and nuanced needs. The work currently being done is focused on a collaborative approach that seeks to ensure no one falls through the cracks. There are individuals with a heart for this community that I am grateful to see stand in the gap. There are dollars being poured into filling those gaps to help bolster the work required. And then there are the people that have worked within the broken and inadequate systems with complicated and often confusing policies making the work difficult to do, even in the best circumstances. 

I am awed by the resilience of this community. Not only those serving, but those being served. I am in awe of the very nature of the folks whose hearts work within a system that is not the easiest to simply get people housed. I am appreciative of their tireless labor and their dedication to service. I am truly blessed to find myself here at Metro Dallas Homeless Alliance that serves those who serve. Our North Star and one I have spoken passionately about with my team, is that we ensure we are creating and maintaining a system that works best for those that need it to work best. The work is important, the impact is greater, and the people we are able to serve are absolutely worthy of all of our hands being at the plow. 

A huge thank-you to the team I get to work alongside each day. Thank you for the opportunity to step into this space and thank-you for your support and your commitment to doing the work each day. I continue to enter each day inspired by all of you and with a sense of wonderment and a renewed spirit to learn and to serve. Onward in service beside MDHA staff and partners, the work is plenty.