Doing Nothing Is Also a Housing Policy

Originally published in a REALTOR® Association of Fox Valley newsletter. Republished here as part of Neeley Erickson’s Policy Commentary series.

Let’s say the quiet part out loud:

If the answer is always no to housing diversity, we are not protecting communities.

We are protecting the status quo.

The loudest argument against housing reform is often “protect local control.” But what happens when local control becomes local veto power over whether working families, young professionals, seniors, and future generations can afford to live there?

That is the tension at the center of this debate.

Doing nothing is also a policy choice. It is a choice to accept the consequences of shortage.

We have all seen the cycle. People talk about the rising cost of housing and the lack of available homes, then a new housing development gets proposed, the Facebook post goes up, and suddenly the conversation shifts to why this particular housing should not be built either.

When communities consistently block housing supply, prices rise. Young families leave. Seniors cannot downsize. Workers commute farther. Employers struggle to hire. Communities begin competing for fewer residents, fewer workers, and less economic growth.

Housing is economic development. Homes are where jobs go at night.

That is where this conversation becomes bigger than local zoning decisions alone. None of this means thoughtful planning, infrastructure, parking, or design standards should be ignored. BUILD still allows communities to shape growth. The conversation is whether local control should mean planning for growth or preventing it altogether.

In practice, many of these conversations involve housing types communities historically already had: duplexes, townhomes, ADUs, cottage courts, and smaller lot development paired with more predictable pathways for housing production.

Housing markets do not stop at municipal borders. When enough communities restrict housing opportunities locally, the consequences eventually become regional and statewide. Demand does not disappear because one community says no. It shifts elsewhere. Prices rise in neighboring communities. Commutes grow longer. Employers struggle to attract workforce. Families are priced out of the places where they grew up.

What feels like an isolated local zoning decision eventually becomes a statewide housing and economic problem.

Across the country, states are wrestling with the same issue: too few homes, rising prices, shrinking inventory, and communities saying they support housing while policies fail to reflect a truly pro-build environment.

According to the Institute for Justice, approximately 75% of all residential land in America is zoned exclusively for detached single-family housing, effectively limiting or prohibiting more attainable housing options in many communities. New housing proposals are often delayed or blocked through restrictive zoning rules, lengthy permitting timelines, environmental reviews, planning commission processes, parking requirements, and public participation structures that can give existing residents effective veto power over future housing opportunities.

That is exactly why states across the country are stepping in.

Illinois is having that debate right now with BUILD. Minnesota is debating the Starter Home Act. Vermont, Maine, Massachusetts, Florida, California, Oregon, Colorado, Idaho, Connecticut, Indiana, New York, North Carolina, Georgia, Texas, and many others have either implemented or are actively considering statewide housing reforms designed to address zoning barriers and establish baseline expectations for housing opportunity.

This is no longer a fringe idea or a one-state experiment.

You can continue arguing these approaches will not work, but communities across the country are already proving otherwise. Places creating housing opportunities are attracting residents, employers, investment, and long-term economic growth. People move where opportunity exists, and jobs follow because homes are where jobs go at night.

The question is no longer whether states should be involved in housing policy.

The question is how long they can afford not to be when housing shortages are already costing them workforce growth, economic opportunity, and hundreds of thousands of homes missing.

At some point, when every community says, “not here,” the result becomes “nowhere.”

______________________________________________________

Strong housing policy begins with clear data, thoughtful collaboration, and a shared commitment to expanding opportunity for every community.

—Neeley Erickson

Neeley Erickson is a Government Affairs Director specializing in housing policy, local governance, and community development across Illinois. Her work focuses on advancing practical solutions that expand housing opportunity and strengthen communities.