'Sell-off?' - Public land eyed to fix U.S. housing crisis

• U.S. Interior Department looks at 500 million acres
• Researchers disagree on suitability of lands
• Critics warn safeguards needed to ensure affordable housing

WASHINGTON – An effort by the administration of President Donald Trump to use public lands to address the affordable housing crisis is underway across the country, sparking reactions both pro and con.

The initiative coincides with debate in the U.S. Congress over selling public lands more broadly, with a Senate panel last week proposing the sale of millions of acres of federal land, including for housing.

In March, the government created a task force that is looking for suitable land parcels and pledging to speed up regulatory approvals.

Maurice Page attended the task force's first stakeholder meeting in May in southern Nevada, and as executive director of the Nevada Housing Coalition, he says the housing affordability crisis demands an emergency approach.

"The federal government controls about 80% of the state, and in particular southern Nevada will run out of land to develop by 2032 if more parcels aren’t released," Page told Context.

"We need to free up as much land as possible so we can keep up with the growth of Nevada."

Nevada's population growth has been among the highest in the country, and Page said that pace, coupled with the economic upheaval of the COVID pandemic creating more need for affordable housing, has led to a shortage of some 80,000 units.

"The process of getting this land reviewed and back into the hands of developers needs to be expedited,” Page said.

"We're talking about essential workers – nurses, teachers, construction workers – that need to be able to maintain their housing."

He cautioned that questions are already arising over safeguards that may be imposed.

"If we're able to free up land, will this be affordable, or will it be more market rate?” he asked.

The Department of Interior referred questions on safeguards to the Department of Housing and Urban Development, which did not respond to a request for comment.

The two agencies are “reviewing underused federal lands that could potentially be leased or transferred to local or state governments for housing development. Priority will be given to lands with low conservation value, and local communities will be involved in the process,” an Interior spokesperson said.

Across the country, the United States lacks more than 7 million affordable rental units, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition.

The Center for American Progress think tank, in an online article published in April, warned the housing crisis could be used as cover for a “massive public lands sell-off."

“There are federal lands that absolutely make sense for transfer or sale,” said co-author Drew McConville.

“But it should be done smartly and in a way that makes sure we’re not forever trading away public lands that are really important, whether for outdoor recreation, cultural resources, wildlife habitat.”

No 'free-for-all'

The idea of selling federal lands for housing purposes is not new. The Biden administration pursued a small effort in Nevada, and both the Trump and Kamala Harris campaigns discussed the idea ahead of the last election.

Now that the task force work is underway, experts are split on its potential effects.

In an op-ed published in March, the leaders of the two task force agencies noted the Interior Department oversees more than 500 million acres of land, “much of it suitable for residential use,” and pledged the effort will not be “a free-for-all to build on federal lands”.

By using less than 0.2% of the land overseen by the Bureau of Land Management (an agency under the Interior Department), the effort could build 1.5 million townhome-style houses, said Edward Pinto, co-director of the American Enterprise Institute's Housing Center, a think tank.

“We can identify the land that is suitable for housing that is close to existing communities, near jobs and roads and amenities, and including general utilities and sewer,” he said.

It's part of an idea he and colleagues call Homesteading 2.0, which also outlines creating entirely new cities.

The proposal would require simplifying local regulation and allowing for higher-density building.

He said he is hopeful a broader strategy could be in the offing.

"There’s a lot more discussion, and there’s a feeling that something may well happen."

Yet others question the extent to which federally owned lands are feasible for mass housing construction.

When adjusted for water availability, wildfire risk and other development challenges, federal lands could host construction of only about 700,000 homes, mostly in five Western states, according to research by Headwaters Economics, a nonprofit.

"In some specific geographies, it could help to move the needle,” said Headwaters economist Megan Lawson.

“But the number of homes that can be built is pretty small compared to what is needed at the national level."

She suggested using safeguards for affordability such as land leases, deed restrictions or incentives for developers.

"If it’s going to be used for luxury homes or second homes, that's not going to improve affordability in these communities at all.

Beyond housing

Policy discussions also are looking at selling public lands to fund a new sovereign wealth fund, pay down the national debt or as a means to extend Trump-supported tax breaks.

In May, a proposal to sell off more than a half-million acres of land in Nevada and Utah was added to the House's budget bill, sparking push back locally and in Washington.

The proposal was removed but taken back up and expanded by the Senate.

The episode put communities on alert, said Jose Witt, Nevada state director with the Wilderness Society, an advocacy group.

“Public lands are very, very popular,” he said. "I think this has solidified the American people’s support of public lands.”

(Reporting by Carey L. Biron; Editing by Ellen Wulfhorst.)