
Housing on Federal Lands Aims to Ease Affordability Crisis
During his presidential campaign, Donald J. Trump pledged to quickly bring down prices for American households, including making housing more affordable.
'We're going to open up tracts of federal land for housing construction,' Mr. Trump said in August. 'We desperately need housing for people who can't afford what's going on now.'
The Trump administration is now trying to follow through on that promise. Last month, federal officials created a task force that would identify and release federal land that could be used for housing development.
The announcement is the first major initiative the Trump administration has rolled out to address the nation's affordable housing crisis. It is an idea that has bipartisan support. Both Mr. Trump and Kamala Harris, the former vice president and Democratic nominee for president, have supported efforts to build affordable housing on certain federal lands.
Housing developers and researchers say the idea of making more federal land available for housing development holds some promise for Western states like Nevada and California, where the bulk of federal land is. But the initiative would do little to increase housing supply in other parts of the country where residents also struggle with high shelter costs, such as New York and Miami.
Other challenges also exist before any housing can be built. Most of the federal government's land lacks the necessary water and sewer infrastructure to support residential communities. Environmental groups have also voiced concern over the administration's intent to sell public land because of its potential effect on wildlife habitat.
As part of the effort, the Interior Department will identify locations that can support homes and aim to reduce regulatory barriers involved with transferring or leasing land to local governments or public housing authorities. The Housing and Urban Development Department will also 'pinpoint where housing needs are most pressing' and ensure that projects 'align with affordability goals.'
Federal officials have estimated that 400,000 acres of federal land could potentially be made available for housing development, said Jon Raby, the acting director of the Bureau of Land Management. The estimate, which will continue to be refined, was determined after officials looked at land within 10 miles of cities and towns with a population of 5,000 or more, he said.
The effort could be most impactful in states like California, New Mexico, Nevada, Arizona, Wyoming, Oregon, Idaho and Colorado, Mr. Raby said. Officials said the lands vary widely and range from deserts and grasslands to mountains and forests. The lands are generally uneconomical or difficult to manage because of their scattered or isolated nature and 'must meet specific public interest objectives.'
In addition to the water, power and sewer systems that would need to be built, federal officials may have to contend with groups that believe that certain areas have higher habitat or conservation value. Mr. Raby said that the areas that officials were looking at generally had lower conservation value, but that the Bureau of Land Management would carefully review concerns.
'People love their public lands,' Mr. Raby said. 'Every acre is important to somebody.'
The Bureau of Land Management will evaluate applications from interested parties, such as state or local governments, that request specific land to be sold. The agency will then assess any existing use of the land, and perform an environmental review and appraisal. Officials could then either lease the land or sell it at fair market value, according to the agency.
Some analyses have found that releasing more federal land could result in the construction of millions of new homes. Selling about 544,000 acres of developable land — or about 0.2 percent of the land that the Bureau of Land Management oversees — could result in the construction of 1.5 million new homes on land near existing cities over the next decade, according to a recent analysis from Edward Pinto, a senior fellow at the conservative American Enterprise Institute. Another 1.5 million homes could be built over the next five decades if new cities are developed near existing metropolitan areas, the analysis found.
David Garcia, the policy director at Up for Growth, a Washington-based research group focused on the housing shortage, said he thought the initiative had 'huge potential.'
'A lot of times when we think about federal land, we think about national parks or forestland or military bases, but there is a lot more land in urbanized areas than I think people realize,' Mr. Garcia said.
Still, he said the process of releasing federal land could take years because of stringent procedures, and the federal effort alone would not be enough to make up the nation's entire shortfall of homes. Freddie Mac, the mortgage finance giant, has estimated that the nation is short about 3.7 million housing units.
Jim Tobin, the president and chief executive of the National Association of Home Builders, said he was optimistic that making more federal land available for development could boost housing supply in some of the fastest-growing markets in the country, such as Las Vegas and Phoenix.
'Any land that we can make available would help in those markets in particular, and then you have the ability to continue to push the suburbs out,' Mr. Tobin said.
But Mr. Tobin said the initiative could run into challenges because of local NIMBYism, or the 'not in my backyard' attitude that impedes housing construction because some residents fight new development in their neighborhoods. 'People just don't like changes to where they live,' he said.
Federal officials say the new national initiative could replicate efforts that have already been done in Nevada. A 1998 law pushed by Harry Reid, who was a senator from Nevada at the time, allowed the Bureau of Land Management to sell certain public land within the state for purposes like housing construction. So far, the agency has sold about 50 acres of federal land specifically for the construction of about 1,060 affordable housing units in the state.
But some environmental groups have already expressed concern over how the effort could affect public land. Athan Manuel, the director of the Sierra Club's Lands Protection Program, said that he was open to efforts to build more affordable housing on some land that is close to developed communities, but that he was deeply skeptical of the Trump administration's effort. He said he worried that new development could 'trample wildlife habitat' and that the public could lose land used for recreation.
'We think this is just a backhanded way of privatizing federal land,' Mr. Manuel said. 'We're going to assume the worst from this administration until proven wrong.'
Some advocates said they were skeptical of the administration's attempt to address affordable housing because officials are also eyeing deep cuts to the housing department as part of a broader effort to shrink the federal government.
Kim Johnson, a public policy manager at the National Low Income Housing Coalition, said building more housing on public land could make a big difference for certain Western states. But she said she was also concerned about the Trump administration's potentially 'decimating' the housing department's work force and cutting federal resources that could help address the affordable housing crisis.
Ms. Johnson said she also wanted to see administration officials provide more details about how they would ensure that housing built on federal land would be affordable. 'The question is always: How affordable, and affordable to whom?' Ms. Johnson said.
Kasey Lovett, a spokeswoman for the Housing and Urban Development Department, said that 'any efforts to streamline the department's processes and programs will help to make HUD more successful in its mission, including addressing our nation's affordable housing crisis.'
Some homebuilder groups said they were optimistic about the effort. Dan Dunmoyer, the president of the California Building Industry Association, said the biggest challenge facing homebuilders in the state was a shortage of land that was both affordable and suitable for housing development.
Mr. Dunmoyer said efforts to release more federal land could help spur housing development in California, given that the federal government owns about half of the land in the state.
'Land is hard to find,' he said. 'If there is land that's adjacent to urban cores that's available, that would be of interest to us.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Hill
11 minutes ago
- The Hill
Newsom: Pentagon lying over LA to justify National Guard deployment
California Gov. Gavin Newsom (D) on Monday accused the Defense Department of 'lying to the American people' in justifying deploying National Guard troops to the state to quell Los Angeles protests against federal immigration raids, asserting that the situation intensified only when the Pentagon deployed troops. 'The situation became escalated when THEY deployed troops,' Newsom posted to X, referring to the Pentagon. 'Donald Trump has manufactured a crisis and is inflaming conditions. He clearly can't solve this, so California will.' Newsom was responding to a post from DOD Rapid Response on X, a Pentagon-run account, which claimed that 'Los Angeles is burning, and local leaders are refusing to respond.' President Trump on Saturday deployed 2,000 National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area amid the ICE protests, with White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt saying the decision was made due to 'violent mobs' attacking 'Federal Law Enforcement Agents carrying out basic deportation operations.' While protests have intensified in recent days, devolving at times into violence, the majority of gatherings have been largely peaceful. Still, California National Guard troops began arriving in Los Angeles on Sunday morning, with some 300 deployed on the ground later that day at three locations: Los Angeles proper, Paramount and Compton. White House officials have sought to highlight images of burning vehicles and clashes with law enforcement to make the case that the situation had gotten out of control. 'The people that are causing the problem are professional agitators. They're insurrectionists. They're bad people. They should be in jail,' Trump told reporters on Monday. In addition, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth has threatened to deploy approximately 500 U.S. Marines to the city, with U.S. Northern Command on Sunday confirming the service members were 'prepared to deploy.' The use of American troops has rankled California officials, who have said the federal response 'inflammatory' and said the deployment of soldiers 'will erode public trust.' Newsom also has traded insults with Hegseth, calling him 'a joke,' and that the idea of deploying active duty Marines in California was 'deranged behavior.' 'Pete Hegseth's a joke. He's a joke. Everybody knows he's so in over his head. What an embarrassment. That guy's weakness masquerading as strength. . . . It's a serious moment,' Newsom said in an interview with podcaster Brian Tyler Cohen. The tit-for-tat continued when chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell then took to X on Monday to attack Newsom. 'LA is on FIRE right now, but instead of tackling the issue, Gavin Newsom is spending his time attacking Secretary Hegseth,' Parnell wrote. 'Unlike Newsom, [Hegseth] isn't afraid to lead.' Newsom, who has formally demanded the Trump administration pull the National Guard troops off the streets, has declared the deployment 'unlawful' and said California will sue the Trump administration over its actions. 'There is currently no need for the National Guard to be deployed in Los Angeles, and to do so in this unlawful manner and for such a lengthy period is a serious breach of state sovereignty that seems intentionally designed to inflame the situation,' David Sapp, Newsom's legal affairs secretary, wrote in a letter to Hegseth on Sunday. 'Accordingly, we ask that you immediately rescind your order and return the National Guard to its rightful control by the State of California, to be deployed as appropriate when necessary.' In the past 60 years, a U.S. president has only on one occasion mobilized a state's National Guard troops without the consent of its governor to quell unrest or enforce the law. That was in 1965, when former President Lyndon Johnson sent Guard members to Selma, Ala., to protect civil rights protesters there.


San Francisco Chronicle
12 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
AP PHOTOS: Trump's new travel ban takes effect, and some protest
President Donald Trump's ban on travel to the United States took effect Monday. Demonstrators outside Los Angeles International Airport held signs protesting the ban affecting citizens from 12 mainly African and Middle Eastern countries. At Miami International Airport, passengers moved steadily through an area for international arrivals. Tensions are escalating over the Trump administration's campaign of immigration enforcement. The new ban applies to citizens of Afghanistan, Myanmar, Chad, the Republic of Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, Haiti, Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan and Yemen. It also imposes heightened restrictions on people from Burundi, Cuba, Laos, Sierra Leone, Togo, Turkmenistan and Venezuela who are outside the U.S. and don't hold a valid visa. This is a photo gallery curated by AP photo editors.
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Mass. Sen. Warren: DOGE accessed ‘sensitive' student loan data at Education Dept., calls for probe
U.S. Sen. Elizabeth Warren says she wants to know how the quasi-governmental Department of Government Efficiency gained access to 'sensitive' student loan information at the U.S. Department of Education. On Monday, Warren and U.S. Sen. Ed Markey, both Democrats, called for the agency's acting inspector general to find out how that breach happened. They were joined by Democratic senators from eight states, including U.S. Sen. Richard Blumenthal of Connecticut. Warren said lawmakers learned of the potential breach of systems at Federal Student Aid after DOGE, which was helmed until recently by tech titan Elon Musk, infiltrated the agency. In response, Education Department officials revealed that DOGE workers 'supported' a review of the FSA's contracts. As a part of that review, one employee was granted 'read-only' access to two internal systems that held sensitive personal information about borrowers. The agency said it had since revoked that access. But, according to Warren, it did not explain why that access had been revoked, or whether the employee had continued access to other databases. 'Because of the [Education] department's refusal to provide full and complete information, the full extent of DOGE's role and influence at ED remains unknown,' the lawmakers wrote in a June 8 letter to René L. Rocque, the agency's acting inspector general. That 'lack of clarity is not only frustrating for borrowers but also dangerous for the future of an agency that handles an extensive student loan portfolio and a range of federal aid programs for higher education,' the lawmakers continued. Warren, Markey and their colleagues have called on Roque's office to determine whether the department adhered to the Federal Privacy Act, which dictates how the government can collect and use personal information. They also asked Roque to 'determine the impact of DOGE's new plans to consolidate Americans' personal information across government databases.' 'It won't end well for Trump' if he does this amid LA protests, ex-GOP rep says All Ivy League schools are supporting Harvard lawsuit — except these 2 Embassies directed to resume processing Harvard University student visas Over 12,000 Harvard alums lend weight to court battle with Trump in new filing Markey: Trump using National Guard in LA to distract from big cuts in 'Big Beautiful Bill' Read the original article on MassLive.