For many city and county leaders, housing has moved from a quality-of-life conversation to a core economic development issue. Employers cannot grow if workers cannot find a place to live. Hospitals, schools, manufacturers, small businesses, and local governments all feel the pressure when the housing market cannot support recruitment, retention, or expansion.

This is especially true in rural communities. The need may be obvious, but the path to implementation is rarely simple. Construction costs are high. Infrastructure is expensive. Developers may be limited or cautious. Financing gaps are common. Public perception can be challenging, particularly when local officials are asked to support housing tools that are not always well understood by the general public.

In McCook and York County, Nebraska, housing work has required more than identifying a shortage. It has required building partnerships, reducing risk, using local and state tools creatively, and staying flexible when the first solution did not fit the market. While the two communities have different assets, challenges, and project types, both experiences point to a similar conclusion: rural housing development does not happen by accident. It takes local leadership, patient capital, practical problem solving, and a willingness to move from conversation to implementation.

McCook: Building Momentum Through Flexible Tools and Partnerships

As a regional hub for southwest Nebraska, McCook serves far more than its population of just over 7,100 residents. Each day, more than 35,000 people are drawn to the community for employment, retail, healthcare, education, and professional services. This regional influence has made McCook a logical location for business investment and expansion, offering employers access to a broad labor pool, strong transportation connections, and the amenities expected of a regional center.

Yet despite these advantages, one challenge increasingly threatened the community’s ability to capitalize on new opportunities: housing. As existing employers looked to expand and prospective businesses evaluated McCook as a location for investment, the availability of housing became a recurring concern. Companies recognized the community as an excellent place to do business, but many questioned whether they could successfully recruit and retain the workforce necessary to support future growth. After decades of limited residential investment, the community’s housing supply had not kept pace with changing workforce demands, creating a barrier to economic development that could no longer be ignored.

Recognizing that housing is fundamental to long-term economic growth, the McCook Economic Development Corporation (MEDC) understood that addressing the issue would require more than isolated projects. It would require dedicated leadership, strong partnerships, and a long-term strategy. Through the collective support of local businesses, philanthropic partners, and community organizations, MEDC secured the funding necessary to establish a full-time director of housing development. The position was created with a singular focus: to identify housing opportunities, cultivate strategic partnerships, pursue funding, and coordinate the many moving pieces required to move projects from concept to completion.

From the beginning, one lesson became clear: meaningful housing development could not happen without collaboration. Housing was not a challenge that either the public or private sector could solve independently. Success would depend on aligning the strengths of local government, private developers, builders, lenders, employers, and community partners around a shared vision. Together, the city of McCook and MEDC began identifying barriers, leveraging available resources, and implementing practical solutions that created an environment where private investment could succeed.

The first barrier was one of the most fundamental requirements of housing development: land. McCook had not seen a new residential subdivision developed in more than three decades, leaving few opportunities for new home construction. Rather than waiting for a developer willing to assume the financial risk of installing infrastructure while also building homes in an unproven market, MEDC acquired land for a new subdivision on the edge of the city.

Working alongside the city of McCook, tax increment financing (TIF) was utilized to install the public infrastructure necessary to create build ready lots. MEDC then partnered with local investment groups to finance the construction of multiple homes at one time, allowing builders to reduce costs through economies of scale while minimizing the risk of carrying unsold inventory. The strategy proved that the market existed for new construction housing, with the initial homes selling quickly and providing the confidence to continue building. Today, the subdivision includes 27 build-ready lots and continues to expand housing opportunities for workforce families.

Creating new lots addressed one important barrier, but MEDC recognized that increasing housing supply would require additional tools as well. The organization identified city-owned property that had the potential to support workforce housing development. In response, the city reviewed and amended its ordinances to allow the conveyance of city-owned property to nonprofit organizations for the development of workforce and affordable housing. This policy change transformed underutilized public assets into another tool for expanding housing opportunities while demonstrating how local governments can create conditions that encourage development.

New construction alone, however, would not meet every housing need. More than half of McCook’s housing stock was built before 1960, and the community was seeing growing demand for accessible housing that would allow residents to age in place. Recognizing that housing needs evolve throughout every stage of life, MEDC and the city worked together to utilize planned unit developments to provide greater flexibility in site design and development standards. This approach created opportunities for higher-density, accessible housing while making more efficient use of available land and expanding the range of housing choices within the community.

MEDC and the city have also embraced redevelopment as another important housing strategy. One of the community’s greatest opportunities is the long-vacant St. Catherine’s healthcare campus, a property that had become both a safety concern and a visible reminder of decline after years of vacancy and absentee ownership. Through a collaborative effort, MEDC provided financing that enabled the city of McCook Community Development Agency to acquire the property and return it to local control. That partnership positioned the community to successfully secure an EPA brownfields cleanup grant, creating the opportunity to prepare the site for future affordable housing redevelopment while eliminating a longstanding source of blight.

McCook’s experience demonstrates that successful housing development is rarely the result of a single project or funding source. Instead, it’s the result of building a system that reduces barriers, encourages investment, and adapts to changing community needs. Public investment creates the foundation by providing infrastructure, supportive policies, strategic leadership, and access to redevelopment tools. Private developers, builders, lenders, employers, and investors provide the capital, expertise, and market confidence necessary to transform those opportunities into completed homes. When each partner understands its role and works toward a common goal, housing projects become far more achievable. McCook’s experience reinforces that housing is no longer simply a community development issue. It’s an economic development strategy that depends on collaboration, shared investment, and a commitment from both the public and private sectors to create lasting community growth.

York County: Turning Housing into an Economic Development System

In York County, housing availability affects nearly every part of local growth. When employers are trying to hire, housing matters. When communities are trying to attract families, housing matters. When businesses are evaluating expansion, housing matters. For the York County Development Corporation (YCDC), housing is not separate from economic development. It’s part of the same system that includes workforce, infrastructure, business growth, and long-term community vitality.

York County has a population of 14,443—up from 14,125 in the 2020 Census. The county has approximately 9,310 jobs and about 8,050 residents between the ages of 18 and 64. Those numbers matter because they show both opportunity and pressure. Employers need workers, workers need housing, and communities need housing options that fit different stages of life and income levels.

Most rural leaders already know they need housing. The real challenge is figuring out how to make projects pencil (financially viable) in a market where construction costs, insurance costs, and infrastructure expenses continue to rise faster than project values. Increased insurance costs, infrastructure costs, and construction costs have changed the economics of housing development. In many smaller markets, the appraised value of a completed home or apartment project may not support the actual cost to build it. That creates financing gaps. At the same time, limited developer activity, zoning challenges, and a lack of dedicated housing staff in many rural communities mean that projects do not simply appear because a need exists.

One of the lessons we have learned is that housing leadership often means helping people see the issue differently. Employers may view housing as a workforce issue. Residents may view it as a neighborhood issue. Elected officials may view it as an infrastructure issue. Effective leaders must connect those perspectives and help stakeholders understand that housing affects every part of a community’s ability to grow and remain competitive.

Housing also comes with public perception challenges. Elected officials are often asked to support housing tools, infrastructure participation, or redevelopment strategies before the public can see the finished product. That can be difficult. Perhaps the most important leadership responsibility is communication. Local leaders must consistently connect housing investments to workforce needs, school enrollment, healthcare staffing, business retention, and long-term tax base growth. When residents understand the why, it becomes easier to discuss the how.

YCDC’s approach has been to treat housing as a long-term implementation strategy. The model includes revolving capital, local and state investment, ongoing reuse of funds, technical assistance for developers and communities, and a diversity of project types. The goal is not to solve the housing shortage with one project. The goal is to create a system that can support multiple projects over time.

One of the most important tools in this work has been the rural workforce housing fund. For York County, the value of the fund is not only the initial investment. It is the ability to reuse dollars as projects are completed and loans are repaid. That revolving structure allows the same capital to continue supporting housing activity beyond the first project.

YCDC chose early on to build a revolving system rather than chase one-time projects. That decision has allowed approximately $8.94 million in housing investment to occur while positioning capital for future projects. That total does not include projects completed without YCDC financial assistance. Supported projects have included York Creekside Apartments, a 48-unit complex; Countryside Estates, with 12 single-family homes underway; apartment rehabilitation; purchase, rehab, and resale activity; housing relocation work in Bradshaw, where seven homes were moved, placed on new basements, and are being rehabilitated for new use; and the technical support to increase the number of available lots throughout the county to more than 70.

The range of project types is intentional. Rural housing needs are not one-dimensional. A community may need new single-family homes, but it may also need rental units, senior housing, rehabilitation of existing properties, infill development, and creative reuse of structures or homes that might otherwise be lost. York County’s housing work has included multi-family housing, single-family development, rehab and infill, relocation of homes, partnership with Champion Home Builders, and independent living.

What we have learned in York County is that funding alone does not create housing. Technical assistance has also been a key part of the model. Many rural communities do not have full-time housing staff, and smaller developers may need help navigating local tools, financing options, infrastructure questions, redevelopment areas, or public processes. YCDC’s role is often to help connect the right partners, identify the right tool, and keep the project moving.

That partnership model includes local government, developers, banks, employers, and economic development or housing organizations. Each partner has a different role. Developers bring project capacity and market knowledge. Banks help evaluate financing. Employers help explain workforce demand. Economic development organizations can help connect housing to business growth. Cities and counties can support infrastructure, provide local match, communicate commitment, and consider tools such as micro-TIF and redevelopment areas.

The role of local government is often underestimated in housing discussions. While cities and counties do not need to become developers, they do influence nearly every factor that affects whether a project moves forward or stalls. They need to understand how their policies, infrastructure decisions, land-use tools, and communication affect housing feasibility. In some cases, infrastructure support can make a project possible. In other cases, zoning flexibility, redevelopment tools, or the use of city-owned property can unlock a site that the private market could not otherwise use.

A key lesson from York County is that housing projects need both capital and capacity. Funding matters, but so does staff time. A financing tool without someone to manage the relationships, communicate with partners, and troubleshoot barriers will have limited impact. Likewise, community support matters. If residents and elected officials do not understand why housing is tied to workforce and economic growth, even strong projects can struggle to move forward.

York County’s work has also reinforced that housing implementation takes patience. Some projects move quickly, but many require months or years of planning, financing, infrastructure coordination, public conversation, and problem solving. The communities that make progress are often the ones willing to stay with the work after the first obstacle appears.

Shared Lessons for City and County Leaders

The experiences in McCook and York County are different, but the lessons are connected. A few things to keep in mind:

Rural housing work must be flexible. 

The first plan may not be the plan that works. A community may begin with a subdivision concept and discover that infill is more feasible. It may pursue new construction while also realizing that rehabilitation or relocation can add units more quickly. It may need to adjust ordinances, rethink lot sizes, consider planned unit development, or use redevelopment tools to make a project viable.

Local leaders must focus on reducing risk. 

In smaller markets, developers and builders are often cautious for good reason. If costs are high and demand is uncertain, even a needed project may not move forward. Incentives, infrastructure participation, land contributions, revolving loan funds, and predevelopment assistance can help reduce risk enough for the private sector to act.

Partnerships matter. 

Housing cannot be solved by one organization. Cities, counties, economic development organizations, housing organizations, banks, developers, major employers, schools, hospitals, and state partners all have a role. The strongest projects often come from aligning those roles around a shared outcome.

Housing should be communicated as part of economic development. 

For city and county managers, this is critical. Housing is not only about rooftops. It affects workforce recruitment, business retention, school enrollment, health care access, downtown vitality, public safety recruitment, and long-term tax base growth. When local governments explain housing in that broader context, they help residents understand why these projects deserve attention and support.

Rural communities need implementation capacity. 

Data can identify the need. Plans can define the strategy. But progress happens when someone is responsible for convening partners, identifying tools, following up, and moving projects through the process. In rural communities, that capacity may come from city staff, county staff, an economic development organization, a housing director, or a formal partnership. The structure can vary, but the function is essential.

Housing shortages were not created overnight, and they will not be solved by one program, one subdivision, or one funding source. But McCook and York County show that progress is possible when rural communities use the tools available to them, adapt those tools to local conditions, and commit to implementation.

Housing work rarely follows a straight line. Projects stall. Costs increase. Financing structures change. Developers come and go. Successful communities are not necessarily the ones that avoid setbacks; they are the ones that continue moving forward despite them.

Communities often spend considerable time discussing housing needs. Far fewer invest in the people responsible for moving projects forward. Housing requires champions, conveners, and problem-solvers. Without capacity, even the strongest plans remain on paper.

Five Questions Local Leaders Should Ask

1. Do we have someone responsible for housing implementation?
2. Are our ordinances helping or hindering housing development?
3. What public assets could support housing?
4. Have we engaged employers in the conversation?
5. Do residents understand the economic importance of housing?

The question for local leaders is no longer whether housing matters. It’s whether their community has the partnerships, tools, and capacity necessary to turn housing conversations into housing units.

AMANDA ENGELL is director of housing development for McCook Economic Development Corporation.

LISA HURLEY, CEcD, is executive director of York County Development Corporation.