Housing Stability Depends on Affordability, Financing, and Resilience

Homeownership can build wealth, but it can also expose a household to costs it cannot absorb. Kristen Scheyder said buyers need to understand property taxes and maintenance, and to have a financial cushion for the moment a water heater fails or a roof needs replacing. Without that cushion, a purchase intended to create security can instead push a family toward unaffordability. Jeff Hall made the related point that households already in homes fell out of ownership after a single setback in the period after the pandemic.

The distinction is not between renting and owning as competing ideals. It is between housing a family can sustain and housing that leaves it exposed to displacement or financial shocks. Hall cautioned against treating a home purchase as the right outcome for everyone, saying that insisting everyone should own “no matter what” is a difficult position in the current economy.

In Oklahoma, Hall said, roughly 53% of households were housing-burdened, and the state had the country’s highest insurance rate. Down-payment assistance may help someone buy, but it does not answer whether that person can afford to stay. Scheyder said young adults may not expect to buy until their 40s or 50s. For some households, homeownership is a goal; for others, the timeline is remote or the goal itself is different.

Samir Goel, co-founder and co-CEO of Esusu, argued that housing should be treated as a platform for helping people pursue the path they choose. Esusu reports rent payments to credit bureaus and offers renters flexible payment options and financial coaching. Goel also described benefits distributed through housing, including access to medical, dental, and vision coverage for $25 a month and help creating a will or trust for $75. Housing, in his view, can connect people with services that support financial security rather than define success only as eventual ownership.

Rent reporting is one intervention that uses an existing household payment to establish financial identity. Scheyder said Citi-backed pilots found that rent reporting helped families increase their credit scores by about 79%. She said credit scores can affect the cost of borrowing and, in some cases, access to jobs. Some developers have made reporting an opt-out default for new buildings, so renters may receive the benefit without taking a separate step.

Reporting rent does not by itself make housing affordable or prevent displacement. Scheyder said the next challenge is connecting credit-building to financial coaching, emergency savings, and benefits families may be eligible to receive. Goel described a progression from financial identity to stability and then wealth creation: a score matters insofar as it opens access to useful financial tools, while cash-flow support and longer-term asset building address different needs.

For a renter, stability may mean remaining in a neighborhood, avoiding an emergency that derails the household budget, or building a financial record without taking on a mortgage. Rent reporting can help establish that record, but it does not replace affordable housing or the support needed to manage expenses and stay housed.

The supply problem is not only a question of how many units a region needs. It is also a question of which homes can be financed, at what price, and by whom. Jeff Hall said research supported by his foundation estimated Tulsa would need 13,000 to 18,000 additional units over the next decade, across the housing spectrum from permanent supportive housing to homeownership. He argued that the market alone would not meet that need, particularly with interest rates above 7%.

Hall’s foundation has worked on three connected fronts: policy, financing, and developer capacity. Its Housing 4 group examines local and state policy, including permitting, zoning, and the use of public finance. The Tulsa Housing Impact Fund, he said, is intended to provide gap financing for rental and ownership projects. The foundation has also supported developers building starter single-family homes and considered ways to expand down-payment assistance. Hall noted that the Oklahoma Housing Finance Agency provides about $100 million a year in down-payment assistance through revenue bonds, while adding that finding more sources of assistance remains difficult.

Kristen Scheyder described a related capacity problem: the housing-production industry has lost smaller builders and has not brought them back at the scale needed. She said the country has a structural deficit in housing production since the 2008 housing bubble and that small, “mom and pop” participants have fallen out of the industry. In her view, supply policy must include the workforce and entrepreneurship needed to build smaller projects, including infill housing of fewer than 20 units—work she said large developers may not take on.

Goel focused on the relationship between home size, price, and mortgage finance. He said homes had doubled in size over the past 20 years and that some financial institutions will not issue mortgages below $200,000. A median home priced at $450,000 is not a starter home for a low-income family, he argued. Homes priced around $150,000 to $200,000 would be more attainable, but builders must construct them and lenders must be willing to finance them. Homeownership, in his account, has depended in part on access to cheap debt, including FHA and VA loans; when borrowing costs are high, the structure that makes a purchase possible becomes harder to provide.

The difficulty is not simply that affordable housing costs more to build. Goel said the cost of producing affordable and market-rate housing can be similar, while the financial return on market-rate housing is higher. Policy and financing therefore have to address the incentives that determine which projects move forward. Hall’s description of the Tulsa fund and the foundation’s other work reflects the same problem from the local side: projects often need gap financing before they can be built or sold at prices households can sustain.

The recently passed Road to Housing Act is a contribution, not a solution. Hall said provisions related to manufactured housing, community development banking, and environmental review could help some projects. But the bill is not a funding bill, he said, and is not likely to change credit pricing immediately. He also said more funding for housing vouchers could help people get into housing. Goel pointed to a provision in section 1001 that requires rent reporting for single-family home developers and operators, which he called potentially transformational for renters. He agreed, however, that the act could not substitute for action on zoning, finance, and the production of smaller homes.

Hall said Tulsa would need to “over subsidize” production to bring housing into a more stable environment. Rents in Oklahoma had risen 40% over five years. Philanthropy, municipal funding, and state action each have a role, but none can carry the effort alone. Hall said available resources are not yet aligned behind a statewide housing strategy.

New construction will not protect households if existing affordable properties fall into disrepair or become financially unviable. Tyler Pratt of Housing Forward, Oklahoma, raised the problem of naturally occurring affordable housing: older properties that have not received enough recapitalization or stabilization funding. He also warned that nonprofit owners can fail when they cannot find preservation capital, with immediate consequences for residents and surrounding communities.

Scheyder said Citi’s Blueprint for Housing was preparing awards to help nonprofit developers restructure portfolios and recapitalize buildings that were financially distressed. The initiative was expected to distribute $20 million to 20 organizations. Scheyder said Citi had received close to 1,000 applications, despite having a relatively small Community Reinvestment Act footprint. The response, she said, showed the demand for flexible financing to keep properties operating.

Hall described a specific financing risk. After the pandemic, some Class C properties changed hands when interest rates were low, with relatively light renovations and variable-rate loans. With rates now higher, owners may have difficulty refinancing or paying for repairs. If a property requires $40,000, $50,000, or $60,000 per unit to preserve it, Hall asked, where does that capital come from? He said cities could use municipal finance tools to create a safety net with trusted partners—not simply to rescue developers—and could consider tax-exempt bonds and 4% tax-credit resyndication where tenants qualify. But he warned that some properties could still face foreclosure.

The same preservation challenge applies to owner-occupied homes. Ashley Putnam of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia asked about households that cannot afford essential repairs, such as a roof or air-conditioning unit. Hall said some homeowners who had locked in mortgage rates of 2% or 3% may be unable to move even if they need a different home. They may consider a home-equity line of credit to pay for repairs, but the added payment may not be affordable.

Hall’s foundation has supported critical repairs for low-income residents through Revitalize T-Town, including work intended to help seniors remain in their homes. He said Tulsa has aging housing stock that needs to be kept habitable, but there is no straightforward, recurring funding source for repairs at scale. The challenge is not only to add units; it is also to keep existing homes online and bring others back into use. Scheyder said repair and emergency-savings programs exist, but often lack funding. She also said community development financial institutions had been preparing to carry out retrofit work under the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund, but that effort had stalled.

Goel added a cash-flow signal from Esusu’s work with earned-wage-access providers. He said weekly withdrawals from those services were largest just before rent day, suggesting that many households were advancing money from a future paycheck to pay rent and cover unexpected expenses. He said this pattern may not be captured in broader measures of household finances. For him, it points to a need for low-cost financing—0%, 1%, or 2% loans for repairs, rent shortfalls, or other emergencies. He argued that such lending could be treated as homelessness prevention and economic-mobility policy, not simply emergency relief.

Rent reporting gives tenants credit for a payment they already make. It does not give them a share of the property’s value. An audience member asked about models that return some rent to renters or preserve a claim to equity in the property. Hall and Scheyder both pointed to an Enterprise fund that captures part of rent and recycles it to tenants over time based on rent-payment history. Hall said it was the only successful example he knew.

Goel described the broader idea as making real estate more share-based, so renters could accrue an interest in the asset as homeowners build equity through mortgage payments. One proposed version would allocate a small share of a property’s value to renters. If the property is later sold, owners and developers could still benefit while renters receive a return, potentially helping them remain in the neighborhood rather than being displaced.

But a share in a property is not the same as cash in hand. Goel said one obstacle is taxation: a renter could receive an asset that creates a tax obligation without having cash available to pay it. For a low-income household, that could turn a nominal benefit into a financial burden. One possible structure, he said, is for a nonprofit to hold an interest on renters’ behalf and distribute proceeds when the property is sold or otherwise becomes liquid. Cash-back rewards offer another route. Goel said the Enterprise approach uses cash back as a vehicle, so any tax exposure is tied to real dollars the renter receives.

The design determines when renters receive value, who holds the asset, and whether costs arrive before the value can be used. Goel’s examples identify a practical trade-off: a share may create a longer-term stake but could leave a renter with a tax obligation before a sale, while cash back provides money the renter can use but works differently from an ownership interest.

Goel also described conditions associated with stronger pathways from renting toward homeownership or business ownership. He said outcomes depend on a household’s aspirations, the market it is in, and the supports around it. Esusu had seen programs work well when rent reporting was paired with tools such as down-payment assistance: credit qualification could be followed by assistance that helped a household take the next step. He also said he had seen more incremental opportunities in Low-Income Housing Tax Credit communities that include residents with different incomes. He contrasted this with project-based Section 8, where transitions he observed were more likely to resemble a “lottery outcome”—for example, a child receiving a full scholarship and later helping a parent leave public housing.

Several parts of the discussion pointed to a gap between what a household appears to have and how securely it can meet its expenses. Scheyder cited the U.S. Financial Health Diaries, research that followed 235 families at 200% of area median income. Some families appeared financially stable on paper: they owned homes and cars and sent their children to parochial school. But following their finances week by week showed that they were underwater for two or three months of the year and relied on informal support, such as neighbors or relatives helping with childcare.

The example complicates a simple distinction between households that have assets and those that do not. A family can own a home and still lack the cash flow to absorb an irregular bill. It can have a stable annual income and still face recurring weeks when expenses exceed what is available. Scheyder argued that the response has to include a stronger safety net and financial cushion, as well as reliable work that is valued and paid appropriately.

Goel’s framework—financial identity, financial stability, and wealth creation—separates the tasks. A credit record may make it easier to open a bank account, borrow at a lower rate, or qualify for a mortgage. But a household also needs to manage cash flow and handle emergencies before wealth-building goals become realistic. Goel said Esusu began with savings circles, in which trusted groups pool money and take turns drawing from it. His family used that practice after arriving in the United States. He described community-based systems as one way people manage when the formal market does not offer workable solutions.

The gap in access is not only about savings. Goel said wealthier households can borrow against assets, use a line of credit, or access lower-cost capital when they face an emergency. Lower-income households often lack those options. A single financial shock can therefore have larger consequences for a household with little savings and no affordable credit. Goel argued for creating lower-cost vehicles that let people manage a crisis without allowing it to shape the rest of their financial lives.

Scheyder’s suggested sequence for a family with a thin credit history and little savings was to count rent toward credit history, build an emergency cushion, and use tax time to review the household’s full financial picture. That review can identify benefits a family qualifies for but may not know about. It can also make room for an honest conversation about whether homeownership is a goal and what a plan to reach it would entail.

Those steps do not substitute for income, housing supply, or public support. Hall emphasized that transportation, health care, food access, case management, and workforce development affect whether a household can benefit from housing. He said there was no reliable payer for some of the case management and workforce services needed. Scheyder’s account of the Financial Health Diaries likewise points to the limits of advice alone. The proposed supports range from rent reporting and savings to benefits, stable work, emergency finance, and housing located near services.

The AI discussion was narrower than the arguments about supply, financing, and preservation. Its clearest connection to those issues was administrative: housing programs are difficult to navigate, and delays or burdens can make access harder for renters, landlords, and public agencies.

Hall said AI was being used or considered in site analysis, permitting, and other municipal functions. He also raised the risk that automation could remove a human element from credit and mortgage decisions. Scheyder’s concern was that young people at her financial institution were turning to AI tools such as Claude for financial advice. She questioned the stability and quality of the information those systems draw on.

Goel distinguished between that uncertainty and a broader economic risk. He worried that market growth and investment had become highly dependent on AI-related companies and data-center construction. A loss of confidence in a major company, he said, could affect market values and the flow of capital into housing, including opportunities for lower-income families. He also said housing itself depends on human relationships, including property management and resident services.

The operational opportunity he identified was reducing the paperwork burden around HUD certifications, Section 8 voucher applications, and USDA processes. Those tasks can be difficult for renters and landlords, especially when families are navigating forms in a second language and administrators are juggling rent collection, inspections, and accessibility requirements. In that setting, automation could make programs easier to administer without replacing the people who deliver housing services.