Resources & Research

I see Michigan’s housing crisis from three different perspectives. By day, I’m a real estate appraiser, with my head buried in market data. As a partner in small-scale development projects, I see the physical results firsthand. And as a councilmember in the City of Holland, I’m always diving into policy.

These roles often pull me in different directions, but they’ve all led me to one conclusion: The housing crisis demands an entire workshop of tools, not the “sledgehammer” of state preemption, where state government overrides local laws.

That’s why I’m lending my voice in support of the MI Home Program, recently proposed by the Michigan Municipal League. It treats Michigan’s systemic lack of attainable housing like the multifaceted issue that it is and addresses it by empowering action at the local level—without Lansing telling municipalities what to do.

My first big lesson in housing policy reform came from Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs), sometimes called backyard cottages or in-law apartments. When Holland adopted its new Unified Development Ordinance, we opened the door for homeowners to build ADUs.

“

To truly unlock the missing-middle housing we need, municipalities must be empowered by Lansing to have a housing-ready mindset alongside small tangible tools.

— Devin Shea

So, are we now crawling with backyard cottages? Do we have tons of college students in garage apartments? Nope. In a city of 35,000, we have 10 ADUs. This is not because the housing costs in our area have gone down. The need for more housing is still huge. 

I was shocked that more ADUs weren’t built immediately. But then I ran the numbers and watched how quickly the profit margin vanished. Prohibitive costs and other zoning frictions mean that even when ADUs are legal, they’re often not financially possible. 

This was my first clue: The biggest barrier isn’t just the zoning map. The “just let them build” argument falls apart if no one can afford to. 

This brings me to a concept some developers call “brain damage.” This is the small-scale developer term for all the hassle, friction, and cost that make a project a nightmare. Think permitting delays, complex stormwater rules, and utility hookup fees.  

Our system is set up for two extremes: Single-family homes, and large apartment buildings. Who’s missing? The small-to-medium-scale developer who wants to build a duplex, a quad, or a small mixed-use building. They face big “brain damage” for a small profit. The system was not built for them. 

As a community, we must lower that “brain damage.” We need to be housing-ready—streamlining permitting, clarifying rules, and removing as many barriers as we can. The solution isn’t one sweeping law; it’s a hundred small, unflashy fixes that, added together, make a new project viable.  

MML’s proposed MI Home Program helps bridge that gap, investing $160 million annually to help communities like Holland rehabilitate existing buildings and create attainable new homes. Its core principle of “partnership over preemption” ensures that locals are the ones who oversee how those funds are used. 

While changing zoning is a crucial first step, it’s just one tool. And it’s a tool best wielded by the local stakeholders. This is the idea of local control—residents are best suited to tailor local policy, so that it can be tailored to their community’s needs. 

While zoning is vital, it requires local control to truly meet community needs. Good zoning proactively invites growth—like duplexes—rather than just restricting it. This is yet another area where the MI Home Program shines. By offering funding for voluntary reforms rather than forcing the same mandate for everyone, it empowers municipalities as partners. 

The state’s role is to enable communities to navigate the experience—on their own terms. To truly unlock the missing-middle housing we need, municipalities must be empowered by Lansing to have a housing-ready mindset alongside small tangible tools. We must streamline administrative hurdles and close the financial gap that makes small projects impossible. We need the state, but we don’t need the state to tell us what to do. 

True leadership needs a thoughtful strategy: localize the conflict. By pursuing change at the municipal level—in partnership with the state—we minimize the chance of a major policy backfire at the state or national scale. This smaller, local approach ensures that innovation is informed by community knowledge and that the risk of negative, unforeseen side effects is contained. 

The sledgehammer of preemption is simple and tempting. But this crisis demands the nuanced, varied, and challenging work of a whole workshop of tools—the “partnership” proposed in the MI Home Program. 

Click here for more information on MI Home. List your support for MI Home here.