The Underfunded Built Environment

Lucas Turner-Owens: So the word in everyone's mind today, and I think for the last year, has been affordability. And the central affordability question is how can we drive down the cost of housing? At the same time, we're navigating an energy crisis and the increasing acceleration of climate change. And I think all these issues can be addressed head on through an impact investing lens focused on the built environment. Yeah, I found since working in the space that actually few folks know that the built environment accounts for 40% of global CO2 emissions, the most of any sector. 41% of global energy use, 40% of raw material usage is attributed to construction, and 42% of landfill waste. And add on to that the issue of rising housing costs for renting and for homeownership. And because the built environment is at the heart of so many problems that we're trying to fix, it should also be, in my opinion, the lever that we focus on when trying to address them. So today we're diving deep into how institutional capital and forward-thinking developers are solving this problem from the investment side. We have Ruby Schiffrin joining us today, who spent her career thinking about how to solve for housing affordability and has done that from within large companies like Lenar, from within the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, and currently Turner Labs out of UC Berkeley, which is currently launching its own standalone venture fund to tackle this issue. And we're also joined by Cole Cage, Vice President of Acquisitions from Jonathan Rhodes Companies, one of the country's leading developers of affordable housing, and a leader in preservation of affordable housing, that also manages several impact funds that they've raised with some very impressive returns and scale. Prior to Jonathan Rose, Cole worked at Oak Tree Capital Management and JP Morgan. Ruby and Cole, thanks for joining me. So I wanted to kick off by asking you both a question and maybe we'll start with you, Ruby, ⁓ which is, you know, what drew each of you to the affordable housing space? You know, what are the kind of bottlenecks that exist in the market that we're trying to solve? And what's your firm's current sort of core strategy in addressing those bottlenecks? Sure. So I ⁓ came into affordable housing and housing in general. ⁓ from organizing actually. I was organizing and social justice, mostly environmental, kind of public health type issues, particularly working on a food insecurity and and food justice type work. And through that, ⁓ you know, you really see how the built environment plays a massive role in your ability to access healthy, nutritious foods. ⁓ you know, if you live in a community that your closest grocery store is an hour by bus, ⁓ yet you're littered with ⁓ fast food restaurants and ⁓ convenience marts, right? It shapes the opportunities that you have. And I would argue that extends to ⁓ your access to jobs, healthcare, education. You know, it's really shaped by where you live. And so I learned more about kind of the patterns of segregation and how the built environment can play a huge role in that and wanted to learn more. And so I went back to school and got a master's in urban planning and focused in housing and development. And so I just saw housing as the linchpin issue. Like if we could solve ⁓ for that and make sure everyone can live in affordable, sustainable housing that, you know, in areas of high opportunity, then that could potentially be the tide that lifts all boats, right? And and kind of solve some of these other major things. ⁓ when it comes to the pain points and some of the problems at Turner Labs, we focus on housing innovation and how do we make housing more affordable, sustainable, and equitable. And the kind of two main levers that we look at when doing this are the policy change and the policy environment that creates the ne enabling conditions for what you can and cannot do. And ⁓ looking at more market-based innovations and thinking about what new solutions are out there to drive down costs, to speed up development, to make it more equitable, to create more options for folks so that ⁓ everyone has the opportunity to live in in thriving communities. And and Cole, what drew you into the space and what's Jonathan Rose's approach to solving some of the problems that we're seeing in affordable housing? Definitely. So I came into the industry through a little bit of a different angle, more through the impact ⁓ investing space. ⁓ after spending some time ⁓ doing investing at JP Morgan and Oak Tree, I really wanted to kind of approach investing through the lens of impact and how to make the world ⁓ a better place. You know, Jonathan Rose often articulates that the best investments are ones where impact is inherent to the product or to the investment itself. And kind of echoing what Ruby was saying earlier, I think housing is an linchpin of impact and social good ⁓ in our world. And so I I thought the affordable housing and real estate's place was really a great one where I could achieve impact in the investments that I was working with. I think here at Rose, you know, in terms of addressing bottlenecks, we feel like bringing capital, namely institutional capital, into the affordable housing space is a great way not only to amplify the impact of a lot of the social programs that have been set up at both the federal and the state level, but also provide strong, solid investment returns for institutional investors. You know, I guess I I wanna take us a level deeper, but before we do that, I wanna give a little bit of framing. ⁓ I think many folks talk about affordability and show up at different sort of places in the ecosystem with different expectations around what affordability looks like. ⁓ some developers are targeting really deep affordability. That could be thirty to forty percent of area median income as like the ideal tenant for their final final project. Others are focused on, you know, a hundred percent of AMI as their as their target. ⁓ but I guess with that I'll say ⁓ across the full spectrum, I'm I seem to be seeing more institutional capital entering into the market. And I wanted to get both your perspective on that. I guess I'll start with you, Cole. It seems to me like there are more LPs entering into affordable housing. ⁓ what's driving that? And also has there been a shift in their mindset as they show up as investors? Definitely. I think at the end of the day, institutional investors are driven by both economic returns and social good. And when you look at the affordable housing space, one of the key things that is on everyone's mind is demand and the need for housing. And I think that often translates into returns. So whether people are leaking looking at the deeper end of affordability, where there are programs such as the session eight program, or on the higher end of affordability, and by higher end I mean higher area median income, so 80 to 100% of AMI, where you have workforce housing, both of those asset classes produce fairly strong returns while also providing for a public good. And Ruby, I guess I want to ask you the same question. I mean, you're you're thinking about this. ⁓ from a different perspective, looking at it as a venture capital investor, ⁓ how are you seeing sort of a mindset shift of ⁓ institutional capital as it enters the space? Yeah, before I get into the VC side, just on the institutional capital side, one thing that I just wanted to add is that ⁓ there was this perception that I think is really shifting that affordable housing is risky and that you know the return profile isn't high enough given the level of risk. And I think that that is changing as there is more proof points in affordable housing's ability to return, ⁓ to return a ⁓ meaningful a meaningful return, I guess, right? Like ⁓ and the perception of it being risky usually is related to the political risk, you know, the idea that I'm not sure how this is gonna get through. I think some of that has shifted because government takeout. As their takeout financing is actually ⁓ very stable, right? This this ability for government to come in and be that long-term player ⁓ is great. Not only that, you're also seeing affordable housing developers like Abridge Housing get bond rated and be able to raise capital against that, right? So I think this the the shift in comfort level of some of the more institutional investors to invest in this asset class has created a lot of opportunity for more project level financing. Where we don't see that as much is on the venture side, right? And so I think that's there's a there's a big disconnect, right? Where companies that are trying to innovate in this space to lower costs, because let's also be real here, affordable housing in particular, the costs have gotten out of control to the point in a lot of places, affordable housing is more expensive to build the market rate. There's something wrong when that is the reality. And I think the challenge. For a lot of companies that are trying to innovate in this space is that they get stuck between proof of concept and scaling. They're too regulated for generalist venture, they're too early for real estate capital, and they're too operationally complex for investors looking for clean kind of software cell growth. And we've seen in the climate space, investors have spent years talking about this, right? And have actually built a more robust ecosystem on this kind of scale gap. Right, where promising technologies need to move beyond the lab and and how to get to commercialization. ⁓ and so that's an area where, frankly, I think we're kind of at the tip of the spear right now, trying to think about what is the right capital stack for these companies to get to scale and to get to a level of comfort for those traditional and institutional investors to be able to make those investments. I I love the way that you frame that as sort of this this kind of capital gap that's that's really specific for startups that are solving in this space. I know often we are scared of companies that are only focused on, you know, solving per p a particular kind of government problem instead of having a ⁓ typical enterprise buyer they can go after. And I I love your point around, you know, what's happening in climate tech because we see that with firms like, you know, Breakthrough Energy that are designed to have a longer timeline and how they think about, you know, their their path to yield. And ⁓ I guess I wanna ask you both, you know, is there also something maybe happening in the broader markets? Maybe it's You know, where cap rates are today, or maybe it's ⁓ a flight to to quality as as other strategies are not working out quite as well, like private equity or or venture, that may be driving some institutional LP interest ⁓ in affordability and affordable housing. I think generally there's a devo desire for diversification, ⁓ being able to put money to work in different asset classes. And so many times when we are speaking to investors, they are looking at it through that lens, right? ⁓ so they they may already have investments in market rate focused developers or in industrial or other types of real estate asset classes, but they don't have coverage on the affordable side. And I think as as we both mentioned, as affordable has grown up as an asset class, investors are seeing that as a place where they need to allocate funds. Yeah. I think also the demand is just higher than ever, right? The need to innovate in this space is You just can't ignore it anymore. ⁓ you know, our homeownership rate is at an all-time low. Average age of first-time homeownership is 40. About half of all renters are cost burdened, right? Meaning that they pay more than 30% of their income on rent. At least 12 million renters are severely cost burdened, which means they spend 50% of their income on rent. This is having a ripple effect across our country, right? Because your inability To pay rent and to stay housed, obviously the first ⁓ most visible thing people think of, right, is falling into homelessness. But there's also all these other impacts that are happening along the way. Trade-offs that families are having to make around where they live, the access to education for their kids, ⁓ you know, what they pay for, what healthcare needs that they take care of. I mean, this is something that if you care about ⁓ you know, crime prevention, if you care about the climate like you were mentioning, if you care about education attainment, housing is a way to address all of those other concerns too, and frankly, I think a more lasting ⁓ a more lasting way. I I agree. And I also, you know, maybe to take the flip side of that point though, and and this is really parroting a point from Abundance, the Ezra Klein, Derek Thompson book, i it is maybe also why we are struggling a little bit in the affordable housing space to deliver units at at a good cost, is because we have a A logical belief of all that can be accomplished with great housing and all that it can then ⁓ the knock on effects that you just spoke to, Ruby. ⁓ I I want to maybe ask one more question about kind of the capital landscape before we dive deeper into what's happening in the sector, which is just maybe we can kind of segment the institutional capital providers a little bit for our audience that might not know this already. You know, there are some folks like you know, ⁓ insurance companies that are thinking about the future of the country and have a different timeline and perspective of how they want to allocate capital. There are, you know, government. ⁓ dollars that enter into the space. There are foundations and endowments participating. ⁓ I'm curious if either of you are seeing any kind of either creative capital structures or really well-suited capital partners, ⁓ just so we can speak to kind of with some specificity around what kind of ⁓ institutional capital providers are working with you. Yeah, certainly. ⁓ I you know can't necessarily name any names, but we have seen increasing interest ⁓ and ⁓ potential investment from either state or city pension funds that have a vested interest in their communities and their cities, ⁓ having strong, vibrant housing and having not only ⁓ good housing stock, but also ⁓ you know, housing that supports local businesses such as contractors and in in general supports labor in in their markets. ⁓ so that's definitely one area where we've seen strong And continued interest in the affordable housing space. I I love to hear that. And in one of our first episodes, ⁓ Eric and I talked to folks from New York City's pension program and also Massachusetts Prim ⁓ with kind of an ESG lens and how they think about their ⁓ the responsibility and and and whose ⁓ money they're they're really putting to work. And so it's great to hear that that's a a group that's that's shown up to be a good partner. I don't know if there's anything you want to add in this Ruby before I kinda talk more about the project level work that I know. Yeah. The only thing I would add is I think about Similar to like how you think about different asset class, like different investors in their risk profile in this, like the pension funds and the, you know, REITs and kind of that long term capital, that's on one end where it's like you've kind of de-risked the model, like how do we get to scale? Like that's that I think about is almost like our takeout financing, right? That that's who is able to make it kind of go to the moon. And then on the other end, should be the more philanthropic effect funders. And I and I would actually push that they're not being risk embracing enough. Like If you take a venture-like model to philanthropy, that means you should expect 99% of your business to fail, right? Or 90% or whatever it might be, right? But ⁓ you're gonna see more failure than success. Yet folks in the impact space have this mindset that if I see any failure, that I'm doing something wrong. ⁓ and so that approach I think is not beneficial when it comes to being the RD and risk capital for the space. Like if we took more of a venture approach to investing in you know, impact, I think we'd see different results. But anyway, sorry, I cut you off. No, no, no, I completely agree. I think ⁓ we how do I put this? ⁓ impact investors should not crowd one end of the pool and you know cherry pick a certain set of opportunities from a fear of looking like a Rube or from a fear of looking like they are, you know, the dumb money. The truth is we need patient money, we need sort of risk-aligned money. ⁓ and we need RD. I like I like that you use that phrase, Ruby. Well, so ⁓ I guess a question for you, Cole, is to talk about kind of the the project level. We've been talking about, you know, the sort of capital plumbing that's needed to route capital effectively to projects on the ground and to RD critically. ⁓ maybe you can kind of give folks a sense of the kind of projects that you're thinking about day-to-day and funding. Maybe walk us through one example of a project that ⁓ Rose Company took on. Yeah, definitely. So in our investment funds, we typically are in the quote unquote developer role. So really leading the transactions day to day. And we look at a variety of different affordable or mixed income structures in our deals. So we look at section eight investments. So these are projects that have subsidy directly from HUD in the form of a housing assistance payment contract or hap contract. And that we would say is at one end of the affordability scale. And then we also look all the way over at the other end, which is what we call workforce housing. So these are deals that are a little bit higher on the area median income scale, typically closer to 80% of AMI. And they are also generally unsubsidized deals. ⁓ so we're looking at transactions in both spaces. I think, you know. The on the the workforce side, it definitely is a is a market that has ⁓ grown up and matured over the last few years. I think increasingly as affordability has become a concern across the country, we've seen cities and states start to implement workforce programs that provide some sort of incentive, not in the form of subsidy, but but usually in the form of tax relief or sometimes accretive financing in order to help get those deals done. And you know, those are really exciting because they combine elements of not only affordability, but also more traditional multifamily real estate all into one deal. On the Section 8 side, you know, despite concerns about funding from the federal government, the Section 8 program has actually been quite strong over the last few years. ⁓ and we see it as a great reduced risk, stable. Opportunity for investment ⁓ in major gateway cities across the country. Well, I I love that point about how we need to, you know, attract outside capital, you know, return seeking market rate capital into the space, as well as pursuing deep affordability. You you really need both. But ⁓ I'm struck by your point that ⁓ so much of the deep affordability work is reliant on that, on that tax relief that comes from federal spending and some state spending. Well, I I want to ask you, Ruby, you know, from more of a portfolio perspective, help folks understand, you know, the kinds of ⁓ startups that that you're working with and backing and helping to to scale. Yeah, absolutely. So ⁓ we are looking at companies across the spectrum that can help lower costs and speed up development. And so this new fund that Turner Labs is launching, Joist, is really looking at what can move the needle and what are the biggest levers for that. And hard costs, right, make up typically about 60% of your total development costs. So looking at various tools, including panelized, kit of parts, you know, factory built housing, but also, you know, supply chain management tool, feasibility analysis, ⁓ looking at financing, right? And how to how to move the needle on getting money out the door more quickly or fewer sources of capital, especially for affordable housing developers, partnering with HFA's housing finance authorities and other government partners too on that end. ⁓ and then GovTech is the other major bucket, right? How do we help? government speed up permitting processes, ⁓ get through compliance, right? Like when we think about affordable housing ⁓ leaseup, there's a lot of income verification and different things that you need to do that can take up a ton of time. One company I talked to that's based in New York talked about how with their clients they moved from a two-year lease up period to a two-month lease up period. So that's dramatic savings too in your ability to bring in income for the property and stabilize that property. There's also a lot on the kind of permitting software side, we're seeing a ton of companies with now AI powered tools come out that make it a lot more accessible, frankly. Like we had this kind of civic tech boom a few years ago, right? And it it was great, but then it didn't quite go all the way. And I think part of that is the adoption. ⁓ I think adoption has been a challenge. And now with the advent of kind of the AI powered tools that just make it easier for folks to use that don't need an engineering background, right? That you don't need to have a ton of technical experience. can be a real game changer. I completely agree. In fact, we we have a at Building Ventures sort of a market landscape of all the drawing review companies that have come out in the last 12 months, powered by AI. We we see that as a space that is really poised to take off. ⁓ and I hope that it's off some of these bottlenecks. And I I want to ask you, Cole, about some of those bottlenecks. So, you know, this is a rough summary of some of the the themes that came up in abundance, which I mentioned earlier, which is that a lot of ⁓ soft costs, pre-development costs. Can really get in the way of affordable housing projects, add on to that ⁓ labor constraints made worse by immigration crackdowns, add on to that high interest rates. I'd love it if you could talk to us about, you know, ways that you overcome some of those problems operationally at Jonathan Rose to help us understand, you know, the opportunities to sort of ⁓ shave off costs and increase speed. Yeah, certainly. And I I do want to go back ⁓ to something that Ruby mentioned earlier and just say that we on the operator and developer side are extremely excited about some of these potential tools that we can use for both compliance and ⁓ AI. You know, one of the key core drags really on us being able to provide quality housing to people in need is all of the overhead that it takes. And, you know, there there are good reasons for some of this, right? To really kind of confirm that people ⁓ are receiving the housing that they are supposed to be receiving and making sure that they meet the qualifications. That is all so important, but it also takes so much human time. And so we we really are excited about some of those tools that are that are that are coming out and can't can't really wait to put them to use. But in terms of your question in terms of how we're shaving off soft costs or reducing some of the overhead, at least on the upfront portion of housing, I I think Part of it honestly is just getting very familiar with not only the programs, but the agencies that we work with. You know, there is obviously a benefit to having scale and being able to do these programs again and again and again. You start to build a relationship with the agencies and you start to understand exactly how it is to how how it is that they they need, for example, applications to come through, or how it how it is that they need their architect forms and all of that stuff, right? So We have a pretty good ⁓ built-in process here at Jonathan Rose companies in terms of making sure that we get everything ⁓ crossed and dotted so that our applications are are accepted by the agencies. I think also, you know, one of the core things that we have been trying to do is figure out which programs we can utilize ⁓ to best reduce overhead costs. So there are certain, without getting into the inside baseball, you know, there are certain financing routes that you can choose in order to avoid cost here or there. And I think we try to do that to the best ⁓ possible extent to reduce costs to make sure that the most dollars that we have are actually going towards impacting residents and impacting the the actual quality of the buildings versus ⁓ overhead. Well I I hear in that answer a lot of allegories to to work that I have done and ⁓ Pierce have done in thinking about how to provide access to capital to entrepreneurs. A lot of that work looks like educating folks around the credit boxes that exist at these different lending institutions to make that really crisp and clear so that when they do submit their loan package, they're likely to be approved. But yeah, I think we describe bottlenecks in the abstract. We don't maybe empathize with the individual person who has to, you know, sift through, you know, hundreds and hundreds of pages of documents to to make a lending decision or to approve ⁓ a project. And so the the more you can be empathetic to that, understand what you're trying to solve for. And and get tight on or crisp on that box, I think the the higher chance you have of success. But I do want to give you the chance. I mean, you say you don't want to get too in the weeds. I I welcome it. If there's anything you want to share around you know certain financing routes, even at a somewhat high level that you think can drive more resident and felt impact, I'd I'd love to hear about it. Yeah, certainly. Well, I mean, ⁓ it's ⁓ no ⁓ you know secret that one of the highest costs of any ⁓ real estate project is going to be labor. And I think we like to both be supportive, but also make sure we're being efficient and economic with the way that we are ⁓ allocating resources. And so, for example, there are certain programs at both the federal and local level that require ⁓ Davis Bacon wages or prevailing wage. And while we want to make sure that we support labor in these projects, ⁓ support also local labor labor, right? So so local. ⁓ subcontractors and general contractors, we also want to make sure that the dollars that we spend are actually going towards the project. You know, I think there's ⁓ approximately a 40% cost difference between a ⁓ call it a a project where we have to support additional labor costs versus those in which we don't. And that really has a big difference on the bottom line and what we're able to do and what projects we're able to actually deliver on. Yeah, I think you you you spoke to it really well. It it's a question to me of, you know, we can't do everything. There are inherent trade-offs in some of these decisions that we make during a full project life cycle. And, you know, in thinking about sort of which impacts we want to drive and prioritize, ⁓ you can make clear which of those trade-offs you you're you're gonna have to make. And I'll try to give a little bit of framing around Davis Bacon for folks that aren't familiar. So, you know, this is a piece of policy that was passed in the 30s. With the intention of protecting workers and promoting fair compensation by paying workers a localized prevailing wage. Fast forward to 2026, many shops will tie their localized prevailing wage number to the most that they've ever made. And I say that not to be cynical, but just to be honest about I think what has happened. ⁓ And so some trades in a city like New York are able to earn over $100 an hour under Davis Bacon. Now there's that tension between we want to see high-paying jobs, good jobs in the trades. And we want to deliver a unit of affordable housing for less than a million dollars. So, how do we think about that tension and solve for it? Is is a policy question that I think is very relevant to this conversation. So I'm glad you you brought it up. I want to ask you, Ruby, not just about David Spacon, but maybe policy more broadly. Are there pieces of policy that you know we think we could reform to lead to an accelerated either delivery of housing or ⁓ just a more efficient ecosystem? Absolutely. I mean, I think affordable housing is an example of well-intentioned policies that create a lot of bloat, frankly, right? And kind of move you further away from your desired outcomes. And I say that also because there's a lot of strings that come attached with the dollars, the investment that comes into affordable housing at the federal, state, and local level. And sometimes those different requirements can also be competing. And so then you get into a really challenging situation as a developer where you're either having To not go for certain dollars, or you're now having to reconcile some of those friction points, right? So for example, sometimes it's like, ⁓ you have to locate within a certain distance of a school. Okay, now you also have to have child care close by. Now you also have to have this. So we've kind of taken all the social ills of society and put it on the backs of affordable housing developers and say, you solve it. Put it all into the housing. ⁓ and again, well-intentioned, well-meaning. We all want. ⁓ a lot of these solutions. And I think ⁓ we just haven't taken a step back. Policymakers and legislators in particular taking a step back and seeing the whole picture, the f versus the forest for the trees, right? In terms of I'm gonna add this new policy and legislation that's gonna be tied to this new requirement. And it's so great because it's gonna help, you know, either workers or it's gonna move more affordable housing into IHO opportunity areas, which also tend to be higher land costs, right? So all of this stuff that has potentially unintended consequences. And you're not trading that off with the existing picture. So for example, instead saying, here's a menu of options, pick three, right? We want you to we want you to be able to target three of these things on this kind of public benefit package. Something that gives also a developer more control so that they can build the site to what makes sense versus a more prescriptive method that says this is how you have to build it, even if the outcome means a worse product, a more expensive product, fewer units. Like literally these are the trade-offs, right? When I was a developer, I remember working on a project where we literally removed a floor because the cost of adding that one floor, you know, made the building not pencil. So now you're you're eliminating potential units that you could build. So you're not building to your max zoned capacity because of costs. That to me is such a sad trade-off to make. I I love that that segue. ⁓ and I think also I'll highlight one thing that I I find to be kind of arcane about our our permitting policy, which is that ⁓ in other countries around the world, they'll say, here's what this needs to look like when it's finished, we'll come and check when it's done. We'll make sure that you've you've met these requirements. And that's not what our permitting process looks like in the States. We have constant check-ins throughout the process which which slow down ⁓ some some projects that never get completed actually as a result. ⁓ And I guess I as I mentioned it's a great segue because I wanted to ask you this question, Cole, around sort of what is a developer's responsibility in placemaking? Like We can't achieve, I and I don't mean to limit our imagination, but I don't think we can achieve a hundred percent of what we want to with a specific single building. ⁓ so how do you think about, you know, your responsibility as you're either entering a a new place that's being developed or preserving an existing one at Jonathan Rose? Yeah, no, it's a great question. And I think one of the things that we always try to think for ourselves is that every opportunity that we come across is unique. In some regard, right? ⁓ unique because you are dealing with certain financing considerations that don't apply to other deals. Unique because, you know, you're dealing with a community that has for us oftentimes been with this particular property or particular group of properties ⁓ for much longer than we have been involved. Maybe even the local state or city agencies have been involved. And so they have certain needs or they have certain views about how their community really kind of comes together. And so when we think of placemaking, ⁓ the first place we go is partnership with the community and making sure that the needs that the community has are actually addressed, right? And then we it is our responsibility as a developer to kind of go out and get the resources that are available in order to continue to support and build up the community. Right. ⁓ so you know when I'm I'm thinking about For example, we have a fairly large portfolio of elderly communities across the country. And one of the core things we do when first engaging with these communities is understanding what services are already provided at the community, with services from either local healthcare providers or sometimes local workforce providers. And then based on that, come to an understanding of What are the gaps, what needs to be filled, and then trying to go out there and find solutions to really help those communities. I think when we gain that knowledge, we can then work with our government partners to be like, okay, well, well, here are the needs and here's some of the funding, or here's some of the restrictions that we can put in place to make sure that those needs are met. ⁓ but but I think it at first it really does come down to engaging with the community and trying to understand what they need. And and one thing I love that you've shared with me in the past when we've spoken about this is that. That community engagement work happens really on the one-to-one with handing out, you know, surveys in a in a room in the basement of a church or in a community center. And ⁓ getting that that perspective requires patience and real active listening, ⁓ and not the idea that you're showing up, you know, brand new to a space that you want to plant a flag on and and completely change. But that, like you said, you're solving for the needs of the folks that live there. So I I appreciate the the humility in that approach. And ⁓ I've seen that same. ⁓ strategy be effective in community economic development work. It makes sense that it it tracks the work you're doing Jonathan Rose. I I want to ask you both a closing question, which is, you know, I think even though institutional capital has has warmed to this space and realized that they need this coverage in their portfolio, I think we still need more folks working in this space. We need more small developers, large developers, we need more startups solving these problems that Ruby's going after to tackle. I guess I want to ask you both, What's kind of the call to action that you want to make to folks listening ⁓ in terms of you know the new ideas or new folks you want to see enter this conversation? You're absolutely right. We need more folks in this space across the spectrum. I think the reality is actually folks that are in the housing space are are much smaller than we've maybe lit on, right? ⁓ that we need folks in climate who work in economic mobility, who work you know across impact areas for the folks that are on that kind of impact space. To be more involved in this and to see this as the linchpin issue that we see. Some of the stuff that I hear sometimes is this is just too complicated and big for me to wrap my head around, or you know, the problem seems too big. And that to me then is a failure on our part in articulating that this is actually very solvable. Like, you know, if you're taking on ⁓ so many other issues, whether it's, you know, in science and drug discovery and development, or you're working on our education system, like there's a ton of thorny issues out there. I think when it comes to housing, ⁓ we need to be more clear and articulate about how we there is a roadmap here. And we actually know a lot of the solutions. It's really about implementation. and that is freeing in some ways, right? Because it it invites people in to be more part of the solution. Well, before I come to you, Cole, with the same question, I I want to just react to that and say, you're so right, Ruby, there is no lack of audacity in the broader venture capital space when it comes to tackling any number of problems. I think folks assume that there's a level of intractability in addressing ⁓ poverty, economic mobility, and and affordable housing for some reason. ⁓ but we forget that you know, we're talking about a space that's largely impacted by federal policy. We've we've thought about this and addressed this before at scale, you know, not that long ago, within the last sixty, seventy years. So we should have that same kind of ambition and belief and not a level of apathy or kind of fatalism when it comes to thinking about affordable housing and ⁓ cool, I guess I want to ask you s the same question, which is ⁓ what's sort of the call to action you either want to leave investors or developers or folks in the space? Yeah, I would just say get your hands dirty, dive in. I think no matter where you are in the space, whether you're a developer, whether you're on the investor side, or whether you know you're just an individual who lives in a community, I think there are opportunities for you to engage with the housing conversation and the affordable housing conversation. No matter no matter who you are or where you are, right? And so for the developers out there, try that deal that you thought couldn't work. Maybe pull up your pro forma or talk to your financing partners and see if there's a way that you can potentially put it together. For the investors out there, give another thought to the affordable housing space if you haven't already or if you're not already invested in this space. You know, sometimes the returns may not look as high as other strategies, but I do think on a risk adjusted basis it's a fairly strong category and also one that is very, very much in need. And then I think for for individuals, you know, go to a local community meeting, go to a local ⁓ neighborhood board meeting and and just hear about what's going on in your community. I am sure no matter where you are, there is a conversation about an affordable development going on in your area and and that you could stand alone. Love that. Love that. And it's so true. I mean, I think we've been having a conversation around how better plumbing, a better sort of more efficient capital landscape can, you know, new orchestration can create new opportunities on the ground, right? So I I love that point you made, Cole. And and yeah, this is a conversation that's live in every city ⁓ and also in a lot of ⁓ rural areas now with ⁓ increasing unaffordability. So thank you both for coming on. I would encourage folks listening to check out the work that Jonathan Rose is doing and the work that Joyce is doing. They have some great portfolio companies that I know we're tracking at building ventures like Pad Split and Pronto and Villa and others. So ⁓ yeah, thank you both for coming on. Thank you. Thanks. The opinions expressed in this program are those of the individuals interviewed and are for general informational purposes only. They are not intended to provide specific advice or recommendations for any individual or on any specific security. This program is intended solely to provide education about the financial industry in the broader impact investing landscape. To determine which investments may be appropriate for you, consult your financial advisor prior to investing. Any past performance discussed during this program is no guarantee of future results. Please remember that investing involves risk and possible loss of principal capital. Please seek advice from a licensed professional before making any investment decisions. All views expressed by our guests are their own and do not necessarily reflect the views of impacted or its hosts.