Editorial of September 4, 2025

Industry and Housing: If Not Here, Then Where?

Averill Road. Rehabilitative Support Services. The Manocherian subdivision. The Albert S. Nader Regional Airport. The EcoYotta data center. All have one thing in common: They are proposed projects that have met with, or are meeting with, strong opposition.

The first three are housing proposals. The last two speak to potential economic development. Which is somewhat puzzling, because—according to the Otsego County “2025 Community Needs Assessment” released in August by Opportunities for Otsego—housing is one of the county’s most pressing needs. And the ability to attract and retain businesses is one of our biggest long-term challenges.

The Community Needs Assessment is available on the OFO website (https://ofoinc.org/application/files/2117/5372/9455/OFO_CNA_2025_FINAL.pdf), and it’s an interesting read.

According to OFO officials, this document “summarizes qualitative and quantitative data gathered from consumers, the community, and various data sources to identify community needs and resources.” Following a brief profile of Otsego County’s natural resources, climate, and transportation and telecommunication infrastructure, the document provides an in-depth dive into our population, employment, education, housing, nutrition, income, and health, wellness, and safety. The purpose of this data? “To determine local priorities and how best to increase self-sufficiency, improve living conditions, and strengthen family and support systems for low-income individuals.”

With regard to housing, the report reads in part:

• Over the past 10 years, Otsego County lost 2.5% of its housing units. Of the estimated 30,011 units, nearly one-quarter are vacant with 80% deemed seasonal or for recreational use.
• The median year housing was built in Otsego County was 1954. An estimated 11% of housing units were built after 2000 and 70.4% were built before the 1978 lead paint ban.
• Fair Market rate for rental housing has increased 18.1%-45.7% over the past seven years, while median home sales prices have increased 32.9% since 2020. As such, 42.7% of renters and 26.8% of [homeowners] in Otsego County are “cost burdened.”
• On the subject of economic development, OFO reports that Otsego County’s top industries with the greatest employment in 2024 are healthcare and social assistance, retail trade, accommodation and food services, public administration, and manufacturing.

One respondent to the Community Needs Assessment Survey said, “Currently Otsego County economic development is focused on tourism as the main driver, which produces low-wage, seasonal jobs rather than industrial development or trying to incubate early-stage R&D/technical new business formation.”

To be clear, this editorial is intended neither to promote nor to object to any of these projects. Though, truthfully, we believe the RSS housing proposal, voted down by the Oneonta Common Council in May, to be a missed opportunity for many. What we’re getting at is this: Without the advent of additional housing of all kinds, and without thoughtful economic development, we cannot begin to address the needs of Otsego County’s low-income individuals.

Community partners and players agree. At a half-day forum conducted by OFO on April 29, five work groups were selected for further discussion based on feedback from the Community Needs Assessment Survey: employment, childcare, housing, transportation and mental health/healthcare. According to OFO, “Discussion groups were prearranged to encourage discussion between a cross section of sectors within the community. Group leaders were provided with a list of questions, based on quantitative and qualitative community data, to facilitate solution focused discussions.”

The housing work group’s list of solutions and interventions to address community gaps bears out our thinking in its first five recommendations:

• Develop housing to address and alleviate increasing housing costs for year-round residents.
• Expand manufacturing jobs to bring year-round residents to the area.
• Increase inventory of low-income/subsidized housing to alleviate excessive wait lists.
• Community education/awareness campaign on benefits to supportive housing (e.g. RSS and Springbrook projects).
• Review and update county and municipal laws/ordinances that create bottlenecks, impede progress, increase costs, and limit the inventory of multi-family dwellings and year-round housing (e.g. number of unrelated individuals in one one-unit, short-term housing, rent control laws, zoning).

Are folks saying “no” to these projects with the greater good in mind? Or are they simply saying “not in my back yard?” We suspect it is a bit of both. At the end of the day, we can’t help those in need without first helping ourselves. Before weighing in on any project, it behooves us to learn more—what need might the project be addressing? Who is it helping? Who is it hurting? Do the benefits outweigh the drawbacks?

And, perhaps more importantly, we must ask ourselves: If “here” is not the place for new housing or new industry, then where?