Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rural Economy Overview topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Federal Reserve presidents highlight housing, workforce and infrastructure gaps in rural America
Summary
Federal Reserve Bank presidents said rural communities face acute housing, health‑care, broadband and workforce barriers but also see opportunities from remote work, community banking and coordinated local convenings.
Moderator opened a panel of Reserve Bank presidents to discuss the state of rural communities and what the Federal Reserve Banks can do to help.
The presidents described striking variation across districts. Tom, one of the Reserve Bank presidents, said the Fifth District contains two archetypes—Appalachian small towns and I‑95 corridor communities—with shared workforce, health and education challenges. Phil, speaking for the Philadelphia Federal Reserve, noted that parts of New Jersey and Delaware that look rural by feel nevertheless differ substantially from more remote Pennsylvania counties; he cited poultry production and manufacturing as important local employers. Susan of the Boston Fed said agriculture is often less dominant than assumed in New England, where education and health services account for a large share of employment in many rural places.
All three presidents emphasized housing and workforce as persistent constraints. Susan said housing affordability and limited housing stock have tightened since the pandemic, and she described capacity limits such as water, sewer and local contractor availability that complicate deploying federal funds. Tom said prime‑age labor force participation in small towns is roughly 10 percentage points below the district average and noted a recent trend: about one‑third of previously shrinking towns have grown in the last five years, driven in part by remote work and exurban commuting.
On access to capital, panelists highlighted the role of community banks and the difficulty of assembling financing for small projects. Susan described a Vermont project that required more than a dozen funding sources to create a viable capital stack; Anna pointed to community banks’ relationship lending as a practical advantage, and Phil and Tom said grant reporting, matching‑fund requirements and limited local administrative capacity can block funding even when capital exists.
Panelists also discussed local innovation: collaborations with tribal leaders in Maine to develop living‑wage careers, Jackson Labs’ tele‑genomics work to extend cancer expertise to rural providers, and community benefits agreements for data‑center conversions of vacant warehouses. The presidents framed the Banks’ role as threefold—research and data, convening and listening, and programmatic support that can seed local strategies and connect funders and practitioners.
The session closed with audience questions on CRA rules, rural opportunity‑zone designations and the need to better link rural and urban policy conversations. David Lipsitz of the Housing Assistance Council pressed the group on how CRA enforcement can be made to serve rural capital needs; the panelist speaking for the Federal Reserve System said the 2023 CRA rule had integrated rural considerations but was vacated in court and that the System must work within the current framework while continuing efforts to support rural finance.
The panel ended with a call for more cross‑place convenings and practical, community‑led approaches to align funding, capacity and local priorities.
