The Issues We Can't Ignore

Housing affordability does not happen by chance. It is shaped by zoning and land use rules. Right now, we make it easy and profitable to build the most expensive kinds of housing and illegal and unprofitable to build many of the modest, practical homes people actually need.

By legalizing missing-middle housing like duplexes, rowhomes, and small apartment buildings, especially near jobs, transit, and services, we can create more housing choices and lower costs without relying on endless subsidies.

Affordable housing starts with smarter land use.

New Castle County is full of underused sites such as vacant malls, empty parking lots, and outdated commercial properties. These places already have roads, utilities, and infrastructure in place, yet developers are still choosing to develop on greenspaces over blacktops. This needs to change.

Redevelopment saves taxpayer money, reduces sprawl, lessens the loss of green space, and delivers faster returns. Before paving new ground, we should reinvest in the places that are already part of our communities.

Redevelopment creates more value with fewer public costs.

Stop Building a County People Have to Leave

Young people are not leaving New Castle County because they do not like it here. They are leaving because we have made it increasingly difficult to build a life here.

We have prioritized development patterns that favor car dependence, large single family homes, and high costs, while making many affordable and practical housing types illegal. The result is a county that works well for some people, but shuts out young adults, working families, and the workforce we depend on.

If we want young people to stay, we need to build places where they can afford to live, move around without owning multiple cars, and feel connected to a real community. That means housing near jobs, walkable neighborhoods, and public spaces that create a sense of place.

This is not just about fairness. It is about economic stability. Young people are the backbone of a healthy workforce and local economy. When they leave, businesses struggle, services weaken, and costs rise for everyone else.

If we want a stable and inclusive future, we have to stop pricing the next generation out of it.

Open space is not a luxury. It is infrastructure. Parks, trees, and green space improve public health, reduce flooding, cool our neighborhoods, and raise nearby property values.

Preserving open space depends on using land efficiently. Dense, walkable development protects land. Sprawl consumes it. I support clear Open Space zoning so public land is permanently protected and transparently designated for what it is.

Green infrastructure lowers long-term costs and pays dividends over time.

Data centers are becoming a major development issue in our region. They require enormous amounts of energy, water, and infrastructure while creating relatively few jobs for their size.

If a project places massive demands on public resources, it must fully cover those costs. Taxpayers should not be subsidizing private profits, especially when the long-term impacts fall on our communities.

Big projects should carry their own weight.

Traffic, unsafe streets, and long commutes are not accidents. They are the result of land use decisions. Car-dependent development increases costs for households and makes everyday life harder, especially for seniors, kids, and people without access to a car.

Smarter land use leads to safer streets, better mobility, and more connected neighborhoods. When we build places for people, daily life gets easier and more affordable.

Growth Should Strengthen Wilmington, Not Drain It.

The many productive neighborhoods of District 4 should not be asked to subsidize inefficient growth elsewhere. District 4 deserves reinvestment that respects existing communities, supports affordability, and improves quality of life.

Development decisions should benefit the people who already live here, not just those who profit from the deal.

Here's the Standard I’ll Use on County Council. Every project should answer three questions:

1. Does it pay its own way?
2. Does it strengthen existing neighborhoods?
3. Does it leave us better off in 30 years?

Repricing for reality is not anti-growth. It is pro-community, pro-fiscal responsibility, and pro-future.