@marktwse thank you! I appreciate the vote of confidence, and yes, I tend to agree with your assessment, that it ought to be possible to induce some new housing to be built with an approach like mine. And then to expand from there.

@jason, happy to share some thoughts on this, sure. First, important to be clear that what I'm proposing to build is an MVP, "minimum viable product." I see a lot of complexity in the rules, and I'm proposing to demystify some fraction of that complexity, for relatively uninformed market participants, in probably just one city where the rules have recently changed in significant ways, like Sacramento. [I have a secondary thesis is that it takes time for knowledge of changes to diffuse into local awareness, and that good tools can accelerate that process]. Can full demystification across many jurisdictions be achieved with $15k? Definitely not. But I do think I can build something valuable that achieves some degree of demystification, and hopefully exposes a path forward to continue to make progress.

Great questions, thanks for reading & for the thoughtful consideration @saulmunn. And apologies for the slow reply — I just realized your post was here.

On your first point, I'll grant that "housing production being hamstrung to some degree by lack of understanding of what's even allowed" is an impression more than a strong conviction. I also note the obvious counter-argument that real estate is a competitive market with many actors who are strongly motivated to know the rules and act accordingly. I nevertheless think that at the small scale especially, awareness plays a role. One bit of quantitative evidence, a 2020 report from the UC Berkeley Center for Community Innovation found that 16% of their survey respondents [caveat — planner & city officials, not homeowners per se] cited "Lack of Awareness" and as a barrier to ADU development. A later 2022 report "ADUs for All: Breaking Down Barriers to Racial and Economic Equity in Accessory Dwelling Unit Construction" notes, of focus group participants, "Many were not aware that ADUs are legal throughout the whole state..." I can't find much more rigorous survey data on this question, but I think it's defensible insofar as the population of homeowners is large and not mainly composed of real estate professionals.

On your second question, I'll admit that I hadn't fully grasped that those are the only possible retro funders for this market. If that's so, then I'll grant that this is an unlikely fit for 3 of the 4 of them. I would nevertheless content that there's a decent chance that Scott might find this compelling if it goes well. Will Jarvis was a previous ACXG recipient for his Georgism-inspired project ValueBase, a pretty closely adjacent concept. And then just overall, my impression is that Scott is proud of the EA community's contribution to the YIMBY movement, and my effort here is aimed at bringing more clarity to the YIMBY table. For my part, on the question of why this is important, I really do see housing scarcity as the root of a lot of deep social problems. Can housing abundance prevent pandemics or lower p(doom)? Not directly! But can it alleviate a lot of suffering directly by making housing less exorbitantly expensive and putting a big dent in the homelessness rate, while dramatically increase GDP, reducing carbon emissions, improving public health, dampening opposition to immigration, and making it easier to start a family? Yep! It can.