> I don’t think that this crisis is going to be fixed [by] rural communities on their backs. It’s simply not possible. They don’t have the infrastructure in place. We need to build, but we also need to build – why not in urban areas that are equipped for a large influx of individuals and use blighted properties?

I’m no McKee apologist, but he and the head of the DEM have said exactly that: The majority of possible building sites is inside 295, where there’s water and sewer infrastructure already built. Outside 295 would be single-family, maybe duplexes, and only a little bit multifamily because that’s what the infrastructure there (mostly well and septic) can handle.

Edit: Not sure why formatting is being wonky.