The problems many face in finding decent, affordable places to live have reached crisis proportions in our state. The business community, most lawmakers, and a majority of the general public recognize that harsh reality. Such consensus is a necessary step in addressing the crisis.

Solving the housing problem is another matter. It will take a persistent effort played out over decades. Ignoring it, on the other hand, would assure the crisis grows.

While homelessness is the most acute manifestation of a lack of affordably priced housing, its circumstances extend far beyond that terrible outcome. It also results in people living in substandard housing, be it the elderly unable to afford needed repairs to their homes, or tenants fearful that complaining about unsafe conditions could lead to a rent increase or eviction. The lack of affordability results in too many people living in too small of spaces, in struggling young people avoiding homelessness by surfing from one couch to another on any given night, and in workers making long commutes because restrictive zoning means no reasonably priced housing near their jobs.

State lawmakers and advocacy groups have proposed numerous legislative solutions. Serving as the centerpiece of these efforts is Gov. Ned Lamont’s call to invest $600 million over the next two years in multiple housing initiatives with the goal to generate 6,400 units of affordable housing.

Details include state loans and grants to promote the sort of dense and more affordable housing that is possible near public transportation hubs providing rail and bus access. The governor wants to invest another $100 million into the state’s Time-to-Own program, offering down-payment help to qualifying low- and moderate-income households.

Lamont calls for investing $200 million to expand so-called workforce development housing — targeted at households with incomes from 60% to 120% of a region’s median income — by providing developers incentives, and municipalities fiscal assistance, to provide multifamily housing where local leaders say it makes the most sense.

Unfortunately, restrictive zoning that bans multifamily housing and affordable homes on small lots, often means workers — such as public safety personnel, nurses, folks in the food industry, tradespeople — cannot afford to live in the communities they serve.

Home rule is a valued tradition in Connecticut, but towns that refuse to cooperate with reasonable efforts to expand the stock of affordable housing must face mandates to do so. Without the stick of state intervention, some communities will not partake of any carrots the state may offer to help them expand affordable housing stock.

Lamont is also asking the legislature to amend renters’ rights legislation to cap security deposits at one month’s rent and to boost fines for housing code violations. These are reasonable proposals. The high cost of deposits can make apartments inaccessible for those of modest means. Tougher code enforcement could dissuade unscrupulous landlords from taking advantage of tenants desperate to keep a roof over their heads, even a leaky one.

More problematic are calls to further restrict the ability of landlords to evict tenants for nonpayment of rent. Placing too many restrictions on the ability of landlords to manage their properties could prove counterproductive. Fewer people getting into the rental business could well lead to fewer rental properties, exacerbating the housing problem.

An interesting idea, floated by state Sen. Heather Somers, R-Groton, is using tax incentives to encourage large employers, such as Electric Boat, to partner with developers in expanding housing priced for their workforce. EB and the subcontractors that feed its supply chain need workers and those workers need housing. At the very least, it is an idea worth exploring.

And that is the point. Addressing the housing crisis will require multi-faceted and creative solutions. It is good to see a serious dialogue has begun.

The Day editorial board meets regularly with political, business and community leaders and convenes weekly to formulate editorial viewpoints. It is composed of President and Publisher Timothy Dwyer, Executive Editor Izaskun E. Larrañeta retired executive editor Tim Cotter and retired deputy managing editor Lisa McGinley. However, only the publisher and editorial page editor are responsible for developing the editorial opinions. The board operates independently from the Day newsroom.