Houston County

Houston County is located in the far southeastern corner of Minnesota, along the Mississippi River and the Iowa border, with the Root River Valley running through much of the county. Established in 1854 and named for Sam Houston, it is part of the Driftless Area, a region that escaped the last glaciation and is known for steep bluffs, wooded ridges, and deeply cut river valleys. Houston County is small in population (about 19,000 residents) and is predominantly rural, with small cities and townships rather than large urban centers. Agriculture remains a significant component of the local economy, alongside manufacturing and services centered in its communities. Outdoor recreation and conservation areas are closely tied to the county’s karst terrain, trout streams, and river landscapes. The county seat is Caledonia, which serves as the primary administrative and civic center.

Houston County is located in southeastern Minnesota along the Mississippi River, bordering Wisconsin and including the county seat of Caledonia. The county is part of the Driftless Area, characterized by unglaciated terrain and river valleys.

Population Size

According to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts for Houston County, Minnesota, the county had:

• Population (2020): 18,843
• Population (2023 estimate): 18,573

For local government and planning resources, visit the Houston County official website.

Age & Gender

Per the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts profile (primarily based on the American Community Survey, 2018–2022):

• Age distribution (selected measure):
  • Under age 18: 19.3%
  • Age 65 and over: 21.5%
• Gender ratio (sex composition):
  • Female: 49.2%
  • Male: 50.8%

Racial & Ethnic Composition

According to the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts profile:

• Race (alone)
  • White: 95.3%
  • Black or African American: 0.4%
  • American Indian and Alaska Native: 0.3%
  • Asian: 0.4%
  • Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander: 0.0%
  • Two or more races: 3.5%
• Ethnicity
  • Hispanic or Latino (of any race): 1.6%

Household & Housing Data

From the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts profile:

• Households (2018–2022): 7,527
• Average household size (2018–2022): 2.40
• Owner-occupied housing unit rate (2018–2022): 78.9%
• Median value of owner-occupied housing units (2018–2022): $200,600
• Median selected monthly owner costs, with a mortgage (2018–2022): $1,359
• Median selected monthly owner costs, without a mortgage (2018–2022): $575
• Median gross rent (2018–2022): $832
• Building permits (2023): 18

Houston County, Minnesota is a largely rural county along the Mississippi River; lower population density and greater distances between towns can raise last‑mile costs and contribute to uneven broadband availability, shaping reliance on email and other online communication.

Direct county-level email usage statistics are not typically published, so email adoption is inferred from digital access proxies. The most relevant indicators are household broadband subscription and computer availability from the U.S. Census Bureau (American Community Survey), which track whether residents have the connectivity and devices needed for routine email use.

Age distribution from the same Census source is a key proxy for email adoption because older age profiles are commonly associated with lower overall digital participation and higher support needs for account setup, authentication, and cybersecurity practices.

Gender distribution is generally less predictive of email access than age and connectivity; county-level differences are typically modest relative to infrastructure and household access constraints.

Connectivity limitations are reflected in mapped service availability and provider-reported coverage in the FCC National Broadband Map, and in local planning context from Houston County government.

Houston County is in southeastern Minnesota along the Mississippi River, bordering Wisconsin. The county is predominantly rural, with small cities (including Caledonia) and extensive farmland, wooded blufflands, and river valleys in the “Driftless Area.” Low population density and uneven terrain (ridges, bluffs, and valleys) can reduce the number of profitable tower sites and increase the likelihood of coverage gaps, particularly away from highways and town centers. County profile context is available from the U.S. Census Bureau QuickFacts for Houston County.

Key distinction: network availability vs. household adoption

• Network availability refers to whether mobile carriers report service (e.g., 4G LTE, 5G) in an area. In the U.S., this is primarily documented through FCC mobile coverage datasets and related maps.
• Household adoption refers to whether residents actually subscribe to mobile service and/or use mobile broadband devices. This is measured through household surveys (often available at national and state levels, and sometimes limited sub-state geographies).

County-level reporting often provides availability with more geographic detail than adoption. Adoption metrics for a single rural county are frequently suppressed or not published due to survey sample size limitations.

Mobile penetration and access indicators (adoption)

Household telephone access (mobile-only vs. landline) and device ownership

• The most consistently available public indicators for “mobile access” at small-area geographies come from Census Bureau survey products, but county-level tables specific to “cellular-only households” or “smartphone ownership” are not always published as standard outputs.
• The best authoritative starting points for household access indicators are:
  • American Community Survey (ACS) for communications-related household measures where available by geography.
  • Census Bureau data portal for downloadable tables; some phone-service indicators are included in ACS “Selected Housing Characteristics,” but detailed breakdowns of mobile-only vs. landline-only are not consistently provided at the county level in standard tables.

Limitation: Publicly cited “mobile penetration” rates (e.g., % of people with a mobile subscription) are typically available for the U.S. and states, and less consistently for individual counties. Where county-level adoption figures are not published, authoritative reporting generally uses state-level adoption context rather than producing county estimates.

Mobile broadband subscription as an internet access pathway

• For household internet adoption measures, the Census Bureau provides estimates of broadband subscription and sometimes categories of internet subscription type. County-level access to these categories depends on the table and year. The Census Bureau’s Computer and Internet Use topic pages consolidate related measures and documentation.

Limitation: Distinguishing “mobile broadband subscription” from other internet types at the county level can be constrained by table availability and sampling error, especially in rural counties.

Mobile internet usage patterns and connectivity (availability)

4G LTE and 5G availability (reported coverage)

• The most authoritative national source for carrier-reported mobile coverage is the FCC’s broadband data collection and mapping program. Coverage should be interpreted as reported availability, not a guarantee of performance everywhere in the reported area.
• Mobile availability reference sources:
  • FCC National Broadband Map (includes mobile broadband layers and reported coverage by provider/technology).
  • FCC Broadband Data Collection (BDC) methodology and filings, which explain how coverage is reported and challenged.

General rural connectivity patterns relevant to Houston County’s geography:

• 4G LTE is typically the baseline mobile broadband layer across rural Minnesota, providing broad outdoor coverage but with variable indoor reliability depending on distance to towers, clutter (trees/terrain), and spectrum used.
• 5G in rural areas is commonly deployed first as:
  • Low-band 5G (wider-area coverage with modest speed gains relative to LTE), and/or
  • Mid-band 5G concentrated around population centers and higher-traffic corridors.
  • High-band/mmWave 5G is generally concentrated in dense urban areas and is not characteristic of rural countywide coverage footprints.

County-specific mapping: The FCC map can be used to view Houston County and differentiate 4G/5G reported coverage footprints by provider and technology. The map is the appropriate source for statements about whether 5G is reported in specific parts of the county.

Performance vs. availability

• Availability datasets do not directly measure typical speeds, latency, or congestion. Performance is influenced by tower backhaul capacity, spectrum holdings, network load, and handset capability.
• Public performance data are often available as aggregated measurement datasets (frequently at broader geographies than a single county) rather than as definitive countywide metrics.

Common device types (smartphones vs. other devices)

• In the U.S., the dominant endpoint for mobile broadband use is the smartphone, with additional usage via tablets, hotspots, and fixed wireless gateways that rely on cellular networks.
• Device-type prevalence is generally measured via consumer surveys and national datasets; county-level device mix is not commonly published as a standard statistic.
• For Minnesota and local planning contexts, device-type discussions often appear in broadband planning documents, but these typically summarize broader trends rather than providing Houston County-specific device shares.

Limitation: No single authoritative, routinely updated public dataset provides a county-level breakdown of smartphones vs. basic phones vs. hotspots specifically for Houston County. County-level device-type statements typically require either proprietary carrier analytics or local surveys not standardized across counties.

Demographic and geographic factors influencing mobile usage and connectivity

Population distribution and land use

• Rural settlement patterns (dispersed homes, farms, small unincorporated areas) increase per-user infrastructure costs and can reduce indoor coverage consistency compared with compact urban neighborhoods.
• Town centers and highway corridors generally have denser infrastructure and stronger service footprints than remote valleys or ridge-separated areas.

County demographic and housing context can be referenced through:

• Census.gov QuickFacts (Houston County) for population, housing units, and density-related indicators.

Terrain and vegetation

• The blufflands and river-valley topography of southeastern Minnesota can create line-of-sight obstructions, increasing localized “shadowing” where signal is blocked by ridges or heavy tree cover.
• This affects network availability at usable signal levels, especially indoors, and can lead to practical differences between mapped coverage and user experience in specific hollows/valleys.

Income, age, and household composition (adoption-side factors)

• At a general level, smartphone and mobile broadband adoption correlate with income, age distribution, and educational attainment. Rural counties with older age profiles can have lower smartphone-centric usage relative to metropolitan areas.
• Houston County-specific adoption by these demographics is not consistently available as published county-level indicators for mobile service; however, general demographic composition for the county is available from the Census Bureau and can be used as contextual background (not as a direct measure of mobile adoption).

Minnesota and local planning context (non-carrier sources)

• State broadband offices often compile planning documents, grant coverage areas, and broadband status reports that provide context for rural connectivity constraints and investment activity. Minnesota’s state broadband resources are accessible via the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) broadband office.
• Local information (such as tower siting, emergency communications, and infrastructure planning references) may be found through the Houston County government website, though this is not typically a source of quantified mobile adoption statistics.

Data limitations and best-use guidance

• Availability (4G/5G): The FCC’s National Broadband Map provides the most standardized, county-viewable depiction of reported mobile broadband coverage by technology and provider. This supports statements about where service is reported to be available.
• Adoption (mobile subscriptions, smartphone prevalence): County-level adoption statistics are less consistently published. The most defensible county-context indicators generally come from Census Bureau household survey products, but they may not separate mobile-only/ smartphone-specific measures cleanly at the county level.
• Practice for clear reporting: Statements about Houston County should cite FCC data for availability, and Census/ACS measures for household internet and communications indicators where those tables are available for the county, noting when only state/national mobile adoption measures exist and county-specific adoption is not published.

Houston County is in southeastern Minnesota along the Mississippi River, anchored by Caledonia (county seat) and bordering the La Crosse, Wisconsin metro across the river. The county’s largely rural/small‑town settlement pattern, proximity to a regional cross‑state media market, and a mix of agriculture, local services, and outdoor recreation shape social media use toward community information, local news, and event coordination rather than high‑density urban creator economies.

User statistics (penetration)

• No public, county-specific social media penetration statistic is consistently published for Houston County. Most reliable measures are reported at the U.S. or state level, with local variation typically tracking broadband access, age structure, and rurality.
• U.S. adult baseline: Approximately 7 in 10 U.S. adults use social media (varies by survey year and definition). This benchmark is documented in Pew Research Center’s Social Media Fact Sheet.
• Local implication: As a rural county, Houston County’s overall active-user share is generally expected to be near but often somewhat below the national average, largely due to older age distribution and rural connectivity differences (patterns described in Pew Research Center broadband and internet use research).

Age group trends (highest usage)

National age gradients are strong and are the most reliable proxy for local patterns:

• Highest usage: 18–29 and 30–49 adults show the highest social media adoption and the broadest multi‑platform use per Pew Research Center.
• Middle usage: 50–64 use is substantial but drops compared with under‑50 groups; platform choice tends to concentrate on fewer services (commonly Facebook).
• Lowest usage: 65+ consistently reports the lowest overall adoption, with narrower platform repertoires (often Facebook and, to a lesser extent, YouTube).
• County context: Houston County’s rural composition typically increases the relative importance of platforms that support community groups, local event discovery, and local-market information (commonly Facebook), while younger residents more often diversify across short‑form video and messaging.

Gender breakdown

• Overall social media use by gender is similar among U.S. adults, with differences emerging by platform (documented in Pew Research Center’s platform-by-demographic tables).
• Platform-skew patterns (U.S. adults):
  • Pinterest and Instagram tend to skew more female.
  • Reddit tends to skew more male.
  • Facebook and YouTube are relatively broad across genders.
• County implication: Houston County’s gender mix is not expected to materially change overall adoption rates versus national patterns, but platform mix can reflect the same national skews.

Most-used platforms (percentages where available; U.S. adult benchmarks)

Reliable, regularly updated platform usage rates are published at the national level; county-level platform shares are not consistently available from public sources.

• YouTube and Facebook are typically the most widely used among U.S. adults. Current benchmark percentages are tracked in Pew Research Center’s Social Media Fact Sheet.
• Other major platforms with sizeable U.S. adult reach include Instagram, TikTok, LinkedIn, Pinterest, Snapchat, WhatsApp, and X (each with distinct age and gender skews), with comparable percentage estimates also available in the same Pew tables.

Behavioral trends (engagement patterns and preferences)

Patterns below reflect well-documented rural/small‑market behaviors and national engagement findings:

• Facebook as a local “community bulletin board”: In rural and small‑town areas, Facebook pages and Groups often function as hubs for local announcements, school/sports updates, community events, buy/sell activity, and public-safety information, aligning with Facebook’s broad reach across age groups (supported by the platform’s demographic breadth in Pew Research Center).
• Short-form video growth among younger adults: Younger groups disproportionately use TikTok, Instagram, Snapchat, and consume YouTube heavily; engagement tends to be more frequent and content-driven than location-driven (Pew platform-by-age distributions: Pew Research Center).
• Passive consumption exceeds posting: Across platforms, many users engage primarily through reading/watching, reacting, and sharing rather than creating original posts; this is commonly observed in general social media research and aligns with the high reach of video-first platforms.
• News and information exposure via social platforms: Social feeds are a meaningful pathway to news for many adults nationally, with differences by platform and age, documented in Pew Research Center’s Social Media and News Fact Sheet.
• Time-of-day and device patterns: Engagement is predominantly mobile, with evening and weekend peaks common in U.S. usage studies; rural users often combine social media with local community calendars and regional news sources that serve cross‑border areas (relevant to the county’s proximity to the La Crosse media market).

Note on local precision: Houston County-specific penetration, platform shares, and demographic splits are not routinely published in reputable public datasets; the most defensible approach is to use national benchmark survey data (notably Pew) and interpret local variation through age structure, rurality, and broadband access.

Houston County, Minnesota maintains family-related public records primarily through vital records and court records. Birth and death records are created and held at the state level by the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH) Vital Records office; certified copies are requested through MDH’s Vital Records services. Houston County’s local registration function is typically handled through the county recorder/registrar operations and public-facing county service contacts are listed on the Houston County website.

Adoption records are generally maintained as court records rather than open vital records. Houston County court matters are filed in Minnesota’s state court system; case access and court records information are provided by the Minnesota Judicial Branch, including Access Case Records and the statewide public access portal Minnesota Public Access (MPA).

Public databases commonly available include court case indexes (with limits on confidential case types) and recorded property/land records. County-level recorded documents access and office contact information are provided through the county’s departments (see Houston County departments and offices).

Privacy restrictions apply to nonpublic and protected records, including many adoption-related files and certain vital records; access is governed by Minnesota statutes and agency rules, and certified copies require eligibility verification through MDH.

Types of records available

Marriage records

• Marriage license application and marriage license: Issued by a county authority and used to authorize a marriage in Minnesota.
• Marriage certificate / marriage record: The completed return is registered after the ceremony and becomes part of the official marriage record maintained by government custodians.

Divorce records

• Divorce decree (Judgment and Decree): The final court order that dissolves the marriage and sets the legal terms (for example, property division, support, custody/parenting time where applicable).
• Divorce case file (court record): May include pleadings, motions, affidavits, orders, findings, and related exhibits in addition to the final decree.

Annulment records

• Annulment decree (Judgment and Decree in an annulment proceeding): Court order declaring a marriage void or voidable under Minnesota law.
• Annulment case file (court record): The underlying civil case record for the annulment proceeding.

Where records are filed and how they can be accessed

Marriage records (Houston County)

• Filed/registered with: Houston County vital records custodian (commonly the County Recorder/Vital Records function) for local registration and certified copies; statewide registration is maintained through Minnesota’s vital records system.
• Access methods:
  • Certified copies are typically obtained through the county vital records office (in person, by mail, or via authorized request channels used by the county).
  • State-level verification/certified copies may also be available through the Minnesota Department of Health (MDH), which maintains statewide vital records.
    Reference: Minnesota Department of Health — Vital Records

Divorce and annulment records (Houston County)

• Filed with: The Houston County District Court, part of Minnesota’s state trial court system (Seventh Judicial District), which maintains the official case record for divorce and annulment proceedings.
• Access methods:
  • Court copies of public documents may be requested from the District Court/Court Administration office.
  • Online case information is commonly available through Minnesota’s public court case access portal for many case types, subject to limits on what is viewable and restrictions on non-public data.
    Reference: Minnesota Court Records Online (MCRO) (public access portal)

Typical information included in these records

Marriage license/record

Common data elements include:

• Full names of the spouses
• Date and place of marriage
• Ages or dates of birth (often recorded as age or DOB depending on the form/version)
• Residence information at time of application/recording
• Information about the officiant and the ceremony location
• Names of witnesses (often recorded on the return/certificate)
• Record identifiers (license number, filing/registration date)

Divorce decree (Judgment and Decree) / divorce case file

Common data elements include:

• Names of parties, case number, court venue, filing date
• Date of marriage and dates relevant to the proceeding
• Findings and conclusions supporting the dissolution
• Orders regarding:
  • Division of assets and debts
  • Spousal maintenance (alimony), if ordered
  • Child custody/legal custody, parenting time, and child support, where applicable
  • Name change orders, where granted
• The judge’s signature and date of entry of judgment

Annulment decree / annulment case file

Common data elements include:

• Names of parties, case number, court venue
• Legal basis for annulment (as found by the court)
• Orders addressing legal consequences similar to dissolution where applicable (for example, property and support determinations)
• Judge’s signature and date of entry of judgment

Privacy or legal restrictions

Marriage records

• Minnesota treats vital records as regulated records; access to certified copies is restricted to eligible requesters under state law and administrative rules, and requesters are typically required to provide identification and/or a legal basis.
• Non-certified informational products (such as limited public indexes where available) may provide reduced detail compared with certified copies.

Divorce and annulment records

• Court records are generally presumptively public, but Minnesota law and court rules classify some information as confidential or non-public, including certain financial identifiers and protected personal information.
• Records can be sealed by court order in limited circumstances; sealed materials are not available to the general public.
• In family cases, some documents and data elements (including certain evaluations, child-related confidential information, and restricted identifiers) may be not publicly accessible even when the case docket exists.

References:

• Minnesota Department of Health — Vital Records (access and eligibility)
• Minnesota Court Records Online (public access limitations)

Houston County is in southeastern Minnesota along the Mississippi River, bordering Wisconsin, with a largely small‑town and rural settlement pattern anchored by Caledonia (county seat) and the river communities of La Crescent and Hokah. The county’s population is in the mid‑teens (about 19,000 residents based on recent U.S. Census estimates), with a higher share of owner‑occupied housing and longer car commutes typical of rural counties in the Driftless Area.

Education Indicators

Public schools and districts (counts and names)

Houston County is primarily served by three public school districts. A consolidated, countywide count of “public schools located in the county” varies by source year and how alternative programs are classified; the most consistent proxy is district-operated schools listed by the Minnesota Department of Education (MDE) district/school directories and district websites.

• Caledonia Area Public Schools (ISD 300)
  • Caledonia Elementary School
  • Caledonia Middle/High School
• Houston Public School District (ISD 294)
  • Houston Elementary School
  • Houston Secondary School (middle/high)
• La Crescent–Hokah Public Schools (ISD 3000)
  • La Crescent Elementary School
  • Hokah Elementary School
  • La Crescent–Hokah Middle School
  • La Crescent–Hokah High School

Reference directories and accountability data are published through the Minnesota Department of Education Data & Reports and district profile tools.

Student–teacher ratios and graduation rates

• Student–teacher ratios: District-level ratios are published in MDE staffing and enrollment files and are commonly in the mid‑teens to low‑20s students per teacher for rural Minnesota districts. A single countywide ratio is not always published; district-level reporting is the most defensible proxy.
• Graduation rates: MDE reports 4‑year cohort graduation rates by district and school. Houston County districts typically report high graduation rates relative to state averages, consistent with many small rural districts, though precise values should be taken from the latest MDE cohort tables for each high school (Caledonia, Houston, and La Crescent–Hokah). Use the most recent “4‑year graduation rate” entries in MDE Data & Reports for definitive figures.

Adult educational attainment

Countywide adult education levels are most consistently reported by the American Community Survey (ACS) 5‑year estimates:

• High school diploma or higher (age 25+): roughly 90%+ (ACS 5‑year, recent release).
• Bachelor’s degree or higher (age 25+): commonly around the low‑to‑mid 20% range in recent ACS estimates for comparable rural southeastern Minnesota counties; Houston County aligns with that general profile.

Definitive county percentages are available through the U.S. Census Bureau’s data.census.gov (ACS Table S1501).

Notable programs (STEM, vocational, AP/college credit)

Program availability is reported by districts and varies by school size:

• College credit/advanced coursework: Rural Minnesota high schools commonly offer Advanced Placement (AP), College in the Schools, and/or Postsecondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) participation through regional colleges. District course catalogs and MDE program participation files are the most reliable sources.
• Career and Technical Education (CTE): Districts in southeastern Minnesota typically provide agriculture, industrial/technical education, business/IT, health sciences, and skilled trades pathways, sometimes via regional collaborations.
• STEM: STEM offerings are commonly delivered through core science/technology sequences, project-based learning, and extracurriculars (robotics/engineering clubs vary by district and year).

School safety measures and counseling resources

Across Minnesota, public schools are generally required to maintain safety planning and student support services frameworks, including:

• Emergency operations planning and coordinated drills, aligned with state guidance and district safety plans.
• Student support staff (school counselors, social workers, psychologists) and school-based mental health referral pathways, with staffing levels varying by district size and budget.
  District and school “World’s Best Workforce” summaries, annual reports, and board-adopted safety policies provide the most concrete, locally specific documentation.

Employment and Economic Conditions

Unemployment rate (most recent)

The most current official county unemployment rates are published by the Minnesota Department of Employment and Economic Development (DEED) and the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (LAUS program). Recent annual averages for Houston County are generally low (often in the ~2%–4% range) in the post‑pandemic period, with month-to-month variation. The definitive latest annual and monthly rates are available from Minnesota DEED Local Area Unemployment Statistics.

Major industries and employment sectors

The county’s employment base reflects rural southeastern Minnesota patterns:

• Health care and social assistance (including clinics, long-term care, and regional hospital employment ties)
• Manufacturing (small and mid-sized plants; wood/metal products and related manufacturing are common regionally)
• Retail trade and accommodation/food services (local services and tourism-oriented demand along the Mississippi River corridor)
• Construction (residential and infrastructure trades)
• Educational services and public administration
• Agriculture and related agribusiness (more prominent in land use than in wage-and-salary counts, but still a core economic element)

County industry detail is available through DEED’s QCEW tools (covered employment by NAICS).

Common occupations and workforce breakdown

Occupational structure typically emphasizes:

• Production and transportation/material moving (manufacturing/logistics roles)
• Office/administrative support and sales
• Health care practitioners/support
• Construction and extraction
• Education and protective services
• Management and business operations (smaller share than metro areas)

ACS 5‑year occupational tables (e.g., S2401) on data.census.gov provide the most recent standardized county breakdown.

Commuting patterns and mean commute time

• Mode: The county is primarily car-commuter oriented, with limited fixed-route transit and low shares of commuting by public transportation.
• Mean commute time: Rural southeastern Minnesota counties typically show mean commute times in the mid‑20 minutes range (ACS).
  Definitive county values are available in ACS commuting tables (e.g., S0801) via data.census.gov.

Local employment vs. out-of-county work

Houston County’s proximity to the La Crosse, Wisconsin employment hub and the broader I‑90 corridor contributes to net out‑commuting in many years. A significant share of residents work:

• Within the county (schools, health care, local government, manufacturing, retail/services), and
• Outside the county, notably toward La Crosse (WI) and nearby Minnesota counties with larger job centers.

The most rigorous measure is the U.S. Census LEHD/OnTheMap “Residence Area Characteristics” and “Work Area Characteristics,” available via OnTheMap (LEHD).

Housing and Real Estate

Homeownership and rental share

Houston County is predominantly owner-occupied:

• Homeownership rate: commonly around three‑quarters or higher (ACS 5‑year, recent release).
• Rental share: typically about one‑quarter or lower, concentrated in city centers (Caledonia, La Crescent, Houston) and near employment nodes.

Definitive tenure shares are reported in ACS housing tables on data.census.gov.

Median property values and recent trends

• Median home value: Recent ACS medians for Houston County are generally below the Minnesota statewide median, reflecting rural pricing and a smaller share of new construction.
• Trend: Values increased materially during 2020–2023 across Minnesota; Houston County followed this broad pattern, with year-to-year changes sensitive to limited sales volume and neighborhood-specific demand (especially near the Mississippi River corridor and commutable areas to La Crosse).

For an official, standardized median value series, use ACS Table DP04 or S2502 on data.census.gov. For market-based trend context, local REALTOR® summaries (nonofficial) are commonly used but are not substitutes for ACS.

Typical rent prices

• Typical gross rent: Generally lower than metro Minnesota, with rents varying sharply by unit type and proximity to La Crescent/La Crosse commuting demand.
  Definitive median gross rent is available from ACS (DP04) on data.census.gov.

Housing types and development pattern

• Single-family detached homes dominate, including older housing stock in small cities and farmsteads/rural residences outside town.
• Apartments and small multifamily are concentrated in city cores (especially La Crescent) with a smaller inventory countywide.
• Rural lots and hobby-farm properties are common outside incorporated areas, shaped by topography (bluffs/valleys), agricultural land use, and river-adjacent development constraints.

Neighborhood and location characteristics (schools/amenities)

• Caledonia: County seat with central access to county services and the Caledonia public school campus; housing mix includes single-family neighborhoods and small rentals.
• La Crescent/Hokah: River corridor communities with comparatively stronger commuting ties to La Crosse; residential areas often emphasize access to Highway 14/16 connections, schools, and local parks.
• Houston and smaller townships: More rural character, with amenities clustered in town centers and longer distances to regional medical and retail services.

Because Houston County is rural, “proximity” is often measured in driving time rather than walkability, and school attendance areas are typically larger.

Property tax overview (rate and typical cost)

Minnesota property taxes are driven by taxable market value, classification (homestead/nonhomestead), and local levy rates (county, city, school district, and special districts). Countywide “average rate” is not a single uniform figure because effective rates vary by jurisdiction and property type. The most defensible proxies are:

• Median real estate taxes paid (owner-occupied): available in ACS (selected housing cost tables).
• Typical homeowner cost: commonly reported as annual property tax paid for owner-occupied homes in ACS; this provides a comparable county median.

For official levy and tax capacity details, use the Minnesota Department of Revenue’s local government finance and property tax reports (state-level portal) and county auditor publications; a starting point is the Minnesota Department of Revenue property tax overview.