On Tuesday, CGMC Executive Director Bradley Peterson testified at a remote hearing of the Legislative Commission on Affordable Housing. The bi-partisan commission made up of legislators from both the House and Senate was created in 2019 and is tasked with reviewing and providing research and analysis on issues related to housing affordability, as well as providing recommendations to the Legislature on how to make housing more affordable, increase home ownership and narrow racial gaps in housing. The commission has been meeting periodically over the last several months to hear testimony from various housing groups, developers, and local governments.
During the hearing, Peterson emphasized the need to create more workforce housing in Greater Minnesota and discussed some of the barriers to creating this tier of housing. He highlighted several potential ideas to increase workforce housing in our communities, including a new program to help pay for the public infrastructure related to housing development and increased investment in the Greater Minnesota Workforce Housing Development Fund.
By the nature of their comments and questions, it is clear Republican members of the commission are focusing their housing affordability efforts on state and local regulations that they view as barriers to creating more (and more affordable) housing. One legislator indicated that rather than “throwing money at the problem” they would like to be more focused on “free market solutions.”
One approach that has received a hearing is encapsulated in a proposal from Rep. Steve Elkins (DFL-Bloomington), which he is calling the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Act. (See a presentation on the proposal here and see the full bill summary here.) Under Rep. Elkins’ proposal, cities would be allowed to collect certain development impact fees as well as establish street improvement districts in exchange for limitations on a city’s ability to use planned unit developments, a change in building inspection fees, prohibition on aesthetic mandates for buildings, and a series of other limitations on a city’s land use and regulatory tools.
Noting that cities are already doing a wide array of things within their communities to encourage housing, CGMC along with the League of Minnesota Cities and other municipal groups have been opposing Rep. Elkins’ approach both for the maintenance of local control when it comes to being responsive to the individual needs of a city and also on the basis that there is no guarantee that making these changes to local regulations will result in additional affordable housing being built.
