Minnesota YIMBYs charting path forward after unsuccessful legislative session

Construction workers build a residential high rise. Inflation is slowing and job growth has surged, but housing costs are still high, partly because of high demand, low inventory and mortgage rates. Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images.

The movement to build more homes entered the 2024 legislative session with the backing of an unusual coalition of influential lobbying groups and lawmakers from both sides of the aisle.

None of the coalition’s main priorities made it across the finish line, however.

Now, the group is reflecting on what went wrong last session, and putting together a plan to try again, using some of the traditional tools of out-of-session legislating: Meeting with local government leaders, crafting new language to placate skeptical committee chairs and considering a more incremental approach.

The Yes-In-My-Backyard, or YIMBY, movement has gained political ground in Minnesota and nationwide in recent years, emerging in opposition to the Not-In-My-Backyard (NIMBY) faction that frequently opposes new housing developments — particularly apartments and affordable housing — often based on fears of declining property values or changes to “ neighborhood character. ”

This year, Minnesota housing developers, religious organizations, social justice groups, environmentalists and others got behind a YIMBY policy suite with bipartisan appeal: Make housing cheaper for Minnesotans by legalizing more types of housing in more places, banning costly aesthetic mandates and limiting local government bureaucracy.

The coalition proposed dozens of changes to housing regulations in Minnesota, largely by revoking certain zoning controls from local governments.

The size of the coalition and the breadth of the legislation surprised local government leaders and their lobbyists at the Capitol, said Daniel Lightfoot, a lobbyist for the League of Minnesota Cities, which represents city governments across Minnesota.

“We were not aware and were not involved in any way in developing the language or drafting the language, which I think was a point of frustration for cities and city officials across the state,” Lightfoot said.

Many city government leaders testified against the legislation in committee hearings, arguing the policies would tie cities’ hands and that infrastructure in certain areas couldn’t support denser development. A handful testified in favor of the bill, citing frustration with the often-onerous process of approving or denying housing permits.

Now, the coalition is going back to the drawing board, aiming to enter the 2025 legislative session with a bill more acceptable to local governments, in hopes of earning the votes of more lawmakers on both sides of the aisle.

Proposals aimed at building more housing failed to pass this year

A nationwide shortage of housing — a lingering consequence of the 2008 market crash — means demand for homes and apartments is higher than supply, driving up housing costs. A quarter of Minnesota families — half of all renter families — are “cost-burdened” by housing, meaning 30% or more of their income goes towards rent or a mortgage, according to research by Minnesota Housing Partnership , which is part of the coalition advocating for zoning reforms.*

The National Low Income Housing Coalition estimates the state would need to add more than 100,000 affordable rental units to alleviate all households overburdened by housing costs.

The biggest barrier to affordable housing, according to YIMBYs, is at the local government level. Cities use zoning to restrict how much new housing can be built, and residents frequently turn up at meetings to oppose new developments , fearful that apartment construction will lower their home values and bring low-income people into their neighborhoods. Public pressure often leads cities to delay or cancel permits for new residential buildings, or to force developers to redesign their plans and whittle down the number of units included in a development, developers say. Those delays, cancellations and changes cost developers money — and the costs are ultimately passed on to renters or homebuyers.

Lightfoot and many local government leaders contend that local governments are helping, not hurting, housing supply.

“Cities are working to add more housing and density in their communities,” Lightfoot said. “I think the philosophical agreement that we all have is, we need more housing.”

During the legislative session, local elected officials argued that builders have been more constrained by material costs, high interest rates and lack of infrastructure than by local government bureaucracy.

Led by the two housing committee chairs, Sen. Lindsey Port, DFL-Burnsville, and Rep. Michael Howard, DFL-Richfield, the coalition put forward legislation that would restrict local governments’ ability to block or change proposed housing developments.

An omnibus housing bill considered last session contained the following provisions, among many others:

• Single-family zoning would be eliminated statewide. Municipalities would have to choose at least six types of residential buildings, in addition to single family detached homes, to allow on lots currently zoned for single-family houses. Those newly-allowed buildings could include duplexes, fourplexes, townhomes or cottage housing — groups of small homes on a shared lot.
• Municipalities would only be allowed to impose housing standards that are related to public health, safety and general welfare. Cities would not be able to mandate materials for aesthetic purposes, minimum garage sizes, minimum square footage or homeowners’ associations.
• Apartment complexes would be allowed in any area zoned for commercial or mixed-use purposes, and municipalities could not impose special height or setback restrictions on those buildings.
• Municipalities could not require developers to build more than one parking spot per residential unit, and could not require any parking for buildings within a half-mile of a major transit stop.

While local government leaders and lobbyists testified in opposition to the bill, they were meeting with lawmakers behind closed doors to hash out their differences and find language everyone agreed to.

“We did introduce bills that were more ‘vision’ bills than ‘fully worked out all the details’ type of bills,” Howard said.

Ultimately, local governments won the lobbying battle, as YIMBY forces failed to win over the most important member of the state House: Speaker Melissa Hortman, DFL-Brooklyn Park.

“The (bill) to change zoning from being a locally-determined issue to a state level policy decision is a very significant policy change,” Hortman said during a late session news conference. “Minnesota is generally not on the leading edge of states doing radically different policy approaches. We want to see how something works — will it actually increase the supply of affordable housing or will it just allow developers to build more high value homes in certain high value areas?”

The message was clear: Not yet, if at all.

The YIMBYs walked away from the session with only a pair of modest legislative wins: a bill putting a stop to a lawsuit blocking Minneapolis’ pro-density housing plan , and a state-commissioned study on the safety of single-stair apartment buildings , foregrounding a possible change to the state building code.

Howard, chair of the House Housing Finance and Policy Committee, said the coalition secured a less concrete but still vital victory: visibility and political viability.

“To build this public coalition that’s really broad, diverse, unique, and to have a more public push for the first time, was helpful,” Howard said. “For the first time since I’ve been in the Legislature this was an issue that a lot of legislators were talking about.”

How the coalition plans to move forward

During a Tuesday panel at the Housing Affordability Institute’s Housing Leadership Summit, Port was quick to point out that members of her own party were responsible for blocking the housing bill’s passage, largely due to influence from local government leaders.

“This is always going to be a tension…state level regulations versus someone closer to the community who might know the issues in that community more deeply,” Port said. “It is a tension, but it’s a tension we have to work through.”

The Republican lead on the Senate Housing and Homelessness Prevention Committee is Sen. Eric Lucero of Saint Michael, a real estate investor and landlord who supported the package of zoning reforms introduced in the 2024 session.

At the same panel, he said every level of government likes to “cling to their piece of the kingdom.”

The housing shortage, Lucero said, “is a direct result of government policy, and therefore the solution can heavily be a result of well crafted, well tested, meaningful government policy.”

The coalition will need to find compromises with local government leaders, however, in order to win over the votes of key lawmakers.

Lightfoot said one way the coalition could gain more support from local leaders is by providing a “menu of options” for cities to choose from to increase density. Many criticized this year’s legislation for being a “one-size-fits-all” approach — especially elected officials from greater Minnesota.

Cities that are already working diligently to increase density and housing supply should be able to stick to their existing plans, Lightfoot said.

To address local government concerns about infrastructure — mainly the drinking water, stormwater and sewer services required for residential development — the state could find a way to contribute more funding, Lightfoot said.

Leaders of the coalition are also weighing whether to attack the issue next session incrementally, through smaller, targeted bills.

“I think part of why it didn’t work last year was because we moved a comprehensive, big package quickly through session,” Port said. “Next year, our goal is to come back with more specific — let’s take this piece by piece, and start shifting the paradigm and working together to understand that like, the sky isn’t going to fall.”

Extensive negotiations and bill language changes did happen during the 2024 legislative session, but almost exclusively behind closed doors.

“That’s a lesson learned — that we need to find ways to do more of this work in public, because while we were having really helpful, engaging conversations behind closed doors, where we’re taking so much feedback from cities and fine tuning legislation, that piece wasn’t coming through publicly,” Howard said.

Howard said he will continue to meet with local government leaders throughout the fall. Lightfoot said his organization is “ready and willing to be part of the conversation.”

Shifting national politics could also benefit the YIMBY movement. Earlier this year, the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development awarded the Metropolitan Council a $4 million grant to help cities rework their zoning codes to allow for more, higher-density housing construction.

And Democratic presidential nominee Vice President Kamala Harris continues to refer to the “housing shortage” and the need to construct more housing — a signal to YIMBYs that the Democratic ticket has adopted their approach to the housing crisis.

*Correction: Previous versions of these charts included inaccurate data but have been updated.