Perhaps Minnesota’s most damaging policies to housing prospects in the state are the strict energy mandates on new buildings.
In America, housing is mainly a state and local issue. But Kamala Harris’s selection of Minnesota governor Tim Walz as her running mate excited some activists about the possibilities of federal housing reform. They claim that Governor Walz supported the “Yes in My Backyard” (“YIMBY”) movement to reduce zoning regulations and therefore he might recreate the same magic in Washington.
In reality, Governor Walz and his progressive allies supported the usual mishmash of new housing subsidies and mandates. In Minnesota, as elsewhere, they championed worthwhile efforts to modify some housing regulations, but their desire for “equity” and commitment to fighting climate change meant they were happy to impose new and even more onerous regulations. Walz’s housing legacy is not a model to be emulated.
After Democrats took a majority in both houses of the Minnesota legislature, Walz signed a law that made what he called a “generational investment” in housing, amounting to $1 billion. Like many claims of government “investment,” most of it was just cash handouts. In fact, $200 million was allocated to down-payment assistance and tens of millions more to rental assistance. This spending has and will continue to drive up prices for nonsubsidized home buyers and renters. Much of the rest of the money will subsidize developers through grants and loans.
Continue reading the entire piece here at the National Review Online (paywall)
______________________
Judge Glock is the director of research and a senior fellow at the Manhattan Institute and a contributing editor at City Journal.
Photo by Justin Sullivan/Getty Images
