Minnesota lawmakers’ latest effort to expand starter-home development has faltered after a bipartisan zoning reform proposal failed to advance in the state House, underscoring the political challenges of loosening local land-use restrictions even as affordability pressures mount.
The legislation, dubbed the Starter Homes Act, was voted down in the Minnesota House Elections and Government Operations Committee in late March, marking another setback for housing advocates who argue restrictive zoning rules have made it increasingly difficult to build lower-cost homes for first-time buyers.
The proposal had emerged as one of the state’s most closely watched housing bills this year because it sought to expand the types of homes that can be built in communities across Minnesota, including duplexes, triplexes, townhomes and accessory dwelling units.
Third straight setback
This year marked the third consecutive legislative session in which lawmakers attempted to pass statewide zoning reform aimed at increasing housing supply.
The measure was backed by an unusual bipartisan coalition led by Rep. Spencer Igo, a Republican representing Wabana Township, and Rep. Larry Kraft, a Democrat from St. Louis Park. Supporters argued the proposal would help revive middle class housing — smaller, more affordable homes that have become increasingly rare as developers focus on larger single-family properties and apartment projects.
Under the bill, cities would have been required to allow accessory dwelling units on lots zoned for single-family homes. Municipalities also would have needed to adopt at least three zoning reforms from a list of options that included allowing duplexes and triplexes in more areas, reducing parking mandates and permitting smaller lot sizes.
Backers said those changes would lower construction costs and create more opportunities for first-time homebuyers struggling with elevated mortgage rates and limited inventory.
Housing affordability has become a growing issue in Minnesota, where rising home prices and constrained supply have mirrored trends seen across much of the country.
Local governments push back
Opposition from city officials ultimately helped derail the measure.
Local leaders argued the legislation would strip municipalities of planning authority and impose broad statewide mandates that may not align with local infrastructure capacity or housing demand.
Some city officials testified that their communities already allow smaller housing types, but developers have continued to favor larger, higher-margin projects. Others warned that rewriting zoning ordinances could create additional administrative costs for cities already operating with tight budgets.
Those concerns resonated with lawmakers on the committee.
The bill failed on a 7-5 vote, with most Republicans opposing the proposal alongside one Democrat. Five Democrats voted in favor of the legislation.
The committee vote significantly narrows the bill’s path forward this session, though lawmakers could still attempt to revive portions of the proposal before adjournment.
Broader housing fight continues
The setback highlights a broader debate playing out nationwide as states increasingly weigh whether to override local zoning rules in an effort to address housing shortages.
States including California, Oregon and Montana have passed reforms in recent years designed to encourage denser housing development, though many efforts have faced resistance from local governments concerned about growth and infrastructure strain.
In Minnesota, advocates say the need for more attainable starter homes remains urgent and are expected to continue pressing lawmakers next year if this year’s bill ultimately dies.
For now, however, one of the Midwest’s most ambitious zoning reform efforts appears stalled once again, highlighting how difficult it remains to translate housing supply concerns into legislative action.
