City/Town: Hugo

Legislative District: House District 33A

Party: Democratic-Farmer-Labor Party

Candidate responses in italics.

Q1: Housing plays a critical role in economic stability, health, and quality of life for individuals and families. However, disparities in housing continue to affect communities of color, people with disabilities, rural communities, and other historically underserved populations. What meaningful actions should be taken to acknowledge, address, and eliminate housing inequities and advance housing opportunities for all Minnesotans?

Safe, stable housing is foundational to a person’s health, economic security, and ability to thrive. Yet not every Minnesotan has had the same opportunity to find an affordable home, become a homeowner, build generational wealth, or find housing that meets their family’s needs. Addressing these inequities begins with listening to the people and communities most affected and using data to understand where barriers exist. Solutions will not look exactly the same in every community. We need more housing choices across Minnesota, including starter homes, affordable rentals, accessible housing, senior housing, and homes working families can afford. We should expand pathways to homeownership, including opportunities for first-generation homebuyers who may not have family wealth available for a down payment or closing costs. We must also preserve existing affordable housing and help people remain successfully housed as property taxes, insurance, rent, utilities, and other costs rise. For people with disabilities and older Minnesotans, accessibility should be considered from the beginning, not as an afterthought. The state should partner with local communities to address infrastructure and development costs and unnecessary barriers to creating housing while maintaining important safety, environmental, and worker protections. As a social worker, I use a person-in-environment lens. Good housing policy should do the same—listening to people, examining the systems affecting their opportunities, and developing solutions with communities rather than for them.

Q2: Supportive housing combines affordable housing with support services that help people who face the most complex challenges to live with stability, autonomy, and dignity. Supportive housing provides better outcomes and is fiscally responsible. What will you do to ensure community members who are unhoused or unstably housed receive the support they need to obtain or keep their own homes?

Everyone deserves a safe and stable place to call home. When someone is unhoused or at risk of losing their housing, our response should begin by understanding what brought them to that point and what they need to become, and remain, stably housed. As a social worker, I know there is rarely one issue affecting a person or family. Housing instability may be connected to job loss, domestic violence, disability, mental health or substance-use needs, childcare, transportation, or simply the rising cost of living. Providing housing without addressing the barriers that threaten a person’s stability can leave people cycling through the same systems. I support supportive housing that pairs affordable housing with individualized, voluntary services and respects a person’s autonomy and dignity. We should also intervene earlier by strengthening eviction and homelessness prevention, connecting people with available benefits and community resources, and helping people remain in their homes before they reach a crisis. State investments should be based on evidence and outcomes. When supportive housing can reduce repeated use of emergency rooms, shelters, law enforcement, and other crisis services while helping people achieve greater stability, it is both compassionate and fiscally responsible. I would work with local governments, housing providers, service organizations, and most importantly, people with lived experience to identify gaps, remove barriers, and invest in approaches that demonstrate meaningful, lasting results.

Q3: Homeownership is a way to build generational wealth, provide family and household stability, and support community vibrancy. More and more Minnesotans are priced out of owning a home because of rising housing costs, including purchase price, homeowners’ insurance, and property taxes. What steps will you take to increase opportunities for renters and first-time homebuyers to purchase homes, condos, or cooperative ownership models?

Homeownership has long been one of the primary ways families build financial stability and generational wealth, but for too many Minnesotans, buying a first home is becoming increasingly out of reach. We need to address both the cost of getting into a home and the ongoing costs of staying there. I support expanding opportunities for first-time and first-generation homebuyers, including down-payment and closing-cost assistance, homebuyer education, and programs that help renters build a realistic pathway toward ownership. We should also support a variety of ownership options, including starter homes, townhomes, condominiums, and cooperative models, because the traditional single-family home will not be the right or affordable choice for every household. At the same time, assistance alone will not solve the problem if housing prices continue rising faster than incomes. The state should work with local communities to increase housing supply, address infrastructure and development costs, and examine unnecessary barriers that add costs without sacrificing safety, environmental protections, or family-sustaining wages. We also need to pay attention to the increasing cost of remaining a homeowner. Property taxes, homeowners’ insurance, utilities, and maintenance all affect whether a family can afford to stay in the home they worked hard to purchase. Our goal should not simply be helping someone buy a home; it should be creating sustainable opportunities for Minnesotans to become homeowners, build equity, and remain homeowners for the long term.

Q4: In the last several years, bipartisan action to streamline building of new homes and apartments has passed in several states, including: allowing for multifamily buildings in select commercial areas, limiting parking requirements, allowing smaller homes on smaller lots, and more homes per lot in residential areas like duplexes, fourplexes, and accessory dwelling units. What reforms do you support to modernize zoning to both enable homes to be more affordable statewide and improve city tax bases?

We know Minnesota needs more housing, and I am open to looking at zoning changes that can help make it easier and less expensive to build. At the same time, I don’t think every community is the same or that every solution will work everywhere. Some of the ideas in this question make sense to explore, such as allowing smaller homes on smaller lots, looking at whether parking requirements are adding unnecessary costs, and finding ways to use land or buildings that are currently sitting underused. I also think communities should have opportunities for different types of housing so people can find something that fits their needs and their budget. I would want to listen to cities, residents, builders, housing advocates, and others who understand how these policies work in practice before deciding which changes should be required statewide. I would also want to understand the effect on infrastructure, schools, roads, water, the environment, and local taxpayers. I don’t believe good policy means choosing between building more housing and listening to communities. We should be able to do both. I would support practical reforms that help create more housing and strengthen communities while making sure we understand the long-term impacts of the decisions we make.

Q5: Despite housing being the largest cost in the average household budget, housing receives only a small fraction of the total state budget at just 0.3%. A lack of ongoing reliable funding for housing in Minnesota’s state budget has resulted in an undersupply of stable homes affordable to our workforce, our elders, and our families. In recent years, a constitutional amendment for housing, which would dedicate revenues from a sales tax increase to housing, has gained momentum at the legislature. What revenue options will you champion to more adequately meet our need for reliable funding for homes we can afford?

Housing is one of the largest expenses families face, and I believe Minnesota needs reliable investments that help increase housing opportunities and keep homes affordable. I am open to learning more about the proposed constitutional amendment and other options for dedicated housing funding. Before supporting a specific revenue source, I would want to understand how much it would raise, who would be most impacted, and how the funding would be used. I am cautious about solutions that could increase costs for working families when affordability is already such a concern. At the same time, I recognize that not investing in housing also has costs for families, communities, and our state. I would listen to housing advocates, local communities, people directly affected by housing costs, and others with expertise in this area before deciding which approach I believe is the most responsible and sustainable.

Q6: If you have other housing policy priorities, especially specific to your district’s housing needs, please share them here.

District 33A includes communities with very different housing needs. What I see in Hugo is not necessarily what residents are experiencing in Forest Lake, Mahtomedi, Willernie, Dellwood, or Grant. In Hugo, I see a great deal of new housing being built, but I am concerned about how much of it is actually affordable. When new single-family homes are selling for $600,000 or more, I wonder how many young families, first-time homebuyers, teachers, childcare workers, and others who work in our communities can realistically afford them. Across the district, I want people to have housing options that allow them to stay in the communities they call home. That includes young people starting out, growing families, and older residents who may want to downsize without leaving their community. Housing policy should recognize that communities have different needs. I would listen to residents and local leaders throughout District 33A and work with them to identify where the state can be a helpful partner in creating housing opportunities that make sense for their communities.