City/Town: Faribault

Legislative District: House District 19A

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?

Housing is foundational to economic stability, health, and the strength of our communities. Every Minnesotan should have access to safe, stable, affordable housing, whether they rent or own.

We need to expand the supply of affordable housing across Minnesota, including in rural communities where a lack of affordable rental options can be just as significant as the cost of homeownership. That means investing in affordable and workforce housing, preserving existing affordable rental units, supporting housing developments that include a range of unit sizes, and giving communities the tools and resources to build the housing they need.

I support expanding state assistance for first-time homebuyers, including down-payment assistance. I have been talking with the Habitat for Humanity leadership in Rice County about the difference that this kind of assistance can make for families who are ready to become homeowners. But homeownership assistance cannot be our only strategy. We also need to ensure that renters can afford to remain in their homes through expanded rental assistance and investments in affordable rental housing. We also need rental units with up to 6-7 bedrooms to accomodate large families.

Finally, we must recognize that housing affordability is connected to economic security. Raising wages, protecting workers’ rights, expanding access to healthcare, and ensuring families aren’t forced to choose between basic necessities all help make stable housing possible.

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?

People experiencing homelessness are not a single population, and there is no single solution. We need both more affordable housing and the supportive services that help people remain safely and stably housed.

In Faribault, I have spoken with police about our small homeless encampment. Officers told me that people there had refused offers of assistance. That experience reinforced for me that simply offering a service once is not enough. We need sustained, relationship-based outreach that meets people where they are and connects them with housing, mental health and substance-use services, healthcare, employment assistance, and other supports when they are ready.

We also need to prevent homelessness before it happens. I have heard from families living in their cars, and we know the disruption caused by COVID-era evictions continues to affect families. Expanding emergency rental assistance, eviction prevention, legal assistance, and short-term housing supports can keep a temporary crisis from becoming chronic homelessness.

As a rural legislator, I would also advocate for flexible funding and regional approaches that recognize that Greater Minnesota does not have the same service infrastructure as the Twin Cities.

Most importantly, people experiencing homelessness deserve to be treated with dignity and autonomy. Our goal should not simply be to move people out of sight; it should be to help people obtain and keep a home and build stable, healthy lives.

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 should be attainable for working families, not just people with high incomes. I support expanding down-payment assistance and partnering with organizations like Habitat for Humanity that are already creating homeownership opportunities in our communities.

I recently toured Habitat for Humanity’s new four-unit project in Northfield and have seen the organization’s work in Faribault, where it has built homes with as many as seven bedrooms for families. These partnerships are essential. But they also demonstrate that building the home is only part of the solution. Habitat shared that, once property taxes, insurance, and other costs are included, a family may need an income of $55,000–$60,000 to afford one of these homes.

We need to address those ongoing costs. I would support meaningful state income-tax credits or deductions to help lower- and middle-income homeowners manage property taxes, along with targeted property-tax relief for households with limited incomes. We should also address rising homeowners’ insurance costs.

At the same time, we need more housing choices. I support expanding opportunities for duplexes, triplexes, condominiums, cooperatives, and other forms of attainable homeownership, particularly in rural communities where housing options can be limited.

Finally, we should continue investing in down-payment assistance and first-generation homebuyers so that families who can afford a mortgage are not locked out simply because they cannot afford the upfront costs.

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?

I support modernizing zoning regulations to allow more affordable and multi-unit housing while giving local communities flexibility to determine what works best for them.

We live in a world where, for many working Minnesotans, purchasing a single-family home is increasingly out of reach because wages have not kept pace with housing costs. That does not mean people should have to leave their communities to find a place they can afford. We need more housing choices.

I support allowing duplexes, triplexes, fourplexes, accessory dwelling units, and smaller homes on appropriately sized lots in more communities. I also support allowing multifamily housing in appropriate commercial areas and reducing unnecessary minimum parking requirements that increase the cost of construction.

These reforms are particularly important in Greater Minnesota, where communities need housing that can attract workers, young families, seniors, and people who want to remain in the communities where they have built their lives.

More housing options can also strengthen local tax bases by putting underutilized land to productive use and supporting local businesses and services.

Modernizing zoning should not mean eliminating local voices. It means removing unnecessary barriers that prevent communities from responding to their housing needs. We should give cities and towns more flexibility to build the housing their residents actually need — including housing that is affordable to people who work in those communities.

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?

Minnesota needs a more reliable and substantial investment in housing. I agree that housing should not receive only a fraction of the state budget when it is one of the largest expenses facing Minnesota families and is essential to the health of our communities and economy.

I would not support a constitutional amendment funded by a broad sales-tax increase. Sales taxes are regressive, and at a time when wages have not kept pace with the cost of living, I do not believe working families should bear more of the burden.

Instead, I would look first to progressive revenue sources, including asking the wealthiest Minnesotans and highly profitable corporations to contribute their fair share, closing corporate tax loopholes, and ensuring that state tax policy does not continue to shift the burden onto working families. I would also support making housing a higher and more consistent priority within the state budget.

We need to be especially attentive to Greater Minnesota. Rural families are struggling with housing costs, stagnant wages, property taxes, insurance, and limited housing supply, while many communities are also struggling to attract and retain workers.

I am willing to have a serious conversation about sustainable revenue for housing, but I will not support balancing the housing equation by asking working Minnesotans to pay more through a regressive tax while those with the greatest ability to contribute are asked to pay less.

Housing is an investment in Minnesota’s families, workforce, and communities, and our budget should reflect that.

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

One housing need that deserves much more attention in my district is housing for large families.

In the Faribault area, we have growing Somali and Hispanic/Latino communities, including many families with four or more children. Our housing supply does not adequately reflect the needs of these families. A three-bedroom home may be considered “family housing,” but it simply does not work for a household with six, eight, or ten family members.

We need to encourage local governments and developers to build a broader range of housing, including larger homes and multi-unit developments with appropriately sized units. Housing policy should reflect the people who actually live in our communities rather than assuming that every household fits the same model.

I would encourage city councils and planning commissions to look closely at their zoning, comprehensive plans, and housing incentives to ensure that large families, families with children, and other underserved households are part of the equation. State housing programs should also recognize the need for larger units when allocating funding.

Development is important, but our communities should be intentional about what we build and who it serves. We should use public policy to encourage housing that meets demonstrated community needs—not simply housing that produces the highest return for a developer.