Cities and providers clash over rental licensing, density of group homes; committee hears competing testimony on HF 1477

House File 1477, introduced by Representative Nadeau, drew lengthy testimony from municipal officials, providers and disability advocates over whether cities should be able to use rental licensing and proximity rules to regulate small congregate care and assisted‑living homes.

Proponents — including a coalition of northwest suburban cities led by Brooklyn Park Mayor Hollis Winston — said a recent change in state law removed local inspection authority for smaller assisted‑living and residential care homes, leaving cities unable to inspect interiors or respond promptly to complaints. Winston told the committee Brooklyn Park had grown from about 29 licensed congregate care facilities in 2019 to more than 400 by late 2024 and that the influx strained public safety and city resources. He said the city seeks modest tools such as reinstated rental licensing authority and a distance requirement for new facilities to avoid over‑concentration. Winston testified, “We have added over 50 congregate care facilities per year in Brooklyn Park for each of the last 5 years. That is not something that we can sustain.”

City inspectors and public safety officials described life‑safety and maintenance concerns they said they previously addressed through rental licensing inspections and argued that state inspections alone do not provide the same complaint response cadence. Brooklyn Park fire and police representatives told the committee a disproportionate share of police and fire responses are to congregate care facilities and that social‑worker and behavioral‑health supports strain budgets.

Opponents — including provider associations and disability advocates such as the Association of Residential Materials (ARM) and the Residential Providers Association of Minnesota (RPAMN) — warned the bill would reintroduce varying city standards that could be used to exclude small, state‑licensed group homes and effectively deny people with disabilities the ability to live in communities of their choice. ARM’s senior director Sarah Grafstrom said repealing last year’s bipartisan language would “open the door to a patchwork of city‑by‑city regulations that can be used to force people with disabilities out of our communities.” She and other provider representatives argued that state licensing and county oversight already include robust inspections and that adding municipal rental licensing risks duplicative enforcement and, in some cases, closures that would displace residents.

The committee adopted an A2 amendment that clarifies the bill's coverage of both assisted living and residential facility statutes and then laid the bill over for possible inclusion; members emphasized the discussion is ongoing and signaled further negotiation among cities, providers and state agencies would be needed.