Minnesota 2025-2026 Regular Session

Minnesota House Bill HF2324

Introduced
3/13/25  

Caption

Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park; eligible uses of increment from tax increment financing districts expanded to include transfers to local housing trust funds, and use of transferred increment requirements imposed.

Summary

HF2324 would expand the allowable use of tax increment financing (TIF) revenue for the cities of Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park. Under current law, these cities already have limited authority to spend a portion of TIF outside the district; this bill increases that authority to 15 percentage points for each city or their designated development/housing entities, but only when the money is transferred to a local housing trust fund established under state law. The bill also sets conditions on how the transferred increment must be used. Funds placed into the housing trust fund must be distributed according to each city’s ordinance or policy for rental and homeownership assistance, with rental uses benefiting households at or below 80% of area median income and homeownership uses benefiting households at or below 120% of area median income. Once transferred, the money is no longer treated as TIF increment for purposes of the general TIF definition and annual reporting requirements. The bill takes effect the day after final enactment.

Impact

HF2324 would amend Minnesota’s tax increment financing framework as applied to three named cities by creating a special authorization to redirect a larger share of increment to local housing trust funds. It would affect the cities of Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park, along with their economic development authorities or housing and redevelopment authority, and would tie the use of those funds to income-qualified housing purposes. The bill would also remove transferred amounts from the statutory definition of increment and from annual TIF reporting obligations.

Sentiment

The available record shows no committee transcript or recorded votes, so there is no documented debate or formal vote history to indicate broad support or opposition. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears to be a targeted housing-finance measure intended to support local affordable housing efforts through existing TIF resources. The absence of recorded controversy suggests the bill was, at least at introduction, a technical/local policy proposal rather than a highly contentious statewide measure.

Contention

The main policy questions raised by the bill are likely to center on the use of TIF revenue for housing trust funds instead of other redevelopment purposes, and on the decision to grant this expanded authority only to three specific cities. Potential points of concern include whether diverting increment outside the district reduces resources for other local priorities, whether the income thresholds are appropriately targeted, and whether the special treatment for named cities creates unequal access to financing tools compared with other municipalities.

Companion Bills

MN SF2667

Similar To Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park tax increment financing districts eligible uses for increment expansion

Previously Filed As

MN SF2667

Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park tax increment financing districts eligible uses for increment expansion

MN HF1159

Eligible uses of increment from tax increment financing districts expanded to include transfers to local housing trust funds, and requirements on use of transferred increment imposed.

MN HF2324

Minnetonka, Richfield, and St. Louis Park; eligible uses of increment from tax increment financing districts expanded to include transfers to local housing trust funds, and use of transferred increment requirements imposed.

MN HF1159

Status in the House - 94th Legislature (2025 - 2026)

MN SF2041

Increment tax financing districts eligible uses including transfers to local housing trust funds expansion provision

MN SB480

Residential tax incremental districts. (FE)

MN AB451

Residential tax incremental districts. (FE)

MN AB137

Maximum life and allocation period for Tax Incremental District Number 9 in the village of DeForest and the total value of taxable property that may be included in tax incremental financing districts created in the village of DeForest. (FE)

MN SB133

Maximum life and allocation period for Tax Incremental District Number 9 in the village of DeForest and the total value of taxable property that may be included in tax incremental financing districts created in the village of DeForest. (FE)

MN HF1065

Tax increment financing; special rules authorized for Minnetonka.

Similar Bills

CA AB2570

Elderly Parole Program.

MN SF1826

Payment rates establishment for certain substance use disorder treatment services

MN HF1994

Payment rates established for certain substance use disorder treatment services, and vendor eligibility recodified for payments from the behavioral health fund.

TX HB1080

Relating to the publication of required notice by a political subdivision by alternative media.

CA SB680

Sex offender registration: unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor.

CA AB387

An act to amend Section 219 of the Code of Civil Procedure, relating to juries.

CA SB689

Local jurisdictions: district-based elections.

US HB31

Cover Outstanding Vulnerable Expansion-eligible Residents Now Act or the COVER Now Act This bill establishes a demonstration program to allow local governments to provide health benefits to the Medicaid expansion population in states that have not expanded Medicaid. Under the program, local governments may provide coverage for individuals who are newly eligible for Medicaid under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (i.e., the Medicaid expansion population) for a maximum of 10 years, or until their respective states expand Medicaid. The bill provides a 100% federal matching rate for the first three years of program participation. The bill prohibits states from taking certain actions against participating localities, such as withholding funding, increasing taxes, or restricting provider participation. States that violate these requirements are subject to certain funding penalties.