The Minneapolis City Council voted March 5 to approve a temporary ordinance that would double the amount of time landlords must give tenants before filing an eviction, extending the pre-eviction notice requirement from 30 days to 60 days.
The measure, titled the Pause Evictions, Save Lives ordinance, passed [1] the council by a 7–5 vote. Council Member Jamison Whiting abstained from the vote.
If enacted, the ordinance would require landlords to provide tenants with a 60-day notice before filing an eviction case in court, instead of the current 30-day requirement in Minneapolis.
Supporters of the measure said the proposal was necessary as some renters continue to face financial hardship following Operation Metro Surge, which community groups said caused sudden income loss and created fear among immigrant residents in the area.
Council Member Robin Wonsley supported the ordinance during the council debate.
“This seems to be a reasonable pathway to a massive problem,” Wonsley said.
Several tenants spoke before the council prior to the vote, describing the financial difficulties they say they are experiencing. Some renters addressed the council through translators.
One woman told council members, “I even used my son’s tuition to pay my rent. We need time. We don’t have the money.”
Another renter said, “We do not know how we’re going to make rent.”
The ordinance is designed to temporarily extend the amount of time tenants receive before an eviction filing is made in court.
Under the proposal, the extended notice period would remain in place until August 31, 2026. After that date, the city’s pre-eviction notice requirement would return to 30 days.
Opponents of the ordinance argued that extending the notice period could create financial challenges for property owners and affordable housing providers.
Council Member Linea Palmisano warned that the policy could disrupt the housing market in the city.
“It greatly disrupts the housing ecosystem and ultimately puts more people out on the street,” Palmisano said.
Council Member Jamison Whiting also raised concerns about the measure during the discussion before abstaining from the vote.
“We have seen historically how pauses in eviction moratoriums have put those most vulnerable at risk to continued evictions,” Whiting said.
Affordable housing providers also expressed concern about the potential consequences of the policy.
Project for Pride in Living, a nonprofit organization that provides affordable housing, urged council members to reconsider the proposal.
“Adding another 30 days only pushes families deeper into debt,” said Karla Henderson, president and chief executive officer of Project for Pride in Living, during remarks to council members earlier in the week.
Tenant advocates said the additional time could help renters secure financial assistance or catch up on payments before facing an eviction filing.
Eric Hauge, executive director of HOME Line, a statewide tenant hotline that provides assistance to renters, said the organization has experienced a surge in calls related to financial hardship.
“Buying more time for folks to come up with rent will prevent evictions, and that is the entire purpose of this, simply having an eviction filing filed against you on your record immediately is harmful for families,” Hauge said.
Hauge also described the increase in requests for assistance that HOME Line has received since the beginning of Operation Metro Surge.
“Since the beginning of December, when the surge began, through I believe yesterday, we’ve seen something like a 75% increase in clients asking about financial aid,” he said.
Community advocacy organizations also pushed for the ordinance during the council debate.
Fadumo Mohamed, a community organizer with the New Justice Project, said the city is facing a serious economic challenge that has affected many families.
“We are in an economic crisis,” Mohamed said.
She also noted that supporters of the ordinance remain uncertain about whether the proposal will ultimately take effect.
“I am worried, though, that the mayor is going to veto it. So I don’t want to celebrate quite yet, just because I know we might have to work ahead of us to fully get it to the finish line, but excited,” Mohamed said.
Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey has not yet decided whether to sign the ordinance.
A spokesperson for the mayor said he is currently reviewing the proposal.
“Mayor Frey believes the most effective solution is a targeted one, which is why we’re working to get the $1M we recently approved out quickly to help our neighbors. Eviction moratoriums or notice extensions are a blunt measure — and the mayor will be weighing information from experts over the next several days to decide whether it actually helps or hinders our city,” a spokesperson for the mayor said in a statement.
Housing providers have also urged the mayor to reject the measure.
The Minnesota Multi Housing Association, which represents housing providers across Minneapolis, said the organization was disappointed with the council’s vote.
“The housing providers in Minneapolis, represented by the Minnesota Multi Housing Association, are disappointed that the majority of the Council did not listen to the concerns of the nonprofit affordable housing sector. We hope that the Mayor will veto this ordinance and that the focus can shift to solutions that meet the needs of Minneapolis renters,” the group said in a statement.
The ordinance will take effect only if Mayor Frey signs the measure into law. If he vetoes the ordinance, the Minneapolis City Council could attempt to override the veto with another vote.
Meanwhile, the neighboring city of St. Paul is considering a similar proposal. The St. Paul City Council is expected to review its own measure during a meeting scheduled for March 18.