Check out my post at Forbes about an aggressive push back on bad tenant landlord policy that’s underway in Minneapolis. Like Seattle, well intended people and some power driven Councilmembers burnishing their lefty credentials are trying to shutdown the tenant screening process. This is absurd. All this will do is make life worse for tenants. But that isn’t the dominate narrative, right? Maybe that’s changing. Because of the work of the Minnesota Multifamily Housing Association (MHA), the local paper said Councilmembers,

Want to require private building owners to take on more risk — a City Hall overreach that would make Minneapolis less attractive to rental-housing owners and developers. And they want to create new disincentives to entry into the market at the same time the city’s rental occupancy rates are sky-high.

That’s our story! That’s our message! That’s the real truth and the narrative that should be the default. The editorial board got the message. Landlords want happy tenants that pay the rent on time, period. If those tenants have criminal records they couldn’t care less. But any private property owner needs to offset risk — and when that ability is taken away, supply suffers when people stop renting their property.

As I said in my Forbes post, if governments want private landlords to rent to people with higher risk profiles, help offset the risk, don’t make it worse by taking away the tools available. Many landlords big and small rent to people with records. They might require a co-signer or a bigger deposit, something to offset risk. When are landlords more likely to do this?

Drumroll please…..

When there are higher vacancy rates! When does that happen? When supply outpaces demand! Once again, supply — not bad policy and rules — is the answer. It always is.

The MHA (the good MHA) has been able to do this by using the recipe of challenging the other sides data and story, offering good ideas, and tapping into people’s basic sense of fairness and efficiency. Current tenants of all levels of income don’t think it’s fair or safe to let people move into their homes without some check. The MHA has used this effectively. But they’ve also taken the media back where the conversation belongs: more supply. That doesn’t work without the first two steps I’ve written about at Forbes too.

The series is worth a read, and I’ll keep updating on the progress in Minneapolis.

Changing The Housing Debate Part 1: Housing Is Not A Right

Changing The Housing Debate Part 2: There Is No Eviction Epidemic

Changing The Housing Debate Part 3: Sharing Wealth And Opportunity