Childhood Lead Poisoning and Affordable Rental Housing: An Analysis of the Implementation of the Minnesota Lead Policy in Minneapolis and St. Paul, 1991-1995

Abstract

Childhood lead poisoning remains a serious public health concern in the United States today. had-based paint in pre-1978 housing stock is the major source of exposure. Although theprimary objective of lead regulation is to reduce the incidence of childhood lead poisoning, i7ller (1994) suggested that lead legislation has not signzjicantly met that objective, primarily due to poor procedures for implementation. In addition, federal, state, and local regulations that are intended to achieve these goals may turn out to have negative consequences for affordable housing because the impact on housing costs may not have been considered when the regulations were first promulgated (ACRBAH, 1991).The purpose of this study was to analyze the implementation of the Minnesota lead statute by the cities of Minneapolis and St. Paulfrorn 1991-1995, which represented the time from when the statute went into effect (1991) to when major revisions were made (1995). The case study approach provided qualitative answers to the questions: “How did the 1991 Minnesota lead statute structure implementation?”; “What components of implementation were lefr up to local discretion?”; and “What impact did implementation have on affordable rental housing?” Sabatier and Mavnanian’s (1980) conceptual framework of the policy implementation process was used to develop an interview guideline, and as the survey instrument for in-person interviews with current and past lead oficials.The findings showed that the Minnesota lead statute was loosely structured, allowing enough discretion by local administering agencies for differential implementation of the policy by the mo cities, particularly in the writing of lead orders. The lead oficials reported that the impact of the implementation of the statute on affordable housing was real, unintended, and largely negative. Aflordable housing units were removedfrom the current housing stock through increased vacancy periods, abandonment by the property owner, and condemnation by the city. In addition, both homelessness and discrimination against families with children were reportedly increased