For the last several years, MPHA, Jacob Frey, and members of the Minneapolis City Council have waged an aggressive campaign against the historic preservation of the Glendale Townhomes. MPHA even egregiously claimed that because it sought historic preservation, Defend Glendale was led by “white homeowners” in Prospect Park, seeking to preserve red-lining in the neighborhood. Of course, this is a bald-faced lie. Glendale residents seek historic preservation because Glendale is truly historic and families do not want their homes demolished or privatized; In fact, Defend Glendale – this organization, run by Glendale tenants – has won national awards for its annual exhibit documenting the history of public housing tenants’ organizing in the neighborhood.
This past Spring, MPHA suddenly changed its tune. For years, it argued that historic preservation was not necessary or appropriate for the Glendale townhomes. Suddenly, though, in April 2026, MPHA initiated the “Section 106” consultation process. Section 106 refers to Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, which states the following:
“…the head of any Federal department or independent agency having authority to license any undertaking, prior to the approval of the expenditure of any Federal funds on the undertaking or prior to the issuance of any license, shall take into account the effect of the undertaking on any historic property.”
The law requires that before federal funds are used for construction on any property, the agency undergoing construction must first assess the construction’s implications on the property’s historic nature. For public housing authorities, the Section 106 process is necessary before any changes are made to any historically significant Section 9 public housing. During the April 9th, 2026, “kick-off” meeting, MPHA personnel admitted that the agency needed to undertake the Section 106 review process because “a National Register of Historic Places nomination is in progress for the Glendale Townhomes” and because the agency seeks to privatize the Townhomes in the next few years.
MPHA acknowledged that while it has not formally initiated the process, it wants to convert Glendale from Section 9 public housing to private housing subsidized through Section 8 vouchers. Specifically, MPHA stated that it wants to use the Rental Assistance Demonstration (RAD) process to transform Glendale. Through RAD, a housing authority transfers ownership of public housing to a private entity to free up private-sector funding for an allegedly necessary repair or rehabilitation. The Section 106 process is a series of public meetings made up of stakeholders in the community, Glendale tenants, Defend Glendale leaders, and the Prospect Park Neighborhood Association, before MPHA initiates RAD, since RAD involves substantial transfers of federal taxpayer dollars.
There is a huge difference between these forms of housing. Section 9 public housing is publicly owned and operated, and residents’ total housing expenditures cannot exceed 30% of their income. On the other hand, Section 8 vouchers are simply lump sum rent subsidies. Section 8 housing is not public housing; it is privately owned and operated, and rent can go up at landlords’ whim. This is why when MPHA has previously privatized housing through RAD and related privatization programs, residents were hit with unexpected fees and charges and many residents did not return after conversion.
At this point, Glendale residents, the Prospect Park Association, and national experts on historic preservation agree: the Glendale Townhomes are historically significant and ought to be preserved. By initiating the Section 106 process, MPHA has tacitly acknowledged that Glendale is historically significant. However, MPHA, with the support of the City of Minneapolis, is fighting against actual historic preservation because real preservation would limit the city’s ability to demolish and privatize Glendale Townhomes.
Defend Glendale & Public Housing Coalition