Key issues
The economic imperative for reform
The Minnesota Chamber Foundation released a data-driven, scientific report in February of 2024, Streamlining Minnesota’s environmental permitting process: Essential for economic growth, plus an update on permitting reform progress in March of 2025. The five-year analysis provides a strong sample size and compares Minnesota’s review times and processes to other states. The report details the state’s ability to update the state’s environmental permitting process while maintaining the business community’s strong commitment to high environmental standards – the protection of public health, natural resources and the environment.
Minnesota is falling behind. According to data from Grow Minnesota!, Minnesota trails other states and is failing to attract as much investment in-state as it is sending out of state. Minnesota ranked 8th among the 12 states in the Midwest in total project activity from 2018-2023 and consistently ranks between 8th to 12th in projects per capita within the region.
​
From 2018-2023, Minnesota-based companies invested in 355 projects in locations outside the state, resulting in an estimated $17.5 billion in capital expenditures and 31,255 jobs created. In comparison, Minnesota received 210 projects from out-of-state companies,
totaling $12.7 billion and 20,914 jobs created locally. This shows continued net deficits in incoming and outgoing business investments.
1.5x to 6x
Minnesota’s air permitting review times are 1.5 to 6 times longer
than the other states evaluated in the study.
3 of 15
Only three of 15 individual water permits (NPDES/SDS) were issued
within the MPCA’s own 150-day goal over a five-year period.
6.5 years
The average length of time to issue expired but still in effect permits is 6.5 years.
The longest is more than 23 years.
$260M to $910M
Minnesota could gain an additional $260 million to $910 million in economic activity
if the state’s permitting review times matched those of the comparison states.
Policy recommendations
The coalition’s legislative proposal includes recommendations to:
-
Enhance efficiency and transparency with:
-
Greater reporting and more clarity;
-
Separating industrial and municipal permit data;
-
Enhancing permit “completeness” processes; and more
-
-
Reduce unlimited 60-day wetland permit extensions to one extension
-
Separate operating and construction permits
-
Allow applicants to request and pay for expedited permitting
-
Limit citizen petitions to the project county, and adjoining counties
-
Direct Commissioner review of permits that do not meet the 150-day goal
-
Direct DEED to appoint a permitting “ombudsman” to facilitate the process
-
A scoping Environmental Assessment Worksheet (EAW) is not required for projects with a mandatory Environmental Impact Statement (EIS).
