Repeal 40B - Vote YES on 2 (Boston, Cambridge: low income, real estate, apartment)

[cwaggy]

Affordable Housing Now - Helping Massachusetts Recover From Chapter 40B

On the south shore 40B has been used heavily against middle/working class communities such as Quincy and Weymouth while leaving wealthier communities relatively untouched. In the towns that developers love to strip mine most of the buildable land has been consumed. 40B was used recently in Weymouth to shoehorn an apartment building into a lot with drainage problems in the middle of a neighborhood of single family homes. Of course there is plenty of open land about a mile away but that is in a wealthy community where the land would cost more cutting the developer’s profit and exposing him to residents with deeper pockets who would delay the development in court.
40B is a completely unfunded state mandate. The cost for services for these high density developments is completely borne by the individual communities whose very tight budgets can’t support them.

On the North Shore, it has been used to permit 'affordable' condos ($300K) in filled tidelands where previously building anything was deemed impossible. In the West, it has been used to slip hundreds of housing units into wetlands, meadows and open space, far away from commuter rails or good roads. 40B is a SPRAWL mechanism used by both government and the RE industry to stick it to local communities.

Now in a down economy, 40B is being used to force unwanted development into places previously unbuildable; when no 'affordable unit' buyers show up within 90 days of completion then the unit reverts to market rate.

Even with 40B, MA remains #47 in afford-ability.

It is welfare for developers, lawyers and their 'non profit' covers who care nothing about smart growth.

Look at the Globe's reader reaction to their pro 40B editorial - people are starting to 'get it'!

40B zoning law is not about snobbery, but smart growth - The Boston Globe (http://tinyurl.com/2cyz4be - broken link)

[yeson2onnov2]

I need more info on the conversion of "affordable" to market rate. Can you direct me?

[DreamworksSKG]

I probably wont vote on this question because its too confusing for me.
I dont vote on questions I dont understand

[cwaggy]

Newburyport News Endorsement!

Most communities in this region have recognized their responsibility to encourage growth that accommodates those of all income levels. And, clearly, there is a need for affordable housing, particularly in communities like Newburyport, where the average home price greatly exceeds the state average.

But the 41-year-old 40B law has had a number of serious structural problems that lawmakers refuse to fix. For instance, many who qualify as "affordable" applicants under the law's criteria can't actually afford to buy the units that are set aside for them. Lawmakers refuse to allow low-cost housing, like trailers, to be counted as affordable — presumably because wealthier suburbs don't want them in their towns. Developers have made a mockery of the law's profit limitations.

It's well worth considering the opinions of leaders in local communities, such as Amesbury Mayor Thatcher Kezer and Salisbury Town Manager Neil Harrington, who have tried to work within the law and have been burned by its flaws. Like many others who are fed up with the Legislature's failure to make changes, Kezer and Harrington favor getting rid of the law in order to force lawmakers to make necessary changes.

We agree with them. A yes vote on Question 2 is the only way to make real and substantive change to chapter 40B. It will force lawmakers to redraw it and fix the flaws.A media blitz has been launched portraying senior citizens and young mothers with babies extolling the virtues of the 40B affordable housing law.

and my additional comments

Did you know that 40B defines “affordable” as only new construction created by the 40B law? Or that three-quarter of all 40B homes are market rate, not affordable? Or that the one-quarter “affordable” units are priced so high that most seniors and low income families can’t afford them?



Fewer than 100 individuals and organizations (including 9 out-of-staters from as far away as Texas) have raised about $1 million to finance this tug-at-your-heartstrings ploy to protect a developer’s welfare program that our state’s Inspector General has investigated and found to be a “pig fest”, “one of the worst financial scandals in the history of our state”.



If you are seeking a balanced view of Question, please look at Affordable Housing Now - Helping Massachusetts Recover From Chapter 40B, or ask any of the 91,341 Massachusetts residents who signed to get Question 2 on the ballot.



Don’t be fooled. The issue is a state law that is being manipulated for financial gain, foists high density development on communities that don’t need it, allows developers to build what they want and where they want in your community, and forces residents to cough up taxes to pay for it.



On Nov 2nd, Vote YES on Question 2 to Repeal 40B. We must get the message “Vote YES on 2” out to as many voters as possible before next Tuesday - please forward this email to all your friends and neighbors. Thank you.

[ChunkyMonkey]

Sorry, I don't buy it. If left alone, most of the towns will not build affordable housing to encourage the "undesirables". I think this law may have problems, but the alternative is even worse. If the towns feel that the law is hurting them, they should just encourage smart growth and build the 10% or so affordable housing that will prevent developers from bypassing the town bylaws. 10% is not much. If they can't even create that with a law, imagine what it would be like without a law.

[AzScorpion12]

Originally Posted by DreamworksSKG

I probably wont vote on this question because its too confusing for me.
I dont vote on questions I dont understand

A YES vote prevents the state from jamming “affordable” housing in your town.

ie

Vote Yes if you don't want to live next to The Projects.

[brightdoglover]

The so-called affordable housing sure doesn't look affordable to me, and certainly isn't "projects."
Having lived through all the real estate wars since the 1980s, I might have had an automatic kneejerk "yes to affordable housing" response. But I saw the pernicious side of "affordable housing" movements in the rent control wars in Cambridge, and there was nothing pretty or productive about it. I do think 40B might just give developers free rein to do whatever they want.
Maybe it made more sense when real estate was zooming crazily. Dunno. But in the current environment, I hardly see giving developers exemptions to build supposedly affordable units that cost a gazilion-minus-ten dollars.
Housing will not make sense until all the prices go down more. And shoving in a few $300K townhouses in places like Lincoln isn't gonna help.
Also, I must admit, I don't see any requirement that people's kids be able to live in the town where they grew up or civil servants the same. While not a screaming capitalist (honest) I'd say let the market take over here. Less-expensive places will be revitalized (as they have been) and people will start out where they can, as they always have.

[xo_kizzy_xo]

I've seen 40B used mostly for senior citizen housing in my neck of the woods. Practically nothing for families of modest-to-low-income means :shrug:

[nei]

It lost.

I don't see anything wrong with more affordable, high-density development in my town.

[brightdoglover]

I have something of a problem with it being mandated by legislation.