Massachusetts’ economic prosperity depends on its ability to provide housing that meets the needs of, and is affordable to, a cross-section of ages and incomes, especially young working families. That is why so many business and civic leaders have joined housing advocates, senior citizen groups, and others in the Campaign to Protect the Affordable Housing Law. And that’s why I’m voting No on Question 2 on Nov. 2.
Question 2 would repeal a law that has created housing for thousands of Massachusetts families and seniors. The affordable housing law sets a goal for every city and town in the state to ensure that 10 percent of its housing is affordable. In the larger cities, nonprofit and for-profit developers use an array of state and federal subsidy programs to create affordable housing, but in suburban locations with more restrictive zoning, the affordable housing law has been the principal tool.
Some of its opponents have argued that the law is too heavy-handed, that left to their own devices, towns would provide affordable housing on their own. In reality, local land use restrictions mean most towns have no other mechanism to permit the construction of new affordable housing. Local planners report that rezoning sites for affordable housing, which requires a two-thirds vote of town meeting, is extremely difficult to achieve. Studies show that less than 1.5 percent of the land area in greater Boston is zoned for multi-family housing by right, and much of that is already developed. Many Massachusetts communities have “down-zoned” in recent years, and the amount of land required for each new housing unit now is triple what is required in southern and western states.
With the state just beginning to recover from a devastating recession, now is not the time to repeal the affordable housing law.
Pamela Brown
Littleton Road
