CLARK ZIEGLER
Concerns ‘addressed’

Supporters of a housing law they credit with creating thousands of affordable units in the last 34 years are waiting to see what action lawmakers take on bills filed to overhaul the law.

But unlike two years ago, when lawmakers had to grapple with similar bills to change the state’s anti-snob zoning act, or Chapter 40B, the hostility from opponents seems to have lessened and supporters feel they have won a more sympathetic ear from key state leaders, according to several observers. Business leaders, homebuilders, planners, lawmakers and residents defended the law at a public hearing last week, but critics made their cases as well.

“I thought an extremely strong case [in support of Chapter 40B] was presented … at the hearing, and in many ways a stronger case than a similar hearing of a couple years ago,” said Benjamin Fierro, a partner with the Boston law firm Lynch & Fierro who serves as counsel for the state’s homebuilders group. “The breadth of support from planners … to obviously homebuilders to the nonprofit sector was really compelling. And more importantly, I think, was the testimony of the beneficiaries of [Chapter] 40B we heard from.”

Housing advocates who attended the State House hearing said they were encouraged because hardly anyone denied the need for more – and more affordable – housing, and also because members of the Joint Committee on Housing and Urban Development praised a task force charged with making recommendations to change Chapter 40B. But they’re still cautious, acknowledging that only time will tell.

“I think there’s a lot more work that needs to be done. I don’t think there were any slam dunks … but I think it gave the [HUD] committee a lot to think about,” said Kevin Sweeney, immediate past president of the Home Builders Association of Massachusetts, a group that opposes any further weakening of the law.

Last week’s hearing was set to get testimony on a variety of bills, including measures that would completely rewrite the law and allow communities to count additional types of housing toward the state-set threshold for affordable housing. The hearing followed the release of a report featuring recommendations on altering the law from a 24-member task force. Legislators had agreed not to consider the more than 70 bills related to Chapter 40B until the task force had made its recommendations to the governor. The task force submitted its report May 30.

Chapter 40B advocates lined up tenants and homeowners from towns and cities like Needham, Waltham and Norton who have benefited from the law to speak at the hearing. With testimony from the residents themselves, some advocates felt that the message is getting through that the law, despite some problems in the past, has worked.

Many argued that cities’ and towns’ concerns about the law have been adequately addressed in regulatory changes adopted by the Department of Housing and Community Development last year and by the task force that met for more than a month to come up with its recommendations.

“All of the legitimate concerns raised by the towns have been addressed very squarely over the last two years,” said Clark Ziegler, executive director of the Massachusetts Housing Partnership.

“Unless the opponents want to repeal the law, what complaint, what concern hasn’t already been addressed?” asked Fierro.

Towns and city officials have called for changes to Chapter 40B because they feel the law has been abused by developers who steamroll through communities building large and dense developments without regard to community character or local services. The law gives developers an opportunity to go through a speedier, comprehensive permitting process in communities where less than 10 percent of the housing is deemed affordable.

Ziegler, who served on the task force, said there isn’t “any basis” to the criticism the task force recommendations didn’t go far enough in addressing the concerns of towns and cities.

“There will always be lingering unhappiness about anything that involves new development,” Ziegler said. “I think communities that simply want [Chapter] 40B to go away are not going to be happy.”

Consensus or Contention

Some predict if any serious efforts to completely disregard the task force report and overhaul the law in other ways emerge, it will spark a huge battle in the Legislature. Advocates argue the report features a comprehensive set of reforms that would have substantial impact.

One recommendation, for example, calls for allowing communities to count half of market-rate units in homeownership developments as affordable. Another key recommendation would give communities a break from developments proposed under Chapter 40B if they increase their housing stock by 0.5 percent in a year, while still another would limit the number of proposals they have to consider at any one time.

Currently, there just over 30 communities in the Bay State where more than 10 percent of the housing is considered affordable. However, allowing communities to count a portion of the market-rate units in homeownership developments constructed under the auspices of Chapter 40B, including already-existing developments, will immediately bump up communities’ affordable housing inventory in the state’s view, according to some who have followed the issue.

“I think if there are any efforts to really undo the consensus that was reached by the governor’s task force … I think it’s not going be without a major fight,” said Ziegler.

However, last week, Douglas Foy may have provided some hope to supporters when he told the State House News Service that a moratorium on the law, as one bill proposes, would be a “disaster” and that he hoped the committee worked on one piece of legislation. Foy, the states’s chief of commonwealth development, supports the task force recommendations.

“I suspect that no one … [is] entirely happy with these recommendations,” Foy said at a homebuilders’ dinner after the hearing last week. “But I think it is a great building block for the next step of reforming and improving Chapter 40B.”

Even state Rep. Harriett L. Stanley, a vocal critic who was a chief sponsor of 15 bills to alter the law, told committee members she supported the report of the task force, of which she was a member.

Meanwhile, business leaders testified that housing production has become a “business imperative” at a time when home prices have escalated so much that companies are having trouble offering salaries that allow their employees to live in the region, and workers are fleeing Massachusetts for more affordable states.

“We must work to make sure that viable options for housing are available,” said Paul Guzzi, president of the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce.

Not all of the state’s legislators are supporting the task force recommendations, however, with some claiming the statute requires a major overhaul, not minor revisions. The 30,000 units that have been built under the law since 1970 – 18,000 of which are reserved for households earning less than 80 percent of the area median income – has not been enough progress, some maintain.

“In my mind, it hasn’t worked,” said Rep. Michael J. Coppola, R-Foxboro, who is recommending an overhaul of the law.

Other critics still question whether the law should remain on the books at all.

Marie J. Parente, D-Milford, said one of the communities she represents is currently facing three Chapter 40B projects but doesn’t have the water and sewer systems to sustain them. She also called for keeping affordable housing units affordable in perpetuity, explaining that the town of Milford was very close to reaching the 10 percent goal several years ago but because some units were converted to market-rate, the town’s affordable housing count dropped.

“[Chapter] 40B has outlived its usefulness,” she said.