Meeting deadlines is important. Timeliness is essential in many industries, including publishing. So it’s odd for those who write on this page to advocate for postponing a cut-off date. But, there’s an exception to every rule.
In this exceptional time, the economic downturn has created scenarios that most of the country didn’t anticipate. Five years ago, the concept of using taxpayer money to bail out banks and spur the housing market was unprecedented.
Locally, it’s clear the economy needs a boost via new legislation and government-supported programs. That’s what a local real estate development association had in mind when writing up legislation to extend permitting deadlines.
Upon returning to session from the July 4th holiday, Massachusetts House of Representatives leaders voted against extending in-place permits for two years as part of the Permit Extension Act. The language, included in a sweeping economic development bill, was proposed by NAIOP Massachusetts. It is intended to help permitted construction projects (residential, commercial and industrial) that have already been reviewed and approved by municipal authorities, but haven’t moved forward due to the recession and the credit crisis.
The Permit Extension Act would grant a three-year extension of all state and local permit deadlines for all projects approved between Jan. 1, 2008 and Jan. 1, 2011.
The Senate passed a version of the bill in the spring, complete with the permit extension language. But after last week’s action in the House, the bill will have to move to a conference committee, where three members from each legislative branch, and from both political parties, will act on the bill and send it back to both legislative branches for approval.
The bill still has widespread support from several lawmakers and the Home Builders Association of Massachusetts. About three months ago, a land use attorney used this space to advocate for passage of the bill.
David Begelfer, CEO of NAIOP Massachusetts, said the bill would have the most direct impact on economic development when the market improves.
“To have construction financing, you need permits,” he told Banker & Tradesman.
Delaying the permitting process will not only add additional costs to projects, but it will also hurt the economic recovery that is underway. Conversely, jumpstarting stalled projects, or giving them more time to arrange complex financing, will allow the economy to recover quickly.
A study conducted by the Home Builders Association of Massachusetts (HBAM) found construction of 5,465 residential units in 2009 created 22,111 jobs in the state. In addition to creating thousands of jobs, homebuilding last year pumped $1.82 billion in personal and business spending into the economy, and generated $314.6 million in revenue for state and local governments.
Extending permits is bound to cause resistance, especially among cities and towns which follow strict permitting rules to protect their communities. The Massachusetts Municipal Association opposes the bill. MMA Executive Director Geoff Beck said state-mandated extension of permits is an “unwarranted trampling of local authority.”
Beckwith suggests applicants go through the torturous process of re-applying for a permit, sitting through countless town meetings, arguing the same points and hoping town officials renew their faith in an already once-approved project.
He said passing the measure “would set an extremely dangerous precedent, for the governor and the legislature to meddle with local authority.”
Nobody is arguing that thoughtful and considerate municipal boards might not extend permits on their own, absent any mandate. But in this case, it doesn’t seem like developers are looking to trample on or meddle with anything. They are simply waiting for financing to allow for investment in, and expansion of, projects that only a few months or years ago seemed like fine ideas.
The economic tide is turning, and builders should be given the opportunity to seize the moment and put their shovels back in the ground once conditions improve, without having to waste precious time re-entering the already arduous local permitting process.
