The NIMBY crowd, which dreams of shutting down new housing construction across Greater Boston, did cartwheels after Scott Brown’s stunning win.
Given how enraged voters were, it seemed the time had finally come for this loud fringe of angry suburbanites – a group that regularly conflates middle class rentals and with urban-style public housing projects – to settle an old score and repeal the state’s decades-old Chapter 40B affordable housing law at the ballot box this November.
The law works by essentially granting developers a more lenient and streamlined permitting process in exchange for a certain number of new “affordable” units. If a community’s housing stock does not contain 10 percent or more affordable units, developers willing to construct some as part of a larger project can generally go over a municipality’s head and seek state, rather than local, approval for their projects.
But as politicking kicks off in earnest in coming weeks, backers of a statewide referendum that would gut 40B – overnight wiping out plans for 12,000 new homes, condos and apartments –have little to gloat about now.
Culture Clash
The Coalition to Repeal 40B is trailing in the polls and is almost out of cash, at least according to its latest filings with state election officials. More importantly, it is withering without the support of any big-name political candidate.
And unless there is a big game-changer in the next few weeks, Question 2, which would gut the law, appears headed to an unexpectedly lopsided defeat.
As of the end of August, opponents of the repeal effort, a coalition that ranges from Catholic bishops to unions and business groups, had a whopping 100-to-1 edge against the NIMBYs in campaign fundraising.
“We think we have a really good chance to try and defeat this,” said Aaron Gornstein, head of the Citizens Housing and Planning Association and a key player in the “Vote No on 2” campaign. “We have the broadest coalition I have ever seen put together on affordable housing, and I have been doing this for 25 years.”
The clash, of course, is not just over affordable housing, but dramatically different views of the Greater Boston real estate market in general.
The Coalition to Repeal 40B’s official argument is that 40B has been abused by developers to override local officials and has fallen short in producing affordable housing. So under the banner “Affordable Housing Now” the group would demolish the long-standing law and leave it up to the geniuses on Beacon Hill to fix the mess.
It seems there are two streams of NIMBY anger, both overlapping, that are driving the repeal effort.
On some days, the NIMBYs seem to think the Boston area’s precious suburbs, thanks to 40B, are about to be overwhelmed with “welfare housing.”
On others, they are ranting about the law as a Trojan Horse that allows “greedy” developers to build pricey condos and apartments over objections of town officials and under the guise of affordable housing.
But as anyone who has tried to buy a house in Greater Boston in the past 20 years can tell you, both notions are ludicrous.
The problem with the Boston area is not too much housing getting built but too little, with our market near the bottom nationally in new construction.
Scarce supply has translated into higher prices and rents, with even the worst real estate downturn in decades having only made a modest dent.
In fact, much of the little new housing we have seen built, both market rate and affordable, has been due to 40B. Nor is it welfare housing, with the subsidized rentals or condos offered at prices that, while hardly cheap, are affordable to firefighters, teachers and town workers.
Starving Opposition
So how bad are things looking for the NIMBYs right now?
Check out the latest poll from the State House News Service, which shows Question 2 defeated by a 22 percent margin. Maybe it’s not a completely lost cause – 10 percent were still undecided, according to the poll – but even if all wound up voting with the NIMBYs, it still would not be enough.
“I have been extremely pleased by the extent by which we have leaders from across the state and from all sorts of diverse backgrounds, political and otherwise, stepping up,” said Tripp Jones, chairman of the Vote No on 2 Coalition.
With time running out, the Coalition to Repeal 40B needs to turn things around – and quickly. But that leads us to the second big chink in the coalition’s armor – no cash.
One way to move those poll numbers up would be through an ad blitz. But the NIMBYs had just about $5,000 in the bank as of the end of August.
That’s compared to $550,000 raised by Vote No on 2 coalition.
No money, no ads – let alone TV ads.
The one wild card here is Coalition to Repeal 40B’s initial backing by the New Hampshire-based Slow Growth Initiative, which previously pumped hundreds of thousands into the repeal effort and helped get it on the November ballot.
Finally, the NIMBYs are starved of political oxygen, with all three candidates for governor having pledged to vote against the repeal of the old, and at times controversial, housing law.
This is somewhat remarkable given Republican challenger Charlie Baker’s angry man routine and independent candidate Tim Cahill’s bid to be the voice of the disgruntled.
But let’s not forget about Sen. Brown, whose sudden ascendancy on the votes of irate Bay Staters gave hope to leaders of all sorts of out-there causes.
Brown, during his career as a state senator, pushed all sorts of bills to undermine or scuttle 40B. One memorable proposal included counting prison cells as affordable units to help towns escape from having to comply with the old law.
Attempts to get comment from Brown’s camp – or return a call on the subject – have gone unrewarded.
