With the 2000 legislative session winding down on Beacon Hill, officials in the residential real estate industry are calling this a banner year, with several industry-initiated or industry-supported proposals successfully making their way through the State House.

With less than a week to go before the July 31 deadline, however, the fate of a number of bills have yet to be decided. Still, most industry observers are remaining optimistic as members of the House and Senate seek to get as much work done as possible under the wire.

“It’s been a remarkably productive session for those concerned about housing in Massachusetts,” said Benjamin Fierro III, counsel for the Home Builders Association of Massachusetts. “Housing is once again a priority issue on Beacon Hill. Everyone is talking about it.”

“With the qualifier that the session is not over yet, I would say we’re quite pleased with how the two-year session has gone,” said Edwin J. Shanahan, CEO of the Greater Boston Real Estate Board. “We hope it continues to be a good session. There’s still a lot going on, and they’re still busy voting on a number of pieces of legislation.”

“It’s been one of the most successful sessions in years,” agreed Robert L. Nash, CEO of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors.

One piece of legislation being hailed by the homebuilding industry and environmental groups alike is a zoning bill that would make it easier for builders to construct clustered housing developments. In clustered projects, instead of each home being placed on a large parcel of land, the homes are clustered together on smaller parcels, with the remaining acreage left untouched as a large swath of open space. The method has not been more widely used because a special permit often is needed for clustered developments, and builders are often reluctant to enter into the unpredictable special permit process. The bill would authorize cluster permits be issued without the need for a special permit, also called “cluster by right.”

Both houses approved the bill last week, and it now sits on Gov. Paul Cellucci’s desk awaiting his signature. The Home Builders Association of Massachusetts sent a letter to Cellucci urging him to sign the bill into law, and it is expected he will do so.

“The passage of this zoning bill is a tremendous accomplishment,” Fierro said. “A lot of organizations supported this.”

Another piece of legislation real estate officials are calling a victory for the industry is the new escrow dispute resolution law which was passed in June and takes effect in September.

The legislation, supported by the Massachusetts Association of Realtors, establishes new language clarifying a real estate agent’s responsibilities when holding funds in escrow and is expected to reduce instances where lengthy court proceedings can occur over deposit disbursements among buyers and sellers if there is a dispute.

The law prohibits claims against brokers who comply with instructions as defined in the purchase-and-sale agreement and keep the funds in an escrow account pending resolution of the dispute.

Earlier in the legislative session, lawmakers passed a bill requiring home inspectors to be licensed, a bill that many in the real estate industry also supported. Under the new law, a board will be created to establish industry standards for home inspectors and administer a licensing system. Each inspector would be required to have a minimum errors and omissions insurance policy. Also, real estate agents could not directly refer a specific home inspector to clients, ensuring no conflict of interest takes place. “This was a major, major landmark piece of legislation,” Nash said.

Left to Languish
Leaders are calling the latest legislative session successful not only because of certain bills that have been or are about to become law, but also because of certain proposals that met defeat.

As an example, both MAR and HBAM had serious concerns about H.1215, the so-called Mansionization/Teardown Bill, which would have allowed communities to prohibit replacement of smaller homes with larger homes through expansion of zoning restrictions. The organizations felt the proposal represented an infringement on personal property rights and could also reduce property values because homeowners could be prevented from maximizing the investment in their property.

“The Mansionization Bill hasn’t advanced anywhere,” Fierro said. “From the homebuilding industry’s perspective, that’s a victory.”

“I’m astounded that that legislation even gets introduced,” Nash added.

Although several bills passed, others supported by the industry were left to languish.

For example, Cellucci had filed legislation that would provide incentives to those who constructed affordable housing, and allowed state-owned land to be sold off to developers to promote creation of new housing. Critics said the legislation was vague and poorly written and the proposal was sent to study, effectively killing it for the near term.

Lobbyists are still holding out hope for some other bills to make their way through the House and Senate before the formal sessions ends. Among those bills is a mandatory rent escrowing bill, which would place a tenant’s monthly rent in an escrow account until a dispute is resolved. Although the bill will most likely die in this session as it has in years past, it was reported out of committee favorably for the first time.

Other bills include H.4970, which encourages mediation instead of a lawsuit between municipalities and homebuilders in the event of a dispute; S.1842, which simplifies the approval process of some subdivisions; and S.1872, which permits communities to authorize the transfer of development rights by special permit as a planning tool.

Conversely, those in the industry are also still keeping a watchful eye on certain bills they don’t want to see passed in the final days of formal session. Among those is S.1946, which would allow cities and towns to impose rent regulations on expiring-use buildings. “We hope the session ends without it being passed,” Shanahan said. “Congress has already taken action to resolve the issue.”

Similarly, GBREB, MAR and others are looking for no action on H.3694, which would limit the circumstances under which real estate broker commissions are due and payable. Specifically, it states that brokers can only be paid is a transaction closes, regardless of any agreements that may exist that allow for consulting fees, referrals or other payments.

Shanahan credited the good legislative session to real estate organizations “consistently conveying accurate information” to legislators about bills that have been “floating around for a number of years,” allowing the proposals to move forward.

“As the elected leadership gets more knowledge, they understand when a legitimate remedy is necessary,” Nash said.