BARRY BLUESTONE
Incentives ‘too weak’
The $22.5 million budget approved by the Legislature last week includes financial incentives for Bay State cities and towns to build housing in specially created smart growth zoning districts.
Under a section called Chapter 40R, towns and cities would be eligible to receive $3,000 for every housing unit created in smart growth zoning districts that have been established by the community. Chapter 40R reflects recommendations from a report issued last year by the Commonwealth Housing Task Force, a broad coalition of business leaders, academics, housing advocates and elected officials. The report identified key strategies – including offering financial incentives and more school aid to communities – that could lead to the construction of roughly 33,000 new housing units.
But while housing and smart growth advocates are pleased that the Legislature is finally offering some financial incentives to towns to encourage housing construction, some argue that the tweaks made by lawmakers last week significantly weakens Chapter 40R.
‘Path-Breaking Approach’
The language for Chapter 40R was included in the Senate version of the budget. A joint conference committee of Senate and House leaders, however, eliminated an incentive that would have provided additional school aid to communities to cover the costs of educating students living in housing that’s built in the special zoning districts. Instead, lawmakers called for a two-year study on the school-aid issue.
Supporters say that the school aid was probably the most powerful incentive to get communities to embrace more housing development because municipal leaders often argue that additional housing brings more school children and places financial burdens on cities and towns.
In addition to scratching the school aid incentive, the House added a provision that requires towns and cities to return the state cash if housing isn’t built within a three-year period in the designated districts.
Barry Bluestone, director of Northeastern University’s Center for Urban and Regional Policy, called the legislation “path-breaking” because “it sets up a completely new approach to encouraging housing development.” Now, in addition to having the stick of Chapter 40B – the controversial comprehensive permitting law in Massachusetts known as the anti-snob zoning law – communities also have a carrot in the form of Chapter 40R to build more housing, he said.
But Bluestone, a member and co-author of the Commonwealth Housing Task Force report, said the legislation was flawed.
“It is a decent start but it [Chapter 40R] has been compromised by these changes in the conference committee and we need to work very hard in the next legislative session to revise Chapter 40R to rebuild the incentive structure in it,” said Bluestone, who emphasized that he was not speaking on behalf of the task force.
“The incentives are too weak, and we fear that not enough communities will take advantage of 40R to solve the housing crisis,” he said.
