When it comes to tackling the housing crisis, Massachusetts voters want an all-of-the-above approach. But some of the ideas they like will cause more problems. iStock illustration
When it comes to tackling the housing crisis, Massachusetts voters want an all-of-the-above approach.
That’s one message to take away from a recent University of Massachusetts Amherst/WCVB poll, which dug into statewide attitudes towards our deranged housing market and what might be done to fix it.
For starters, an amazing three-quarters of those surveyed who had been in the housing market recently reported one or another serious challenge.
The top one was price, with 44 percent saying they couldn’t find a home in their price range, while 63 percent of renters looking for a new place said they were priced out as well.
And when it comes to the top issues facing the state, housing came out in the No. 1 spot, cited by 34 percent of all respondents to the poll, not just those actively looking to buy a home rent.
All of the Above?
Given the gravity of the situation, maybe then it’s not all that surprising that Bay State voters show strong support for a wide array of proposals to rein in housing costs, even if some are likely to be counterproductive or contradict others.
More than 70 percent support rent control, and in particular, giving local officials the power to cap rents, while 62 percent support a tax, or transfer fee, on home sales over $1 million.
Yet along with bringing back rent control and rolling out a luxury real estate tax, voters also favor aimed at ramping up housing production.
Fifty-five percent of voters surveyed in the UMass Amherst/WCVB poll support the MBTA Communities law, which requires cities and towns across the Boston area to roll out new zoning districts where apartments and condominiums can be built.
An even greater number, 65 percent, support the idea of the government dishing out tax incentives to spur the conversion of now-empty offices into residential units.
Two-thirds, or 66 percent, also favor tax breaks for developers who build low-income housing, while 64 percent want homeowners across the state to have the ability to add granny flats and rental cottages to their properties, collectively known as accessory dwelling units.
Not Every Policy Mixes Well
All these proposals to spur new residential are great.
But they could wind up going nowhere, or at the least falling far short of expectations, should some of the other measures favored by voters – namely, rent control and a luxury real estate tax – wind up getting enacted as well.
Economists have long taken a skeptical view of rent control, arguing it helps depress construction of new apartments by making it harder for developers to finance and build new projects.
Taxes on high-priced real estate sales, also known as “transfer fees,” have the same potential to put a damper on new development, cutting into potential profit margins on new condo projects and subdivisions of high-end single-family homes.
Given that our out-of-control prices and rents stem from decades of underbuilding, that would probably just make things worse.
Still, outside the real estate and housing advocacy sectors, most people don’t follow these issues closely enough to understand the potential contradiction, let alone the complex interplay between these issues.
That means it’s up to Gov. Maura Healey and legislative and local officials to help steer public opinion and proposals in productive, rather than counterproductive ways.
A Warning Sign in the Suburbs
And in that regard, there are warning signs that support may not be as strong as it could be for centerpiece of the Healey administration’s push to boost housing production, the aforementioned MBTA Communities law.
A small but growing number of suburbs have outright rejected the law, while a larger group is likely complying with the letter of the law even as it attempts to subvert its spirit.
Opponents have cited the potentially large numbers of new apartments and condos that could get built under the law, though often these numbers are based on full-build estimates that would be hard, if not in some cases, impossible, to achieve.
Of all the housing fixes in the poll, the MBTA Communities law generated the least enthusiasm, with 55 percent in favor.
Scott Van Voorhis
Meanwhile, a recent poll commissioned by the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance reported more opposition than support for the new law, with percent 45 percent against and just 33 percent for.
Clearly, slapping caps on rents and putting a surcharge on sales above $1 million are a lot more popular among Massachusetts voters than the prospect of large, new apartment and condo-style developments taking shape in their towns.
But at the end of the day, the only way to dig our way out of the housing crisis is to build more. Luxury real estate taxes and rent control aren’t going to do it and would likely backfire badly, killing plans for new housing.
Now it’s up to Healey, the self-proclaimed “proud progressive,” to make that case.
Scott Van Voorhis is Banker & Tradesman’s columnist and publisher of the Contrarian Boston newsletter; opinions expressed are his own. He may be reached at sbvanvoorhis@hotmail.com.
