Category Archives: Housing

Housing Affordability: Not Yet in Massachusetts

Posted on by
Reply

One would think that with the national housing market bust, the issue of affordable housing in Massachusetts is on its way to resolution. Well, maybe not so quickly.

The New England Public Policy Center and the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston recently produced a discussion paper: The Housing Bust and Housing Affordability in New England by Robert Clifford, Research Associate.

The paper looks at affordability in the New England states and the rest of the nation. The results show that although New England’s housing prices have declined and affordability has returned to the pre-housing crisis levels of the early 2000s, owner-occupied housing in Massachusetts is still less affordable than in the rest of the nation. Clifford remarks:

The affordability measures explored here point to lingering sources of concern pertaining to the high cost of homeownership in New England. In four of the six New England states (all but Maine and New Hampshire), recent drops in home prices have not been large enough to make the median-priced home affordable for the median-income household. Or—to present the same results from a different angle—the weak economy has prevented middle-income households from augmenting their incomes enough to allow them to afford the median-housed home in their state. The difference in affordability between New England and the nation is especially acute in Massachusetts.

The study also shows that more of the region’s households are becoming cost-burdened, particularly low- and middle-income homeowners.

Unfortunately, what this means for the Massachusetts economy is that, as the recovery begins nationally, job opportunities in other states will start attracting young families out of the region and into areas that are more affordable, leaving us yet again with a declining skilled workforce.

Once and for all, we need to develop a serious policy that allows for the construction of smaller, denser, affordable, starter homes.

Vote No on Question 3

Posted on by
Reply

A referendum on next month’s ballot, Question 3, would not only roll back last year’s Massachusetts sales tax increase, but would bring the sales tax rate all the way down to 3 percent.  The last time we saw a rate that low was in the 60s!  That certainly beats a one-time tax free holiday weekend, and who wouldn’t like a 3% savings on all our purchases year-round?

Unfortunately, as they say, there is no free lunch.  Remember the painful cuts to the state budget these last two years?  Remember the increasing costs of healthcare/Medicare; education; deferred infrastructure investments?  Well, with a declining revenue picture subtract from that another $2.5 billion dollars in state spending. The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation’s recently released report, Question 3: Heading Over the Cliff, indicates passage of Q3 would result in across the board cuts of 30% in virtually all state programs!

We’ll all feel it as local aid is dramatically slashed affecting schools, police, firefighters and infrastructure repairs. This is why NAIOP Massachusetts has joined with other leading business groups to form Business Leaders Against Question 3, which has launched a series of radio spots educating voters on the unintended consequences of this proposal.

Yes, we all would like to save money, but not at the expense of hurting ourselves and our neighbors. Join us and vote no on 3!

40B Update at NAIOP MultiFamily Event 10/20

Posted on by
Reply

Following up on David Begelfer’s recent post on protecting 40B, I want to note that NAIOP’s Director of Policy and Public Affairs, Tamara Small, will offer a brief update on 40B and related public affairs topics at next week’s Main Event program on multifamily housing: MultiFamily – The Bright Star.

Following Tamara’s update, the program will feature leading housing developers discussing the outlook for affordable housing, as well as market-rate and senior housing. Speakers include: Howard Cohen, Chief Executive Officer, Beacon Communities, LLC, Thomas Grape, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, Benchmark Senior Living, and David Hall, Development Partner, The Hanover Company, with George Fantini, Chairman, Fantini & Gorga, as moderator. Click here for more info – hope to see you there!

Protect Affordable Housing in Massachusetts: Vote No on Question 2

Posted on by
2

Question 2 on the Massachusetts ballot this November would rescind Chapter 40B, the state’s affordable housing law.  According to the Citizens’ Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA), 80% of the affordable housing built since 2000 would not have been built without Chapter 40B. Most communities favor large lot, single family subdivisions and, without 40B, would not allow for denser, cluster designs or multi-family housing. 

Housing permitted under Ch. 40B serves a broad range of households that are critical to our workforce.  Many of the market rate units have increased housing opportunities by creating ownership units that are less expensive than the existing large lot homes and by creating quality rental opportunities in high employment areas underserved by the rental market (40B developments represent 53% of all new suburban apartment construction). 

Massachusetts has one of the highest costs of living in the country and the largest single component of that is housing.  It is no wonder that we have led the country in the outmigration of our 25-40 year old skilled workers over the past decade.  If we are to recover our leadership role as an innovation economy, we need to keep these young families and provide them with affordable housing choices. If Chapter 40B is repealed it would immediately halt the creation of needed workforce housing and will jeopardize the future economic prosperity of Massachusetts.  This comes at a time of high unemployment, growing homelessness, and the worst foreclosure crisis on record.

However, if that is not enough to convince you, read the recent study from the University of Massachusetts Donahue Institute that Chapter 40B can spur an economic recovery.  By allowing the 21,000 units of housing already approved to move forward, the Commonwealth would benefit from over $10 billion in spending and nearly 55,000 jobs.  Now that is a stimulus plan!

So, Vote NO on Question 2 because it is the right thing to do for the young families looking to remain and work in Massachusetts.  Or do it because we need to get the recovery going to provide jobs and to help stop the looming cuts to local services.