Why I'm voting No on removing 40B.

[dsrtao]

(Relevant only to Massachusettsians.)

40B is not perfect, and isn't even exceptionally good, but the way to overturn it is to propose something better, not to kill it and hope that someone will come up with something better later.

Comments

[noeltheone.livejournal.com]

By what metric is 40B a success?

http://www.protectaffordablehousing.org/cms/home/get-the-facts/accomplishments

I'm not by any means saying the law is perfect, but the move to repeal it has sidetracked amendments to the law that were working their way through the legislature.

Which is of course what was desired.

The main proponents of this repeal aren't interested in solving the underlying problem. They just want 40B to go away. If they were interested in solutions, they would suggest amendments or propose something to replace it.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

The question is mooted, but it's worth pointing out that (if you have the knowledge), that web page is badly distorting the facts, or quoting them highly selectively.

Nor is it the case that amendments to the law were side-tracked. Thanks to Prop 2.5, the law cannot be modified, without the state also providing funding: the state can no longer produce or modify laws with unfunded mandates.

Having gotten to know THE MAIN proponent of the law (online), I'm sure that you are utterly and completely mistaken about his desire or his intention.

You speak with surety: but lack the facts. That's not really a good basis for advocating a position.