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

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

I see I mis-remembered. 40B would require increasing the housing stock in Arlington by one third, not double. Still impossible. And would only work if no ordinary housing was built beyond those 40B developments.

The "double" was to use inclusionary zoning - which is what 40B is supposed to spur as an alternative. So, while I was mistaken, the mistake does not obviate my point.

41 years of absolute failure.

Were you aware that the state revised the definitions of affordable housing only a few years ago, to make them more liberal? And that, as yet, most towns in MA still aren't affordable? And that given municipal land crowding, very few can achieve affordability to the 10% level via 40B or inclusionary zoning?

[shayde.livejournal.com]

This, as you say, is the case ONLY if 40b is the only mechanism for making units affordable. 40b was put in place as a last resort for towns that have outpriced low income households, as a way to get affordable units into a community, because the town has failed to do so.

If Arlington granted a permit to 2-3 projects that have enough affordable units, then no 40b projects could come in.

But that won't happen. So 40b succeeds in pushing the issue.

[goldsquare.livejournal.com]

2-3 projects?

Where? When? How, and with what money? Whose money?

Bluntly put: it just could not happen. Period. Not won't, not shouldn't: it just cannot happen.

And why should so much money and effort be spent to provide housing for a very small subset of people that cannot afford housing? Why should it be spent on housing they OWN, instead of housing they rent? Why should it be spent on housing that may (or may not) remain affordable into the future?

"So 40B succeeds in pushing the issue"

By what metric of success? Affordability in MA has scarcely improved in the 41 years of 40B, and remarkably little of that can be laid at the feet of 40B.

By what metric is 40B a success?

[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.