I proposed a Community Preservation Act project that was initially approved, but then got tabled. If elected, I hope to push forward with this. Here's a description, and linked here are more details:
Detailed description
PowerPoint presentation
In this project, the City of Somerville will:
1. Contract with a consultant who will study historical and current maps, deeds, assessors’ data, current open space uses, and neighborhood demographics to identify locations and legal mechanisms by which the City can: a. reclaim and find uses for remnant spaces for purposes such as pedestrian paths across blocks, picnic areas, tot-lots, community gardens, off-leash dog areas, and other public uses and/or b. permit private property owners to develop their land as permanently public and accessible open space; and
2. Test the feasibility of repurposing remnant spaces by completing an engineering and schematic design for the development of pedestrian paths through the wooded area below Corbett McKenna playground.
Thursday, October 26, 2017
Monday, October 23, 2017
Position: Affordability and Housing
THE NEED:
Affordability tops most people’s worry list. It means something different to different people. Some people live on only $40,000 a year and have trouble paying for water or tax bills, even as their property is worth almost $1 million. Younger people may have two degrees and high earning potential, but they still struggle with student loan debt and have no way to get into the market. Low-income renters face the most struggles.
There are no easy answers to address the above-listed points of pain. Everything we do will require the best possible technical, legal, and analytical work. Equally important, it will require a community discussion in which people can share their stories and understand one-another’s needs, combined with a call to action from all corners. It will be hard, but if we don’t make these hard choices, our demographics will look like those of wealthier suburban neighbor communities within a decade or two.
Here are the tools we should explore and then implement in some form:
CONNECTIONS TO OTHER ISSUES: (Coming soon for some issues...):
WITH APPRECIATION:
The following people provided feedback on and additions to these policy ideas. Fred Berman, Alex Bob, Cory Mian, and David Tisel. In addition, Canopy.City hosted a brainstorming session on housing preferences and models. Ideas from attendees of that meeting helped inform these policy goals.
Affordability tops most people’s worry list. It means something different to different people. Some people live on only $40,000 a year and have trouble paying for water or tax bills, even as their property is worth almost $1 million. Younger people may have two degrees and high earning potential, but they still struggle with student loan debt and have no way to get into the market. Low-income renters face the most struggles.
- Displacement: Data on housing show that people’s fears are real. Based on data compiled two years ago, almost 80 percent of households in Somerville will need to move if their housing situation changes (their lease ends, their rent increases, they outgrow their space, or they need to sell their home). That means, we can expect to see a huge shift in who lives in Somerville, and that’s destabilizing for the fabric of the community. The odds have gotten even worse since the City released that data, though there has been softening of the rental market in recent months.
- Declining housing stability: While the rate of home ownership has remained relatively stable for the last 50 years at around 32 percent, historically, families have lived together in units in multi-family buildings. Now, more buildings are owned by absentee landlords. The percent of residents between the ages of 18 to 34 has grown to almost half of the population. Many people I’ve met while door knocking, especially seniors, have talked about a decline in the feeling of community. They believe that it’s because of an increase in residents who stay for just a few years and because of fewer children. The younger people I've talked to are worried about getting a toe-hold in the market. Having such a large population of young adults, while good for attracting certain employers, means that most of these people will not be able to stay if they want a different living arrangement for the next stage of their live, such as ownership or a family-friendly unit. It's like a five-lane highway converging to a one-lane road. If we keep building small high-end apartments and if only young adults can find space to rent in the older housing stock, we are building this transiency and lack of commitment into our population. Young renters will have no way to get involved in Somerville's future, because they won't be able to be part of that future when they "settle down."
- Additional household burdens: Finally, additional burdens handicap household finances. The cost of city services, fees and fines has increased, as has costs of transit, childcare, and healthcare. Meanwhile, wages for some have fallen. Immigrant families without residency status are experiencing more stress and destabilizing forces as they fear or experience deportation of family members. Many people are experiencing increased hardship.
As we try to address affordability pressures, there are five groups that I believe warrant special focus, given their unique needs: - Families with children: Children are almost twice as likely as other residents to be living in poverty. Families generally make less money and have more expenses, unique housing needs, and more dependence on municipal/district services. They face much more housing discrimination. The population of children in Somerville has continued to shrink over the last 30 years, and Somerville currently has one of the smallest percentages of children among larger communities (only Cambridge is lower). The vast majority of Somerville School students will face displacement pressure in coming years. If we want to retain children, especially any low-income children, we will need to create and preserve housing with families in mind. Our goal should be to do AS MUCH preservation, protections, and production of affordable units as possible in the face of our growing economy.
- Seniors: Many seniors I've talked to may be ready to leave their home, because of issues with maintenance or mobility (I know from door knocking how many houses are atop many, many steps!). Or, perhaps they worry about social isolation. Most want to, however, stay in their own neighborhood with their same social network. I believe we need to focus on housing for seniors that allows them to stay in their own neighborhoods.
- Middle-income households: While we need to create more low-income housing, we also need to have a special focus on middle-income households. They need less support, but do need some subsidy and technical assistance. Middle-income households and families are a key part of creating a strong community. This includes employees of the City, the Schools, non-profits, and smaller businesses.
- Artists, artisans, and small business owners: This is another group of residents that has contributed to the character of Somerville. We need to look at models of housing that enable artists and entrepreneurs of all types to live and use business space in Somerville.
- Owner occupants: In order to create stable blocks where residents live together for more than a few years and residents can be assured of their housing stability, I believe we need to increase our percentage ownership or permanently affordable housing units. For this reason, any of the policy plans should have special accommodations for owner occupants. Also, if we do not limit new opportunities to owner occupants (e.g. development of accessory units), properties will become even more desirable and profitable to developers, who will almost always outbid owner occupants. If that happens, it will have the opposite effect on creating an affordable and stable housing market.
There are no easy answers to address the above-listed points of pain. Everything we do will require the best possible technical, legal, and analytical work. Equally important, it will require a community discussion in which people can share their stories and understand one-another’s needs, combined with a call to action from all corners. It will be hard, but if we don’t make these hard choices, our demographics will look like those of wealthier suburban neighbor communities within a decade or two.
Here are the tools we should explore and then implement in some form:
- Tax deferral: The City and State law currently permits residents who meet certain age and income requirements to delay paying their taxes at a 3 percent interest rate. Very few people, however, are aware of this program. I believe that we should carry out an aggressive advertisement of the program, such as by using a third-party company that can sign up interested residents. As part of tax bills, the City could send a statement on the estimated value of the home and annual appreciation (similar to a pension statement) so that residents are able to see how much their home will be worth at sale even after settling deferred taxes. The City should also work with local banks to create a loan program for owners who do not meet the age/income requirements so that they too may tap into their extraordinary gains in housing values. We should also explore offering owners an opportunity to permanently deed restrict their property (so that the property would become part of the inclusionary housing stock after they sold it or passed on) in exchange for tax forgiveness.
- Regulation of smaller developments: While larger, new developments need to pay for a number of community benefits (inclusionary housing, a proposed CBA and infrastructure payment), smaller developments and rehabs currently do not require owners to pay for any community benefits. I believe we need to regulate smaller developments and rehabs so that those developments are required to build (or pay into a fund to build) affordable housing and to contribute to community benefit funds. Some have proposed a higher inclusionary (IZ) housing percentage, which I support. However, I think it’s important to move increased regulation of the smaller developments forward in conjunction to any change in IZ percentages. If that doesn’t happen, I believe there will be increased pressure on speculative development activities that fall outside of the ones currently regulated by the inclusionary housing law. For example, I’m thinking of an old building of about 20 units where a lot of Somerville Public Schools students live. If/as the IZ percentage increases for new construction, it may create an incentive for developers to buy and gut rehab that building because current law doesn’t obligate them to build any affordable units. If/when that happens, all the low-income tenants will be displaced. There are a number of ways that the community benefit requirements could be applied to smaller development, and this should be spelled out in the code so as to leave no room for negotiation. They could be required to pay into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund according to an as-yet undetermined formula. Or, they could create one middle-income inclusionary housing unit, with a subsidy required that matches the payment to the Trust Fund. As mentioned above, with every new housing policy, owner occupants should be given special consideration. Thus, a resident owner of a triple decker should be able to renovate without payment into a community benefit fund.
- Implementation of Sustainable Neighborhood Working Group (SNWG) recommendations: The SNWG met for more than a year to hammer out detailed recommendations on affordability published in May of 2016. However, few of the report’s recommendation have been implemented. This is in part due to a lack of staffing in the housing office, which needs to change. Those recommendations include some of the ideas mentioned here, but also the following: work with universities so that they house their students, centralize our affordable housing waiting lists, create a housing assistance center (that would work to ensure landlords and tenants know rights and responsibilities, and to identify and track tenants at risk of displacement), and other ideas of varying level of difficulty to implement. The report had planned as a next step for a detailed implementation plan, however, we have heard little in terms of updates and progress made. We need a living, evolving plan that we pursue with urgency and for which we track and report on progress made.
- Right of First Refusal (ROFR) Program: The Sustainable Neighborhoods Working Group recommended that the City pursue a ROFR program. This program is modeled after Washington DC’s First Right program, and Rep Provost has currently proposed as a State law that would enable communities like Somerville to adopt the program without a home rule petition. The model permits tenants to have the first option to purchase their unit. Tenants can also assign their right to purchase to a third party, such as a non-profit developer or the city. That non-profit can use subsidies to develop the housing into limited equity ownership opportunities or permanently affordable rental units. The benefits of this program include: currently affordable units (that are below market rate because they are in older buildings) can remain affordable and tenants do not need to leave; middle- and even higher-income buyers have a better chance of purchasing a unit rather than competing with developers; it promotes ownership even for low- and moderate-income households; and it creates affordable units in traditional buildings and neighborhoods. Note that the program requires a source of local subsidy, such as more funding for the affordable housing trust fund from a transfer fee and/or payments from smaller developers.
- Community Stabilization or Transfer fee: I currently participate in a task force that is analyzing options for how to implement a community stabilization fee. This fee, if implemented, will require some sellers or buyers to pay a small percent of their total sales price into the Affordable Housing Trust Fund. That funding would then be used to support subsidies, such as those used for the 100 Homes program of for the creation of limited equity ownership opportunities through a First Right program. Much needs to be considered as this proposal gets reviewed. Property sales or transfers to family members will be need to be exempted. Also, many homeowners are very frustrated by fines and fees, and will be very opposed to a new fee. If the proposal moves forward, I believe we should enable owner occupants to waive or reduce their transfer fee payment if the property is sold to a current tenant, to an owner occupant or to a resident who earns less than the average income. Also, I believe that funding from the transfer fee should help pay for more senior housing and to help expand a low- or no-interest tax deferral program.
- Municipal marketplace: Another idea to explore in addition to the First Right program (or if that program proves too difficult to implement) is a municipal marketplace. The City or a third party non-profit developer would maintain a clearinghouse of residential properties in Somerville. If an owner sells via the marketplace, their transfer fee will be waived. Only owner occupants may purchase from the marketplace. This could be built into the functions of a housing assistance office and could also take over the sale and transfer of a future pipeline of deed restricted units.
- Producing of housing in the right places and at the right scale: The recent YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) advocacy has given voice to a new strand of housing activism. The YIMBY approach argues that because the region needs an additional 430,000 housing units to meet demand, we should discourage NIMBYism. NIMBYism stands for “Not in My BackYard” and it refers to when neighborhoods or communities shut out higher density housing. While I think this approach is an important perspective, it does need context and refinement. The voices of neighbors and abutters must always be considered. When we live in such close quarters, people feel very powerless when they have no influence over any major project (buildings, streets, parks, etc.) that’s just feet or yards away from their front porch. That said, I support higher density construction in the transformative districts, like Boynton Yards and the Inner Belt, where there are few residential neighbors. In all cases, higher density within the same building envelope should be tied to other benefits, often more affordable units and/or in some cases other community benefits, like shared public indoor or outdoor space. Also, we should consider the pros and cons of enabling development of some accessory units, such as basements and exterior buildings (garages, carriage houses) into living spaces. These, as well, should be granted with affordability incentives and only if the accessory or primary home can be designated as an enforceable car-free unit (see below). The development and use of accessory units should be limited to owner occupied properties. I don’t think that Somerville can take the burden of building too much more density, but if we can do higher density successfully and with community buy-in, it can help other communities see that smart growth can work.
- Car-free status: One of the key barriers to higher density is worries about increased parking and traffic congestion. I support the creation of a permanently “car-free” property status that would will owner occupants to develop accessory units without increasing car traffic and parking problems in neighborhoods. In a property that elects to adopt this status, current and future owners and tenants will be unable to acquire a parking permit, create a curb cut, or add pavement in their yards. City planners have said that legally this is possible.
- Live/work space & creative models: Artists and artisans are a critical part of our community. They do not make much money and often have special needs for workspace. Places like Brickbottom, Artisans Asylum, Greentown, and Canopy provide models of shared workspace. I believe we need to continue to test models of shared live and work spaces that meet the needs of artists and artisans, and others, like entrepreneurs and non-profit employees or managers.
- Air BnBs: While door knocking, many residents express frustrations with Air BnBs. They felt that the properties hurt the quality of life in the neighborhood. While renting a room or renting a whole property on occasion can help owner occupants pay their mortgage, I believe that we should prohibit whole-unit, not-owner-occupied AirBnB (or similar) rentals. Cambridge recently passed an ordinance that we can use as a model.
- Citywide zoning: The City currently is soliciting feedback on a zoning overhaul. The overhaul provides updates to the patchwork of amendments that makes up its current code. Once passed, it will require less scrutiny of some kinds of renovations and development projects, and more scrutiny of other types. Most importantly, however, it provides a superstructure onto which additional housing policies can be build using municipal code (under the jurisdiction of the Board of Aldermen) and City Policy. We need to give the proposed zoning a final round of careful critiques and reviews, and then move ahead so that additional rules can be added via zoning law, ordinances, and municipal policy.
- Neighborhood design and incentives for family friendly new housing models: I believe that we need to work hard at preserving affordability in our traditional neighborhoods, which I think are ideal for families with kids. I do think, though, that when new neighborhoods get designed, we need to plan intentionally for all walks of life in our new neighborhoods. When we build out a new neighborhood, like the Inner Belt, its housing and amenities should reflect the composition that we hope for the city, including people of different income levels, children, seniors, and people requiring supportive services. It should include ownership opportunities, and not just rental. Neighborhood amenities will need to include childcare, grocery stories, parks, and schools
- Advocacy for pressure on other communities: As we know, housing is a regional problem requiring solution at higher level of government. While YIMBY argues for building higher density locally, I believe we need a YIYBY (Yes in YOUR Backyard) strategy as well. We need our Governor and State legislature to take leadership in creating incentives and mandates so that higher income, suburban communities must build more high density housing. I will also continue to work on lobbying for changes to the State’s education accountability and funding formula. Both penalize communities that serve low-income families, rather than rewarding and providing more support to them, enforcing what amounts to an institutionalized classism and racism.
CONNECTIONS TO OTHER ISSUES: (Coming soon for some issues...):
- Transit: As mentioned above, creating parking for new development adds to the cost of units. While many households do need a car, some can go without or with one fewer if they have good transit and employment within reach of the transit. There does, though, need to be an enforcement mechanism. Go to the LIVABLE STREETS section for more ideas related to transit.
- Community safety net: Housing is part of a household’s total cost burden. While we work on the cost of housing, we can also address the other household costs, such as transit, out-of-school time, and city fines/fees. Go to COMMUNITY INSTIUTIONS, SAFETY NET, AND CONNECTIONS for more ideas (coming soon!).
- Transparency: Residents have expressed a lot of frustration with the decision made by the Planning Board in the Federal Reality IZ waiver case. I believe that we need to revamp the City’s powerful boards, including their scope, appointment process, and methods of soliciting public comment. If elected, I will work with the administration and colleagues to launch a process to review the boards. In the meantime, however, the Board of Alderman approves candidates for Boards, and I will use that authority to work with colleagues to vet candidates in a transparent and rigorous process. Go to the TRANSPARENCY, DATA, AND EMPOWERING NEIGHBORHOODS section for more thoughts.
- Open space: Thoughtfully designed open space can relieve the need for private open space. As we build out areas like Union Square, we can think about how open space affects the design of neighboring housing. See OPEN SPACE for more thoughts.
Small carbon footprint: Energy efficient, small households with one or no cars have a small carbon footprint at the same time that they are more affordable. See ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES for more thoughts (coming soon!) - Empathy and community building: Implementing these and other policy initiatives requires a community conversation. Some require sacrifices. We need to continue to build relationships and exchange stories that help us make decisions together. Go to the TRANSPARENCY, DATA, AND EMPOWERING NEIGHBORHOODS section for more thoughts.
- Employment and business development: Having access to stable employment, particularly in close proximity to Somerville, helps households pay for housing costs. We need to support small businesses and non-profits such as by subsidizing their business AND personal household costs. Municipal employees also should have access to special housing programs. See BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT ISSUES for more thoughts. (coming soon!)
WITH APPRECIATION:
The following people provided feedback on and additions to these policy ideas. Fred Berman, Alex Bob, Cory Mian, and David Tisel. In addition, Canopy.City hosted a brainstorming session on housing preferences and models. Ideas from attendees of that meeting helped inform these policy goals.
Wednesday, October 4, 2017
Affordability Forum Questionnaire Responses
Please find below complete answers to a questionnaire regarding affordability for an upcoming candidate forum sponsored by the Affordable Housing Organizing Committee (AHOC), the Union United Coalition, and the Winter Hill Neighborhood Association on Tuesday October 10th, at Warehouse XI in Union Square (11 Sanborn Court). Doors will open at 6 pm, and the event itself will begin at 6:30 pm and run until 8:30pm.
1. The Board of Aldermen is about to consider a new draft of the Administration’s citywide zoning proposal. How can the zoning ensure that residents have a greater say in development in our neighborhoods? What concerns have you had with prior drafts? What changes will you push for in the current draft?
Here are a guiding principles on how I’ll evaluate zoning. As I’ve been door knocking, I have heard about both the desperate need for housing and anxiety about changing neighborhoods due to development. I believe that zoning and our community need to try to balance those tensions. A third issue that has roiled the community is a sense that we can’t trust our powerful boards to make decisions in the best interest of the community. Our new zoning needs to provide more transparency so we can make key decisions about trade-offs as a community. Finally, it’s important to note that the zoning is just one set of rules that shape our future. Municipal and traffic ordinances, administrative policy, and other tools also matter, so we must monitor design and rollout of each, making course corrections as we go. My goals include:
2) Every ward has at least one lot that has been vacant for years. What steps will you take to ensure that these sites are finally developed, and that their development meets the needs of current residents?
As I’ve been door knocking, residents have expressed a great deal of frustration with stalled development at sites like “the hole of Teele Square”, the Cobble Hill plaza, and the notorious Star Market site in Winter Hill. Each location has its issues. I’ve checked with the City, and the Teele Square site has given the City some new proposals, but all ask for more units than permitted in zoning law. At Cobble Hill, there is a legal fight underway between owners, which has contributed to delay. The original project approval has expired. While awaiting any action, the City can monitor the sites for code violations and residents can organize to put pressure on the owners to move forward.
For any site – in particular at present Star Market -- the last-ditch step is for the City to develop an urban revitalization plan that builds off of a neighborhood plan. The City can take this site by eminent domain and find a developer that can build based on the Winter Hill neighborhood plan. People worry about the whether or not eminent domain is the right thing to do, but it’s an important tool I believe to have available for use sometimes. However, if the City takes the property by eminent domain, work going forward must be scrutinized extra carefully to make sure it leads to significant public benefits, to justify the legal/admin cost to the City, the moral weight of taking property expressly for community benefit, and the cost to the prior property owners.
Other possible strategies include: changing the zoning to allow for higher density, helping with infrastructure, providing technical assistance, or subsidizing environmental remediation (or seeking grants to do so). Some of these approaches come with their own dilemmas.
3) Do you support increasing the inclusionary zoning rate from 20% to 25% or higher? Please explain your answer.
I would support increasing the inclusionary housing rate, however, I believe it needs to be done in conjunction with other strategies. First, I think it needs to happen in combination with adding new requirements for developers of smaller properties. Also, the IZ rate should, explicitly apply to rehab (currently, it’s unclear). Without adding these two elements, I believe that development pressure and funds will shift to rehabs and smaller properties. I often think about an older, 20-unit building that’s right across from a park and close to a grocery store and schools. It houses many families I know. Its rent is below market because it’s an older building with no new amenities. I’m very worried that this building will be purchased and undergo a gut rehab, therefore displacing all residents and effectively eliminating 20 units of affordable, family-friendly housing.
Also, in general, I think that our community, activists, and City staff and elected officials only have so much bandwidth as to what issues we can take on. I want to be sure we are taking on the highest-impact ones. We can look at publicly available assessing data and cross-reference it to other data to see which approach has the biggest impact on reducing displacement and on slowing speculative buying/flipping.
4) Do you support the creation of a City Office of Housing Stability or a position in the City’s Housing Division to inform tenants and landlords of their rights and responsibilities, to facilitate resolution of landlord/tenant disputes, to help tenants and homeowners at risk of displacement, and to maintain data on displacement? Why or why not?
Yes!! This is an issue that has weighed very heavily on my mind over the years. The very carefully developed Sustainable Neighborhood Working Group report was issued in December of 2016, almost two years ago, and the City’s housing department has had trouble implementing many of the recommendations, such as consolidation of the affordable housing wait list. I believe this is largely because they have very, very few staff. Also, they also have significant operational work to do, such as running lotteries. I would like to see staff added to:
5-A) Condo conversion is a major factor in increasing rents and home sale prices. Which of the following steps do you support to help address the impact on tenants?
(a) Eliminating the City’s existing condo conversion ordinance and defaulting to the State law
(b) Revising the City ordinance to increase the amount of relocation and notice time that tenants are given to the maximum allowed by State law
(c) Revising the City ordinance to increase the amount of financial relocation assistance that must be given to tenants to the maximum allowed by State law
(d) Revising the City ordinance to require owners to provide more advance notice about condo conversion to tenants and the City, including for buildings with two or three units, that are not covered by the State law. 5-B) Explain why you chose the items you did in question 5-A, and what other steps you would propose:
I do not believe we should focus on revisions to the condo conversion ordinance but, instead, we should focus on implementing the right of first refusal (ROFR) initiative. I believe that condo conversions should be treated as property transfers and thus ROFR rules should apply to those as well. I am worried that focusing on the condo conversion will divert attention and exhaust political energy with less results, as it has, I believe in the past year.
I support the ROFR proposal put forward by Rep Provost, recommended by the SNWG, and piloted in DC. A program like this will help preserve housing in traditional neighborhoods, support both low- and middle-income buyers, create opportunities for ownership, and reduce the speculative buying that residents are finding so unsettling. As the proposal gets refined, I believe we need to pay special attention to the timeline of how quickly the tenant (or their designee) has to make an offer. This issue was flagged as the most hard to handle for sellers and realtors. I believe this can be helped by crating short-term financing strategies and by enabling third party non-profits to hold the property until a tenant association can be formed and/or longer-term financing secured.
6-A) The deal the Administration made with Federal Realty, which allowed them to avoid their obligations under the new Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance and to provide cash in lieu of onsite affordable housing, set a precedent. Should the new zoning allow the "cash in lieu of affordable units" option? Yes, cash in lieu of onsite units should be allowed in the new zoning. No, cash in lieu of onsite units should not be allowed in the new zoning. 6-B) If cash in lieu of on-site units is an allowed practice, which of the following should be used to set the payment? (a) Yes, cash in lieu is acceptable if it creates substantially more affordable units than would have otherwise been required. b) Yes, cash in lieu is acceptable if it create units with substantially deeper affordability than would be required in onsite units. c) Yes, cash in lieu is acceptable if it creates substantially more 3-bedroom or larger family-size units than would be required onsite. (d) No, cash in lieu is never an acceptable practice.
I support a, b, and c and, in general, funding for off-site unit for the following reasons. I know that this is a point of disagreement for many who share a passionate support for the goal of affordability. With such limited sources of subsidy, it’s really a discussion for the community to decide where to us scarce resources. I welcome the discussion and perhaps will change my view, but believe that first I’d need to see a thoughtful study of the needs and wishes of families (and seniors, people with disabilities), strategies to preserve housing in our traditional neighborhoods, and ways to make the newer neighborhoods more family friendly.
My top concern with affordability is housing for families. I think families are in a special position for these reasons: Kids are almost twice as likely to be living in poverty than the rest of our population, they are more dependent on City services since moving involves a tremendously disruptive change of schools (a kid’s whole world at that age!), they have special housing needs, and they face major housing discrimination. Without subsidy, there will be zero affordable housing units on most traditional blocks perhaps within a decade. The families I have spoken to consider it to be a better, easier, and safer place to raise kids in the older blocks, where housing built 100 years ago got designed kids in mind. Also, paying into a fund enables the possibility of crating limited equity ownership opportunities and of having existing tenants at risk of displacement turn into owners (such as in the 20-unit property I’ve described). I believe a non-profit developer like SCC could work with the school system to identify properties that have multiple SPS families and then target those for acquisition and conversion to limit equity ownership or permanently affordable rentals. Finally, some local sources of funding, which I believe may be applicable in this case, provide more flexibility, while state or federal funding comes with many more restrictions on who can live in the unit and sometimes prevents giving Somerville residents first priority. That leads to pretty heart-breaking situations. It happens too often that a Somerville family who is homeless and in temporary housing in Boston and has kids bussed to their Somerville school, doesn’t get a unit. When a new unit opens, a family from Boston may get a unit, while the Somerville family remains homeless. The same situation can happen in the reverse for the Boston family, and both families ultimately need to transfer districts.
That said, I believe that as we design new neighborhoods in transformation al districts, like Assembly Square, Boynton Yards, Union, Inner Belt, and others, we should be looking to build new family-friendly housing and neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods should have the services families want, like new schools, parks, grocery stories, and childcare. We will, though, need to look at new models of subsidy for big projects and purpose-built housing. Our goal, I think, should be at last 1/3 each of low-income, middle-income, and market rate for family friendly housing and neighborhoods. I believe that programs like 40R and 40B may be worth investigating, though they come with some trade-offs as well.
7-A) In 2011, the Mayor threatened to veto an ordinance that would require developers who have contracts with the City or receive City assistance with development costs to hire a specified percentage (or more) of their workforce from the local population. If such an ordinance were to come up again, would you support it? 7-B) Please explain your answer about such an Ordinance requiring a minimum percentage of Somerville workers.
I would support it, though I would like to look at the details. I do think there’s a risk of tying employment to residency (such as for labor contracts), especially in such an expensive real estate market. I believe that any employee who needs to move shouldn’t lose their job because of changes in their municipality.
8) How do your respective track records in addressing development and affordable housing issues set you and your opponent(s) apart?
I have spent the 25 years of my professional life in anti-poverty and community development efforts. In my 20s, I worked in direct service in non-profits in North Philadelphia and rural Georgia. Seeing how local government systems had failed people and prevented them from becoming providers for their families and community, I resolved to spend my life trying to fix the brokenness of government systems. I studied statistics and finance at Harvard and the University of Chicago, and then went on to work to improve child welfare with NYC and reduce youth violence with the Boston Police Department. Working for the City of Somerville and its schools, I started SomerStat, ResiStat, 311, SomerPromise, and the City/District’s Children’s Cabinet. I worked with Code for America to spearheaded creation of a tool and intervention process that helps kids get more of what they need to do well.
Though I think I accomplished a lot, there’s so much more to do. I can see the faces of kids who fell through the cracks while I was working for the City and Schools and living in Somerville. Every other week I learn of one of my kids’ classmates who needs to move to Everett, Chelsea, or Lynn. I wasn’t able to figure out how to help in my prior roles. I am running to try to do more, to work with other residents to mobilize to address affordability, to increase investment in community institutions, and to improve life outcomes. Personally, I have spent thousands of hours with kids and families (like volunteering to run after school programs and a before-school gym program for ELL students who take the bus each morning), and trying to help many, many families find housing. I want to do so much more. Every day I am reduced to tears at a story I hear. The issues are so complex and hard to fix, I believe we need the best tools available —ones that will set a precedent for regional and national problems. I think my knowledge of how the City works, my strong will, and my deep knowledge of people’s experiences and needs will help me take on the biggest problems to identify ground-breaking solutions. Note that I have pledged to not accept donations from developers, because the stakes are so high, and there should be nothing interfering with trust in the public process and a clear view of priorities.
9) We are in the midst of an affordable housing crisis in Somerville. What are the first 2-3 steps you will take as Alderman to make Somerville more affordable? What have you done to address the crisis in the past 2-3 years?
Relief for seniors: I will do all I can to (respectfully, but relentlessly) pressure the city to reach each household with the offer of a tax deferral. We need to figure out how to address the needs of our long-time homeowners in conjunction with thinking about a transfer fee. Note that the 2016 Special Senate Committee on Housing report introduces a concept called property tax relief and municipal right of first refusal that could work in Somerville. The proposal suggests giving older residents property tax relief if the resident gives a right of first refusal agreement with the city. (In another scenario, the owner could have a reverse mortgage with the city or a non-profit developer so that some of the equity gradually gets transferred). This could help create a pipeline for the 100 home program and could help take properties off the speculative market.
Organizing tool kit: I will work with activists and community groups to think about a complete tool kit of activism at the local level. I will help the people I’ve met to connect to one another. This includes people in the immigrant households, where sometimes only one person may be able to vote, but 10 people live in the home and have ideas about what can and should happen here. I believe we can think of a rapid response approach to help us act on the different drivers of affordability, such as pressure on Tufts to come up with a master plan that results in more students housed on campus, help for Rep Provost with getting the proposed RORF enabling legislation moved forward, volunteering to inventory vulnerable small businesses, and weighing in on budget hearings. We can produce our own statistics on displacement and display them on places, ranging from billboards to websites. We can produce can annual report and report card.
Zoning: I will read the proposed citywide zoning line by line to try to understand how it impacts affordability. I will meet with stakeholders to get their views.
11-A) Do you support the Administration’s proposal for a Community Benefits Ordinance? 11-B) Please explain why you do or do not support the Administration’s proposal for a Community Benefits Ordinance. What changes, if any, in the proposed Ordinance would you like to see?
I believe that the 1,000s of hours of work of people involved in the Union Square Neighborhood Council has been long, arduous, and very important. They are getting close to a second neighborhood vote on a proposed design for the council. I think we as a city can learn from this ground-breaking effort and then look at the proposal for the CBO after that. Among the issues that have been raised are:
12-A) The State Legislature enacted a Home Rule petition over a year ago allowing the City to assess commercial developers with a linkage fee that would help fund a local jobs training and job placement assistance program. A nexus study has been conducted to calculate the appropriate amount of such a fee. Will you actively support prompt passage of an amendment to the zoning to ensure that regardless of the outcome of the City's comprehensive rezoning effort, commercial developers must comply with a jobs linkage requirement? 12-B) Please explain why you do or do not support prompt passage of jobs linkage legislation, regardless of the outcome of the City's proposal for comprehensive zoning reform.
I support a linkage fee. I do recognize the need for more commercial development so think that any new obligations imposed on commercial developers need to be weighed against the need for revenue (as well as daytime traffic for other small businesses). Somerville continues to be one of the lowest per capita revenue generators in the state. State aid has fallen dramatically, along with some federal, like CDBG. Between 2004 and 2016, our revenue from the state fell by 6%, in part because of our rising property values and changing mix of student enrollment. Everett, in contrast, increased by 167% or $46 million. Expenses have continued to rise, including fixed expenses like pensions and spending on backlogged issues, like capital projects or small increases to departmental budgets that jut fill small gaps. We haven’t been able to dramatically increase commercial development because our transformative areas (like inner belt) don’t have the infrastructure.
As a result, Somerville continues to be among the poorest communities on a per capita basis. Between 2004 and 2016, Somerville’s total revenue has increased by only 38%. Cambridge’s increase, meanwhile, was 72%. In that time period their revenue rose by $240 million, which is more than all of Somerville’s budget – Cambridge now has almost three times our revenue.
Municipal revenue pays for the very long list of needs, including expansion of our housing office, staff who can support small businesses, out-of-school programming that can help take the stress off of families who are living in doubled up housing.
1. The Board of Aldermen is about to consider a new draft of the Administration’s citywide zoning proposal. How can the zoning ensure that residents have a greater say in development in our neighborhoods? What concerns have you had with prior drafts? What changes will you push for in the current draft?
Here are a guiding principles on how I’ll evaluate zoning. As I’ve been door knocking, I have heard about both the desperate need for housing and anxiety about changing neighborhoods due to development. I believe that zoning and our community need to try to balance those tensions. A third issue that has roiled the community is a sense that we can’t trust our powerful boards to make decisions in the best interest of the community. Our new zoning needs to provide more transparency so we can make key decisions about trade-offs as a community. Finally, it’s important to note that the zoning is just one set of rules that shape our future. Municipal and traffic ordinances, administrative policy, and other tools also matter, so we must monitor design and rollout of each, making course corrections as we go. My goals include:
- Create better ways to collect public comment/process (discussed in zoning section 15);
- Have at least some IZ and community benefit requirements apply to rehab and to non-resident investors that renovate and resell multi-families and small apartment buildings (Section 13);
- Create a permanently car-free property status with enforcement mechanisms to reduce cost/increase density without increasing parking problems (Section 12);
- Tie density bonuses to benefits like affordability and civic space (Sections 9 and 13);
- Allow units to be smaller, especially if they can accommodate families, such as with small bedrooms and shared public indoor and outdoor spaces (Section 9);
- Require a certain portion of new housing development to include family-sized units (though I understand this may not be legal);
- Regulate non-owner occupied short-term rentals;
- Provide some kind of bonus or incentive if commercial owners creates permanently affordable commercial rents and/or provide leases to minority/women owned businesses;
- Consider the right level of SF for that triggers the commercial linkage payment, and tie linkage fee rates to CPI or a construction cost index, so linkage fee can increase without new nexus study every few years; and
- Consider down-zoning in residential - areas to reduce speculation.
2) Every ward has at least one lot that has been vacant for years. What steps will you take to ensure that these sites are finally developed, and that their development meets the needs of current residents?
As I’ve been door knocking, residents have expressed a great deal of frustration with stalled development at sites like “the hole of Teele Square”, the Cobble Hill plaza, and the notorious Star Market site in Winter Hill. Each location has its issues. I’ve checked with the City, and the Teele Square site has given the City some new proposals, but all ask for more units than permitted in zoning law. At Cobble Hill, there is a legal fight underway between owners, which has contributed to delay. The original project approval has expired. While awaiting any action, the City can monitor the sites for code violations and residents can organize to put pressure on the owners to move forward.
For any site – in particular at present Star Market -- the last-ditch step is for the City to develop an urban revitalization plan that builds off of a neighborhood plan. The City can take this site by eminent domain and find a developer that can build based on the Winter Hill neighborhood plan. People worry about the whether or not eminent domain is the right thing to do, but it’s an important tool I believe to have available for use sometimes. However, if the City takes the property by eminent domain, work going forward must be scrutinized extra carefully to make sure it leads to significant public benefits, to justify the legal/admin cost to the City, the moral weight of taking property expressly for community benefit, and the cost to the prior property owners.
Other possible strategies include: changing the zoning to allow for higher density, helping with infrastructure, providing technical assistance, or subsidizing environmental remediation (or seeking grants to do so). Some of these approaches come with their own dilemmas.
3) Do you support increasing the inclusionary zoning rate from 20% to 25% or higher? Please explain your answer.
I would support increasing the inclusionary housing rate, however, I believe it needs to be done in conjunction with other strategies. First, I think it needs to happen in combination with adding new requirements for developers of smaller properties. Also, the IZ rate should, explicitly apply to rehab (currently, it’s unclear). Without adding these two elements, I believe that development pressure and funds will shift to rehabs and smaller properties. I often think about an older, 20-unit building that’s right across from a park and close to a grocery store and schools. It houses many families I know. Its rent is below market because it’s an older building with no new amenities. I’m very worried that this building will be purchased and undergo a gut rehab, therefore displacing all residents and effectively eliminating 20 units of affordable, family-friendly housing.
Also, in general, I think that our community, activists, and City staff and elected officials only have so much bandwidth as to what issues we can take on. I want to be sure we are taking on the highest-impact ones. We can look at publicly available assessing data and cross-reference it to other data to see which approach has the biggest impact on reducing displacement and on slowing speculative buying/flipping.
4) Do you support the creation of a City Office of Housing Stability or a position in the City’s Housing Division to inform tenants and landlords of their rights and responsibilities, to facilitate resolution of landlord/tenant disputes, to help tenants and homeowners at risk of displacement, and to maintain data on displacement? Why or why not?
Yes!! This is an issue that has weighed very heavily on my mind over the years. The very carefully developed Sustainable Neighborhood Working Group report was issued in December of 2016, almost two years ago, and the City’s housing department has had trouble implementing many of the recommendations, such as consolidation of the affordable housing wait list. I believe this is largely because they have very, very few staff. Also, they also have significant operational work to do, such as running lotteries. I would like to see staff added to:
- Meet with each senior owner to help them access the deferred tax programs and, if interested, to help them restructure ownership of multi-families to transfer ownership to adult family members. Many of the kids in our school system live with their parents and older grandparents. Their future in Somerville is uncertain. If the older generation sells, the assets gets split among siblings and then the middle and younger generation needs to move. I have heard about this happening so many times.
- Meet with each Somerville family with kids to develop a housing plan. This could be done in schools, working with school staff as well. It is so needed for low-income families and for middle-income families. The middle-income ones may just need advice and technical assistance, while the lower income ones other resources.
- Implement the SNWG recommendations and any new policy initiatives, track and report on displacement of individuals (and perhaps small businesses), and allow for better real-time problem solving.
5-A) Condo conversion is a major factor in increasing rents and home sale prices. Which of the following steps do you support to help address the impact on tenants?
(a) Eliminating the City’s existing condo conversion ordinance and defaulting to the State law
(b) Revising the City ordinance to increase the amount of relocation and notice time that tenants are given to the maximum allowed by State law
(c) Revising the City ordinance to increase the amount of financial relocation assistance that must be given to tenants to the maximum allowed by State law
(d) Revising the City ordinance to require owners to provide more advance notice about condo conversion to tenants and the City, including for buildings with two or three units, that are not covered by the State law. 5-B) Explain why you chose the items you did in question 5-A, and what other steps you would propose:
I do not believe we should focus on revisions to the condo conversion ordinance but, instead, we should focus on implementing the right of first refusal (ROFR) initiative. I believe that condo conversions should be treated as property transfers and thus ROFR rules should apply to those as well. I am worried that focusing on the condo conversion will divert attention and exhaust political energy with less results, as it has, I believe in the past year.
I support the ROFR proposal put forward by Rep Provost, recommended by the SNWG, and piloted in DC. A program like this will help preserve housing in traditional neighborhoods, support both low- and middle-income buyers, create opportunities for ownership, and reduce the speculative buying that residents are finding so unsettling. As the proposal gets refined, I believe we need to pay special attention to the timeline of how quickly the tenant (or their designee) has to make an offer. This issue was flagged as the most hard to handle for sellers and realtors. I believe this can be helped by crating short-term financing strategies and by enabling third party non-profits to hold the property until a tenant association can be formed and/or longer-term financing secured.
6-A) The deal the Administration made with Federal Realty, which allowed them to avoid their obligations under the new Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance and to provide cash in lieu of onsite affordable housing, set a precedent. Should the new zoning allow the "cash in lieu of affordable units" option? Yes, cash in lieu of onsite units should be allowed in the new zoning. No, cash in lieu of onsite units should not be allowed in the new zoning. 6-B) If cash in lieu of on-site units is an allowed practice, which of the following should be used to set the payment? (a) Yes, cash in lieu is acceptable if it creates substantially more affordable units than would have otherwise been required. b) Yes, cash in lieu is acceptable if it create units with substantially deeper affordability than would be required in onsite units. c) Yes, cash in lieu is acceptable if it creates substantially more 3-bedroom or larger family-size units than would be required onsite. (d) No, cash in lieu is never an acceptable practice.
I support a, b, and c and, in general, funding for off-site unit for the following reasons. I know that this is a point of disagreement for many who share a passionate support for the goal of affordability. With such limited sources of subsidy, it’s really a discussion for the community to decide where to us scarce resources. I welcome the discussion and perhaps will change my view, but believe that first I’d need to see a thoughtful study of the needs and wishes of families (and seniors, people with disabilities), strategies to preserve housing in our traditional neighborhoods, and ways to make the newer neighborhoods more family friendly.
My top concern with affordability is housing for families. I think families are in a special position for these reasons: Kids are almost twice as likely to be living in poverty than the rest of our population, they are more dependent on City services since moving involves a tremendously disruptive change of schools (a kid’s whole world at that age!), they have special housing needs, and they face major housing discrimination. Without subsidy, there will be zero affordable housing units on most traditional blocks perhaps within a decade. The families I have spoken to consider it to be a better, easier, and safer place to raise kids in the older blocks, where housing built 100 years ago got designed kids in mind. Also, paying into a fund enables the possibility of crating limited equity ownership opportunities and of having existing tenants at risk of displacement turn into owners (such as in the 20-unit property I’ve described). I believe a non-profit developer like SCC could work with the school system to identify properties that have multiple SPS families and then target those for acquisition and conversion to limit equity ownership or permanently affordable rentals. Finally, some local sources of funding, which I believe may be applicable in this case, provide more flexibility, while state or federal funding comes with many more restrictions on who can live in the unit and sometimes prevents giving Somerville residents first priority. That leads to pretty heart-breaking situations. It happens too often that a Somerville family who is homeless and in temporary housing in Boston and has kids bussed to their Somerville school, doesn’t get a unit. When a new unit opens, a family from Boston may get a unit, while the Somerville family remains homeless. The same situation can happen in the reverse for the Boston family, and both families ultimately need to transfer districts.
That said, I believe that as we design new neighborhoods in transformation al districts, like Assembly Square, Boynton Yards, Union, Inner Belt, and others, we should be looking to build new family-friendly housing and neighborhoods. Those neighborhoods should have the services families want, like new schools, parks, grocery stories, and childcare. We will, though, need to look at new models of subsidy for big projects and purpose-built housing. Our goal, I think, should be at last 1/3 each of low-income, middle-income, and market rate for family friendly housing and neighborhoods. I believe that programs like 40R and 40B may be worth investigating, though they come with some trade-offs as well.
7-A) In 2011, the Mayor threatened to veto an ordinance that would require developers who have contracts with the City or receive City assistance with development costs to hire a specified percentage (or more) of their workforce from the local population. If such an ordinance were to come up again, would you support it? 7-B) Please explain your answer about such an Ordinance requiring a minimum percentage of Somerville workers.
I would support it, though I would like to look at the details. I do think there’s a risk of tying employment to residency (such as for labor contracts), especially in such an expensive real estate market. I believe that any employee who needs to move shouldn’t lose their job because of changes in their municipality.
8) How do your respective track records in addressing development and affordable housing issues set you and your opponent(s) apart?
I have spent the 25 years of my professional life in anti-poverty and community development efforts. In my 20s, I worked in direct service in non-profits in North Philadelphia and rural Georgia. Seeing how local government systems had failed people and prevented them from becoming providers for their families and community, I resolved to spend my life trying to fix the brokenness of government systems. I studied statistics and finance at Harvard and the University of Chicago, and then went on to work to improve child welfare with NYC and reduce youth violence with the Boston Police Department. Working for the City of Somerville and its schools, I started SomerStat, ResiStat, 311, SomerPromise, and the City/District’s Children’s Cabinet. I worked with Code for America to spearheaded creation of a tool and intervention process that helps kids get more of what they need to do well.
Though I think I accomplished a lot, there’s so much more to do. I can see the faces of kids who fell through the cracks while I was working for the City and Schools and living in Somerville. Every other week I learn of one of my kids’ classmates who needs to move to Everett, Chelsea, or Lynn. I wasn’t able to figure out how to help in my prior roles. I am running to try to do more, to work with other residents to mobilize to address affordability, to increase investment in community institutions, and to improve life outcomes. Personally, I have spent thousands of hours with kids and families (like volunteering to run after school programs and a before-school gym program for ELL students who take the bus each morning), and trying to help many, many families find housing. I want to do so much more. Every day I am reduced to tears at a story I hear. The issues are so complex and hard to fix, I believe we need the best tools available —ones that will set a precedent for regional and national problems. I think my knowledge of how the City works, my strong will, and my deep knowledge of people’s experiences and needs will help me take on the biggest problems to identify ground-breaking solutions. Note that I have pledged to not accept donations from developers, because the stakes are so high, and there should be nothing interfering with trust in the public process and a clear view of priorities.
9) We are in the midst of an affordable housing crisis in Somerville. What are the first 2-3 steps you will take as Alderman to make Somerville more affordable? What have you done to address the crisis in the past 2-3 years?
Relief for seniors: I will do all I can to (respectfully, but relentlessly) pressure the city to reach each household with the offer of a tax deferral. We need to figure out how to address the needs of our long-time homeowners in conjunction with thinking about a transfer fee. Note that the 2016 Special Senate Committee on Housing report introduces a concept called property tax relief and municipal right of first refusal that could work in Somerville. The proposal suggests giving older residents property tax relief if the resident gives a right of first refusal agreement with the city. (In another scenario, the owner could have a reverse mortgage with the city or a non-profit developer so that some of the equity gradually gets transferred). This could help create a pipeline for the 100 home program and could help take properties off the speculative market.
Organizing tool kit: I will work with activists and community groups to think about a complete tool kit of activism at the local level. I will help the people I’ve met to connect to one another. This includes people in the immigrant households, where sometimes only one person may be able to vote, but 10 people live in the home and have ideas about what can and should happen here. I believe we can think of a rapid response approach to help us act on the different drivers of affordability, such as pressure on Tufts to come up with a master plan that results in more students housed on campus, help for Rep Provost with getting the proposed RORF enabling legislation moved forward, volunteering to inventory vulnerable small businesses, and weighing in on budget hearings. We can produce our own statistics on displacement and display them on places, ranging from billboards to websites. We can produce can annual report and report card.
Zoning: I will read the proposed citywide zoning line by line to try to understand how it impacts affordability. I will meet with stakeholders to get their views.
11-A) Do you support the Administration’s proposal for a Community Benefits Ordinance? 11-B) Please explain why you do or do not support the Administration’s proposal for a Community Benefits Ordinance. What changes, if any, in the proposed Ordinance would you like to see?
I believe that the 1,000s of hours of work of people involved in the Union Square Neighborhood Council has been long, arduous, and very important. They are getting close to a second neighborhood vote on a proposed design for the council. I think we as a city can learn from this ground-breaking effort and then look at the proposal for the CBO after that. Among the issues that have been raised are:
- How do we make sure a new group represents the neighborhood?
- How do make sure it represents the needs of people who have typically been less active in local politics for different reasons
- What are the boundaries and should neighborhood councils be not overlapping, but covering the whole city?
- What’s its relationship to the City?
12-A) The State Legislature enacted a Home Rule petition over a year ago allowing the City to assess commercial developers with a linkage fee that would help fund a local jobs training and job placement assistance program. A nexus study has been conducted to calculate the appropriate amount of such a fee. Will you actively support prompt passage of an amendment to the zoning to ensure that regardless of the outcome of the City's comprehensive rezoning effort, commercial developers must comply with a jobs linkage requirement? 12-B) Please explain why you do or do not support prompt passage of jobs linkage legislation, regardless of the outcome of the City's proposal for comprehensive zoning reform.
I support a linkage fee. I do recognize the need for more commercial development so think that any new obligations imposed on commercial developers need to be weighed against the need for revenue (as well as daytime traffic for other small businesses). Somerville continues to be one of the lowest per capita revenue generators in the state. State aid has fallen dramatically, along with some federal, like CDBG. Between 2004 and 2016, our revenue from the state fell by 6%, in part because of our rising property values and changing mix of student enrollment. Everett, in contrast, increased by 167% or $46 million. Expenses have continued to rise, including fixed expenses like pensions and spending on backlogged issues, like capital projects or small increases to departmental budgets that jut fill small gaps. We haven’t been able to dramatically increase commercial development because our transformative areas (like inner belt) don’t have the infrastructure.
As a result, Somerville continues to be among the poorest communities on a per capita basis. Between 2004 and 2016, Somerville’s total revenue has increased by only 38%. Cambridge’s increase, meanwhile, was 72%. In that time period their revenue rose by $240 million, which is more than all of Somerville’s budget – Cambridge now has almost three times our revenue.
Municipal revenue pays for the very long list of needs, including expansion of our housing office, staff who can support small businesses, out-of-school programming that can help take the stress off of families who are living in doubled up housing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)