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.
No comments:
Post a Comment