All About Chapter 40B

One of the most critical, and least understood, aspects of housing in Massachusetts is Chapter 40B. While the Massachusetts Democratic Party supports the positive and intended aspects of 40B to promote affordable housing accross the Commonwealth, we strongly oppose the exploitation of 40B by big developers who, in looking to increase their bottom line, use the law to hold our towns and cities hostage.

Governor Romney on the other hand, ever since he ran for office in 2002, has failed to take a side on Chapter 40B.

October 2003 State House News
Gov. Romney vetoed legislation that would slash hundreds of dollars from residential tax bills in Cambridge. The purpose of the legislation, which was co-sponsored by Senate President Robert Travaglini, was to reduce the tax bills of more than half of the city's 20,000 properties. The legislation would have cut between $68 and $328 from annual property tax bills. The bill had quickly received Legislative approval, but Romney put a halt to that. Gov. Romney opposed the bill, saying it would shift more of the local tax burden onto properties with higher assessments, including apartment buildings. Romney argued that it "makes it even more difficult and costly for lower-income families to secure affordable rental housing."

The governor's argument masks the reality of the legislation, said Sen. Jarrett Barrios. The bill is intended to shift higher taxes to the wealthiest homeowners, while the average Cambridge homeowner would save money. He said the governor "is protecting multimillionaire homes" at the expense of lower-income homeowners.
"Romney is socking it to the elderly, working class residents of Cambridge to help his wealthy campaign donors, whose million-dollar homes on Brattle Street are going to bear a larger share - and I believe a fairer share - of the city's property taxes," Barrios said.

September 2003
Gov. Romney presented a $125 million job-creation and affordable housing proposal - minus the actual legislation - which he says will strengthen the state's economy. The governor's presentation occurred just hours before the Senate began its public hearings on a plan proposed last summer by House Speaker Tom Finneran. The Speaker's plan, which has already received approval by the House, includes the use of $110 million from the state's $475 million tobacco trust fund to encourage investment and redevelopment.

March 2003
Douglas Foy, the state's development secretary, said he is intrigued by the concept of shifting responsibility for building affordable housing from cities and towns to regions, noting that a wealthy community (read: Belmont) might provide funds to a larger community (read: less affluent) with more affordable land. Gov. Romney's plan would siphon $50 million from local aid payments to cities and towns to create a special fund that would reward those communities that encourage new housing. The governor said the goal was "to provide communities with additional funds to offset infrastructure and education expenses associated with a growing population." However, those expenses are "systematically" overstated, according to a report by the University of Massachusetts and the Citizens Housing and Planning Association, an affordable housing advocacy group.

Add that Sen. Harriette Chandlder, chair of the Senate housing committee, wondered: "What about the cities and towns that don't have the opportunity to build more housing because they're already built up? We have old cities and towns. Do they have the opportunity to receive the [money] too?"

Foy said the state needs to have an aggressive housing plan in place, but the Department of Housing and Community Development budget is about half of what it was two years ago. Gov. Romney also proposed to slash $20 million for the affordable housing trust fund. In addition, he eliminated $4 million in subsidies to public housing authorities, which hurts the poorest tenants in the state.

July 2002 Boston Globe
Then gubernatorial candidate Mitt Romney unveiled a housing plan which was short on specifics, admitting that his ideas required much greater study before implementation. One of the proposals contained in his plan would be a surcharge to developers who want to build on open space. That money would be directed into a fund to be used for creating affordable housing in existing neighborhoods. However, some people question whether a surcharge will be an effective deterrent to new development in outlying areas.
In some cases, such funds have been declared illegal. On Cape Cod, a Superior Court judge ruled two years ago that the inclusionary housing fee created in the town of Barnstable -- also targeted for affordable housing - was an "illegal tax." A similar fund in Boston has weathered several legal challenges. Marc Draisen, head of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, said the fee carries a unique predicament: If it is too low, it will not work as a deterrent; if it is too high and scares off developers, it will raise no money for affordable housing purposes. "Whenever you place a development charge on another development, it's a very difficult balancing act," said Draisen.