Letter: Grafton Needs the Affordable Homes Act

Dan Cusher, “Grafton Needs the Affordable Homes Act (Letter),” Grafton News, March 14, 2024.

Grafton, along with every community in the Commonwealth, has a housing crisis. Typical rent for a 2-bedroom apartment in Grafton is $1,500, requiring an income around $70,000, more than twice the minimum wage at 40 hours per week. Home ownership has become increasingly out of reach, with Grafton’s 2024 median single-family home value rising to $596,235, and new construction in town prioritizing luxury McMansions. Seniors who raised their families here can’t afford to stay. Young people who grew up here can’t afford to come back. The Legislature needs to take action before the crisis gets worse.

I’m glad that Governor Healey has responded to this crisis by introducing the Affordable Homes Act, which combines funding authorizations for various housing programs with important new policy measures for affordable housing. One of the most exciting proposals for Grafton is the real estate transfer fee local option.

This would enable cities and towns to levy a small fee on large real estate transactions in order to create a dedicated revenue stream for affordable housing production and preservation. Cities and towns across the state have already expressed a desire to do so, and the state should let them and ensure that the local option is flexible enough for cities and towns across the state to benefit.

I am grateful that the housing crisis will be at the center of the Legislature’s attention this year, and I hope that Senator Moore and Representative Muradian will advocate for the strongest legislation possible.

LTE: High rents have young people putting Boston in the rearview mirror

Jonathan Cohn, “High rents have young people putting Boston in the rearview mirror” (letter), Boston Globe, March 15, 2024.

Last year, the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce said that Massachusetts needed to cut taxes on businesses and the rich because otherwise people would flee the state. They won a generous tax package, but cutting the tax on the estates of multimillionaires and the tax on day traders and speculators won’t change the minds of young people about where to live.

Indeed, the chamber’s own new study (“ ‘Alarming’: 1 in 4 young people eye leaving Boston,” Business, March 13) shows that one of the main reasons young people consider moving away is that rent is far too high. It’s the fourth-highest in the country.

Zoning reforms that the chamber supports can make a small dent, but we also need to invest more money in affordable housing and to strengthen tenant protections. Boston has proposals to do both, with home rule petitions to create a real estate transfer fee to fund affordable housing and stabilize rents. Other municipalities do so as well, and the governor’s housing bond bill has language around the former. I’d welcome the chamber’s support for such clear solutions to an urgent problem facing the region.

Jonathan Cohn

Policy director

Progressive Massachusetts

“Cutting Through the Noise” | The Grassroots Connector

Jonathan Cohn, “Cutting Through the Noise,” Grassroots Connector, March 13, 2024.

Let me tell you a secret about your state legislature (and I’m certain it’s true of any). Your legislators don’t hear from constituents all that often. Yes, they’ll get calls about constituent services requests, and if you live in especially active districts, their inboxes may get flooded some days. But most legislators do not hear about policy from their constituents on a regular basis.

If we want better and bolder policy, we need to change that. And that’s one of many reasons we’ve been hosting phone banks at the relaunched Activist Afternoons in Cambridge on the first and third Sundays of the month.

We have been calling constituents in key legislative districts to ask them to call their legislators about important issues (and we can patch them through to an office immediately if they’re interested!) This year, we have been making calls about the Real Estate Transfer Fee, a proposal to enable cities and towns to levy a small fee on high-end real estate transactions in order to raise much-needed revenue for affordable housing. We are also backing the Gas Moratorium bill, which would put a pause on gas infrastructure expansion so that we aren’t entrenching unsustainable fossil fuels.

Odds are, you get too many emails with different action alerts (and too many fundraising emails), so it’s easy for things to get lost in the mix. That’s why these calls help. Many times, the voters we call are aware of the issues and eager to take action. But sometimes they aren’t aware but happy to learn of how they can make a difference. And too many people assume that their legislators are doing good work off in the distance when, in fact, they need to hear from constituents regularly. Calls from constituents urge them to pay attention to things they may have overlooked and give them positive reinforcement when they are doing good work. Phone bankers cut through the noise and make taking action easier for the people they call.

What is also exciting about these phone banks is that every time we train a new phone banker, or build the skill and comfort level of a returning phone banker, we are helping future campaigns, especially critical ones in the fall. Since we are calling a favorable list (our own list from Progressive Mass), people can have their first phone banking experiences with friendly voters, get used to the rhythm of phone banking, and relieve initial fears about talking to people they don’t know.

With Activist Afternoons, we also recognize that activism is always more fun when it’s social. We get to share our experiences on calls—celebrating wins, laughing at bizarre calls or answering machines, and enjoying each other’s company. And with our every-other Sunday regularity, people know that they can drop in when their schedule frees up. We’ll be there waiting — you just need to come with a good attitude, a phone, and a laptop.

Letter: Legislature must act on state’s housing crisis

Al Blake, “Letter: Legislature must act on state’s housing crisis,” Berkshire Eagle, March 2, 2024.

To the editor: Massachusetts and the Berkshires have a housing crisis.

To rent the average two-bedroom apartment in Massachusetts requires an income equal to $41.64 per hour, more than twice the minimum wage. Homeownership has become increasingly out of reach as the state’s median home price nears $600,000.

The high cost of housing has led to displacement, and in a growing number of municipalities the local workforce can no longer afford to live there. The Legislature needs to take action before the crisis gets worse.

I’m glad that Gov. Maura Healey has responded to this crisis by introducing the Affordable Homes Act, which combines funding authorizations for various housing programs with important new policy measures for affordable housing. One of the most exciting proposals is the real estate transfer fee local option. This would enable cities and towns to levy a small fee on large real estate transactions in order to create a dedicated revenue stream for affordable housing production and preservation.

I am grateful that the housing crisis will be at the center of the Legislature’s attention this year, and I hope that our Berkshire legislators will advocate for the strongest legislation possible as the only way to make or keep that a reality is through good policy.

Al Blake, Becket

Op-Ed: MA Takes Steps to Put Gas in the Past

Jonathan Cohn, “MA Takes Steps to Put Gas in the Past,” Fenway News, February 1, 2024.

“Although the docket raised the bar for when the DPU would approve new gas pipelines, it did not call for a ban on expanding gas infrastructure, a vital step to avoid the lock-in effect of unsustainable fossil fuels. Before the Legislature are a set of bills (S.2135 / H.3237) to put a two-year moratorium on gas infrastructure expansion to give the state time to develop a clear and equitable plan for transitioning to renewable energy. We still need that (and for more than just two years), and the Governor can also do that herself by executive action. You should let her know that you think she should.”

Op-Ed: A New Year’s resolution: Make Mass. affordable

Jonathan Cohn, “A New Year’s resolution: Make Mass. affordable,” CommonWealth, December 28, 2023.

Throughout 2023, we constantly heard elected officials talk about the need for tax cuts to make Massachusetts more “competitive,” pushing a debunked myth that we were about to see an exodus of the well-off due to the Fair Share Amendment and the overall tax landscape. The risk we really face is that our graduates won’t be able to stay here, that young couples won’t be able to make a family here, and that working people will be displaced from one neighborhood to the next before being driven out of the state entirely. All of this is avoidable with good policy.

So let’s hope – and pressure – our elected officials to embrace those policies. And to not give up on a New Year’s Resolution too soon.

Letter: “Mass. lawmakers have two bosses, heed one (hint: it’s not the voters)”

“Mass. lawmakers have two bosses, heed one (hint: it’s not the voters),” Boston Globe, June 8, 2023.

The article “Lawmakers show little concern over sleepy start” (Page A1, May 30) astutely captured the problem of worsening inertia on Beacon Hill, with few bills, few votes, and almost no debate in the session so far. As the article points out, the over-centralization of power on Beacon Hill is a key culprit.

I often underscore that the State House suffers from a “two bosses” problem. In most jobs, the person who can hire and fire you is the same as the person who controls your pay. But for legislators, we — the public — are the ones who can choose, through our votes, to hire and fire elected officials, and legislative leadership, through committee chairs and other perks, are the ones who control the pay, with a scale that has become even more hierarchical in recent years.

With Massachusetts having the least competitive elections in the country, it’s no surprise which “boss” speaks loudest to legislators, but we all lose out from the lack of urgency around the many crises our state faces, from the growing costs of child care to the affordable housing crisis to a transit system in desperate need of care.

Jonathan Cohn

Boston

The writer is policy director of Progressive Massachusetts.

Letter (Globe): Needs of the many outweigh the desires of a few

Written by Progressive WRoz/Roz member Nina Lev and published in the Boston Globe on April 19, 2023.

I am both puzzled and disappointed by the current budget talks on Beacon Hill. Much of the analysis pits the benefits of those who are struggling to meet their basic needs against those of our wealthiest residents (“House’s tax plan echoes Healey’s ‘competitiveness’ goals,” Metro, April 12). Why is it assumed that the only way to retain the wealthy is to give them a tax break?

Don’t these citizens already live in comfortable homes, send their children to good schools, and enjoy nice vacations? Wouldn’t their lives, like those of the rest of us, be enhanced by providing secure housing and great educational opportunities to all of the Commonwealth’s children? Like the rest of us, don’t they wantreliable transportation, environmentally sustainable infrastructure, public art, and glorious parks? Until we can fully fund all these priorities, shouldn’t we hold off on talking about refunds to the most fortunate?

Nina Lev

Roslindale

Letter: “In pitching Healey on tax reform, Question 1’s foes haven’t gotten the message”

Jonathan Cohn, “In pitching Healey on tax reform, Question 1’s foes haven’t gotten the message,” (letter) Boston Globe, January 25, 2023.

In November, voters chose a fairer tax system by passing Question 1, the “millionaires tax” (“Business community has a big ask of new governor: Tackle taxes,” Chesto Means Business, Jan. 19). Voters were clear that the best way to boost Massachusetts’ economy isn’t cutting taxes for the ultrarich; rather, it’s raising them to invest in public goods that help all residents and businesses succeed, such as well-funded schools, better roads and bridges, affordable public colleges and universities, and reliable public transportation.

Massachusetts faces real problems that are threatening our economic competitiveness, from our high housing costs and crumbling infrastructure to the enormous burden families face paying for child care and college.

But the business lobbyists who led the losing fight against Question 1 clearly haven’t gotten the message. They continue to pay lip service to the need to solve those big problems while focusing their real energy on their latest effort to cut taxes for the wealthy.

The passage of the Fair Share Amendment showed that voters want to see our state government make major investments to tackle the challenges we face as a Commonwealth. Large, profitable corporations and their wealthy investors need to stop putting up roadblocks to the change voters demanded.