Take Action: The MA House Should Listen to the Public on Housing

Yesterday, UMass Amherst and WCVB released a poll on what voters think about different solutions to our housing crisis, and voters were clear that we need to use every tool in the toolbox.

Here’s just one example: by 3 to 1, voters supported allowing cities and towns to levy small fees on high-end real estate transactions to raise dedicated funds for affordable housing.

Governor Healey agrees, and in her housing bond bill (the Affordable Homes Act), she included a local option real estate transfer fee, allowing communities to choose to impose a small fee on high-end real estate purchases to build and preserve affordable homes if this tool is important to them in preserving their community.

Cities and towns across MA have shown that they want to do this. And it’s not hard to see why. In Nantucket, for example, you need to be earning 7x the area median income to afford the median value home. That’s why voters, including local realtors, support this proposal.

But, unfortunately, the the House left this key tool out of the housing bill that it’s voting on TOMORROW, capitulating to the heavy lobbying from the real estate industry. But the fight isn’t over.

Can you write to your state representative in support of Amendment #165 to add the local option transfer fee back into the bill and ensure that it’s flexible enough for all communities across the Commonwealth?

Mass Voters Show Strong Support for Progressive Housing Action

A newly released UMass/WCVB poll shows strong support for progressive housing policies, showing yet again how out-of-touch the State House can be.

Rent Control: 72% of voters supported allowing local governments to set a limit on how much rents can be increased each year, with only 13% opposed.

Local Option Real Estate Transfer Fee: 62% of voters supported allowing cities and towns to tax real estate transactions above $1 million to help raise funds for local affordable housing, with only 21% opposed.

Accessory Dwelling Units: 66% of surveyed voters supported allowing homeowners to add small, add-on living spaces called accessory dwelling units to their property, with only 9% opposed.

And despite the buzz around opposition in a few towns, the MBTA Communities Act, which requires cities and towns with MBTA proximity to rezone near transit, had the support of 55% of MA voters, with only 18% opposed.

Statement on the House Redraft of the Affordable Homes Act

“Massachusetts has a housing crisis, and voters across the state are calling for bold action. If only the Massachusetts House Leadership would care to listen.

Rather than strengthening and building on Governor Healey’s housing bond bill, House Leadership has decided to cave to the real estate lobby, axing the local option real estate transfer fee, eviction sealing protections, and measures to increase affordability of new development. We need every tool in the toolbox, and at every level, to address our housing crisis.

Let’s be clear: members of House Leadership are being dishonest when they claim that they oppose a local option real estate transfer fee because it is a “piecemeal” solution that doesn’t help every city and town. Such concerns were nowhere to be found during the budget process, when those very same representatives had no problem stuffing the budget full of outsized perks for their own districts. Dedicated funding for dog parks in the North End don’t benefit even the full city of Boston, but giving Boston the ability to tame real estate speculation and preserve and expand affordable housing has benefits far beyond the city itself—not to mention the many cities and towns that want to take actions well.

The House is certainly not acting with an eye to public opinion. MA voters support a local option real estate transfer fee by 3 to 1

Last year, when state representatives passed tax cuts for the rich proposed by Governor Healey, many of them emphasized the importance of giving the Governor a “win.” Now that the Governor wants a “win” for working and middle-class residents across the Commonwealth, the House sings a different tune, showing that they care less about Healey’s legacy or their everyday constituents than they do about their donors.” 

Letter: “The ‘benefit,’ Mr. Speaker, is more affordable housing, including in wealthier areas”

Jan Soma, “The ‘benefit,’ Mr. Speaker, is more affordable housing, including in wealthier areas” (Letter), Boston Globe, May 22, 2024.

Matt Stout’s March 16 article describes House Speaker Ron Mariano’s reticence to embrace the real estate transfer fee portion of Governor Maura Healey’s housing bond bill. Mariano is quoted as saying that relatively wealthy communities would disproportionally benefit from a local real estate transfer fee. Let’s consider the benefits: As clearly stated in the governor’s proposal, transfer fee proceeds would be deposited in affordable housing trusts that use the funds solely for low- to moderate-income housing. The benefit is more housing opportunities in communities that all but the very wealthy can afford as well as in other communities.

We need affordable housing across the state, not just in enclaves that segregate residents by income. I applaud communities that want to be part of the housing shortage solution. I am proud to live in one. Housing funds from the Commonwealth are generally more available to communities that are struggling economically. If wealthier towns are willing to help share the financial burden through a transfer fee, doesn’t everyone win?

Jan Soma

Needham

The writer is on the steering committee of the Needham Housing Coalition.

Take Action: Your Legislator Needs to Hear from You about the Housing Crisis

Massachusetts has a housing crisis. It’s true all across the commonwealth, and it registers as a top priority in every poll.

We know that in order to address our housing crisis, we need every tool in the toolbox. Unfortunately, because of heavy lobbying from the real estate industry, one of those vital tools is under attack: the real estate transfer fee local option.

Under Gov. Healey’s housing bill, a community could choose to impose a small fee on high-end real estate purchases to build and preserve affordable homes if this tool is important to them in preserving their community.

Has your state rep heard from you yet in support of this?

Cities and towns across MA have shown that they want to do this. And it’s not hard to see why. In Nantucket, for example, you need to be earning 7x the area median income to afford the median value home. That’s why voters, including local realtors, support the transfer fee for housing.

House Speaker Ron Mariano recently dismissed this urgency, but what that means is that state legislators are not hearing enough from the majority of voters who want to see real action on the housing crisis.

Tell your state representative to vote “yes” on the transfer fee for real estate to give municipalities an option to fund local housing solutions. It is time to give communities a choice, and a chance to preserve their hometowns for all residents – not just the wealthy.

Will MA Do the Right Thing on Housing?

In poll after poll in Massachusetts, the #1 issue on voters’ minds is housing. And it’s no surprise why. Escalating rents and soaring housing prices have forced people out of their communities or out of the state entirely. That’s not sustainable, and we need robust policy action to address this growing housing crisis.

Over the past few months, the MA Legislature has been working on its main piece of housing policy this session: Governor Maura Healey’s H.4138, the Affordable Homes Act (known as the “housing bond bill”), with the House expected to vote soon. 

Among the key provisions of the bill are a real estate transfer fee local option, which would provide cities and towns a critical tool for addressing their local housing crises, and allowing for accessory dwelling units (ADU) as of right, a way to boost the supply of affordably priced housing.

Your legislators have been hearing from a well-funded real estate lobby trying to block the transfer fee proposal.

And your legislators have been hearing from those who want to preserve the exclusionary nature of their local zoning laws.

But the question is: have they been hearing from you?

Can you write to your state legislators in support of comprehensive action to address our housing crisis?

House FY 2025 Budget Action Alert

Last year, Massachusetts passed critical legislation to guarantee free communication in prisons and jails, the most comprehensive such legislation passed in the country so far. With No Cost Calls in effect, the number of calls made from MA’s prisons rose by more than 60% in January relative to just a few months prior, and the number of electronic messages sent nearly tripled, meaning that people who are incarcerated are better able to stay connected with their loved ones back home.

But the larger work of keeping families connected is not done. We need to make sure that there is robust reporting to ensure full and effective implementation by the Department of Correction and county jails, and we need to build on the win of No Cost Calls by improving access to in-person visitation as well.

Please contact your state representative by next Tuesday (4/23) to urge them to co-sponsor the following amendments to the FY 2025 budget:

  • #975 and #986, amendments to No Cost Calls (These amendments make technical fixes and improvements to reporting requirements with the aim of maximizing effective implementation of free communication in prison and jail)
  • #1263, “Strengthening Community Connections”  (This amendment mirrors legislation to improve access to in-person visits)

Email your state rep

Other amendments worth highlighting for your state rep:

#788, “Lift Kids out of Deep Poverty” (This amendment would provide 10% grant increases for very low-income families with children, elders, and people with disabilities.)

#1479, “Access to Counsel” (This amendment would clarify that the Access to Counsel pilot would be statewide, that it would be for full legal representation, and that the Massachusetts Legal Assistance Corporation, the fiscal administrator, would in consultation with an advisory committee, determine how to implement the program)

788, “Lift Kids out of Deep Poverty” (This amendment would provide 10% grant increases for very low-income families with children, elders, and people with disabilities.)

1479, “Access to Counsel” (This amendment would clarify that the Access to Counsel pilot would be statewide, that it would be for full legal representation, and that the Massachusetts Legal Assistance Corporation, the fiscal administrator, would in consultation with an advisory committee, determine how to implement the program)

PM in the News: “What was the point of Massachusetts’ new tax break for renters?”

Nik DeCosta-Klipa, “What was the point of Massachusetts’ new tax break for renters?,” WBUR, April 17, 2024.

“Nobody is going to complain about getting $50 back, but it doesn’t mean very much,” Jonathan Cohn, the policy director for the left-leaning group Progressive Massachusetts (and a renter himself), told WBUR. “Given that many people’s rents will go up by more than $50 each year, that’s not even combating one-twelfth of an annual rent increase for people.”

Cohn credits the Healey administration for pursuing other, more “meaningful” measures to address the housing crisis in the multi-billion-dollar bond bill, which is primarily aimed at funding and encouraging more affordable housing. (Whether — or how much of — the bill passes before the end of the legislative session this summer remains to be seen.) Healey’s administration has also moved to aggressively enforce the state’s MBTA Communities Act, which requires cities and towns near the T to zone for additional multi-family housing.

Letter: Mass. Can Do More to Lower Housing Costs”

Green affordable housing

Marianne Rutter, “Letter: Mass. Can Do More to Lower Housing Costs,” Newburyport Daily News, April 12, 2024.

To the Editor:

It should come as no surprise to my fellow readers that Massachusetts has a housing crisis. To rent the average 2-bedroom apartment in Massachusetts requires an income equal to $41.64 per hour, more than twice the minimum wage.  Do the math yourself:  Coming up with monthly rent is a near impossibility in a two-earner household working $15/hour minimum-wage jobs, even if both wage-earners are holding down two jobs.

Home ownership has become increasingly out of reach, as the state’s median home price has passed $600,000.   In parts of our northeastern corner of the Commonwealth, the average home price today is 25% higher than that.

The Legislature needs to take action before the crisis gets worse. 

Governor Healey (who, let’s remember, hails from our part of the state), has shown leadership in responding 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. 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.  I’m urging Senator Barry Finegold and Representatives Dawne Shand, Adrianne Ramos and Kristin Kassner to advocate actively for the strongest legislation possible. Massachusetts must be a place where people can afford to live at any stage of life, and the only way to make or keep that a reality is through good policy.

Marianne Rutter

Amesbury

Letter: Transfer fee could boost affordable housing

Green affordable housing

Rachel Roth, “Letter: Transfer fee could boost affordable housing,” Your Arlington, April 4, 2024.

I am stunned by how much the cost of housing in Arlington has increased since my family moved here about 20 years ago. Renovated upstairs units in two-family condos routinely list for $1 million, and to rent the average two-bedroom apartment, someone must earn $41.64 per hour, more than twice the minimum wage – and that’s for the entire state, not just high-cost areas like greater Boston.1

We are fortunate to have Reps. Dave Rogers and Michael Day fighting for housing security, such as the right to have an attorney when facing eviction, yet there is so much more to do, including in the governor’s housing bill, unveiled last October.

The bill would be improved by adding options for cities and towns to raise money with local real estate transfer fees or implement rent control. According to the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center, with a robust real estate transfer fee, Arlington could raise almost $8 million each year for affordable housing, and Winchester could raise over $9 million.2

I ask our reps to keep pushing for strong housing laws with both statewide commitments to adequate and affordable housing production and allowances for some locally tailored options as well.