Massachusetts Repeal 40B (2008)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Not on Ballot
Proposed ballot measures that were not on a ballot
This measure was not put
on an election ballot

Repeal 40B did not appear on the November 4, 2008 statewide ballot in Massachusetts as an initiated state statute. The measure called for repealing four housing provisions from Chapter 40B.

Chapter 40B is a Massachusetts state statute passed in 1969. 40B allows developers who include a certain percentage of affordable housing (25% for owner-occupied units) to appeal local zoning board denials or restrictions to the state Housing Appeals Committee (HAC).

Appeals can be initiated when the developer has been denied a comprehensive permit by the ZBA or has been issued a permit with conditions that the developer claims would make the project uneconomic.

Under 40B, affordable housing is defined as units which can be afforded by households making 70% of the local median income, have been subsidized by certain state or federal housing subsidy programs, and have long-term deed restrictions.[1][2]

Supporters

The Committee to Repeal40B and their supporters were the leading proponents of the measure.

Arguments against 40B are listed by The Better Not Bigger Alliance on their website:[3]

  • If 40B worked, then after 38 years Massachusetts wouldn’t be at the bottom of national rankings in housing affordability (49th!).
  • If 40B worked, then why are alternatives to 40B providing 90% greater contributions of affordable housing?
  • If 40B worked, then 53% of the few “affordable” units the state does have wouldn’t be in danger of expiring due to deed restrictions running out.
  • If 40B worked, then two-thirds of the additions to the state’s affordable housing stock wouldn’t have come from repair programs, new houses for the Dept. of Mental Health/Retardation and market rate rental units that “count” towards 40B thresholds but which aren’t actually affordable; such gains would have come from 40B.
  • If 40B worked, then why is it that most of the communities who reached the “10% affordable” threshold set by 40B did so by using alternatives to 40B?
  • If 40B worked, why can not not produce more than 3 affordable units, per town, per year!
  • If 40B worked, then why is it so often being investigated for fraud?

[4]

Other support included the Harvard Slow Growth initiative which has released a report criticizing 40B.[5]

Opponents

The leading opposition of the initiative was the Citizen Housing and Planning Association (CHAPA) which advocated that 40B should remain or even be increased in size in order to create more affordable housing in Massachusetts. Some of their arguments included:[6]

  • Without 40B there would be less affordable housing
  • Chapter 40B has been responsible for the production of affordable housing developments that in most cases could not have been built under traditional zoning approaches.
  • Zoning boards work with developers to modify the project
  • 40B has created affordable housing and serves the people who really need it.

The Massachusetts Housing Partnership had also encouraged cities and townships to use 40B.[7]

Status

The group submitted signatures for the first phase of approval from the Secretary of State, which required 66,593 signatures.[8]

The measure failed to submit enough signatures to qualify for the first phase of the approval process. Fewer than 34,000 signatures were submitted by proponents. Of the signatures submitted 2,442 were disqualified because the signatures sheets were not exact copies or had extraneous markings. The proponents promised to return for the next general election cycle with a larger campaign.[9]

See also

External links

Footnotes