To the editor:
The recent faff (something difficult and time consuming) over the State Auditor’s interpretation of Section 3A has given renewed life to Marblehead’s anti-housing advocates’ efforts to reject compliance with the law, with one activist claiming in a recent letter to the Current that compliance would, “be a burden on the town.” This assessment is irrelevant given Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s willingness and ability to sue noncompliant towns. Regardless of Section 3A’s legality, Marblehead must permit more housing.
A poll of Massachusetts residents conducted by UMass Amherst and WCVB last month asked respondents to identify the biggest issue facing Massachusetts, producing this word cloud:
The most common response was ‘housing,’ with other common responses (most likely related to ‘housing’) being ‘cost,’ ‘living,’ ‘homeless,’ high,’ ‘price’ and ‘affordable.’ The cost of housing is the single greatest problem in Massachusetts.
Similarly, 55% of respondents favor, “[r]equiring cities and towns served by the MBTA to create zoning that allows for new multifamily housing,” compared to 19% who oppose. Anti-housing advocates represent a super minority viewpoint that only sees the light of day because that very vocal minority is overrepresented in our Town Meetings that see at most 5% of voters participate. A 30 vote margin in last year’s Meeting rejecting compliance should not be seen as an overwhelming mandate to dig in our heels and refuse to consider the positives of compliance.
Not including the whole being-eligible-for-grant-money thing, multifamily housing would help the town’s budget. A 2005 Harvard study concluded that, “small rental properties pay a tax rate one-third higher than do single-family owner-occupied properties.” Since Marblehead is projecting a budget shortfall in excess of $8 million over the next three years, and over 75% of its revenue comes from property taxes, more multi-family homes could help avert an override.
Marblehead’s demand for housing is not being met. The average home costs roughly $1 million, whereas the average household income is $166,000. This gives Marblehead a home price-to-income ratio of 6.0; comparable to major metros like Austin, Nashville and Washington D.C. Another way of understanding the high cost of a home in Marblehead is using the guideline that one’s housing costs should not exceed 28% of their income. Using this metric, one needs to make $225,000 a year, or 135% the average household income, to afford to live in Marblehead. Underscoring this disparity was the resignation of Louis Meyi, the man trying to address Marblehead’s housing affordability, because he could no longer afford to live in Marblehead.
Lastly, compliance with 3A is not a mandate to tear down beautiful Colonial-style houses and replace them with garish commieblocks or skyscrapers rivaling the Burj Khalifa. If one reads the proposal in Article 23, they will see language like, “allow,” “option,” “permitted” and will only see terms like, “must” and “shall” used to describe restrictions on developments. One has to be divorced from reality to conflate permission to build with a mandate to build. Article 23, as written, is not the mandate to build that anti-housing advocates fear. It is a mandate to permit property owners in three specified parts of town to build, within reason, structures that meet the demand and need for housing in our town.
Hunter Wanger
Power Terrace
