We have inclusive, diverse communities where everyone can afford to live and thrive.

Massachusetts has a long history of residential segregation, which can be traced in large part to restrictive local zoning and permitting decisions, as well as discriminatory real estate and lending practices. Comprehensive zoning reform in Massachusetts must promote inclusive neighborhoods where families with children and households with low-or-moderate incomes can find homes.

Massachusetts has not comprehensively updated its core zoning and subdivision laws in several decades. Municipalities across the Commonwealth use existing zoning laws as a way to prevent changes that would allow more affordable homes, condominiums, and apartments. An update to the Commonwealth’s outdated zoning laws should ensure that most cities and towns will allow at least some districts where multi-family housing can be built, while encouraging municipalities to adopt bylaws or ordinances that ensure at least a portion of this housing will be deed-restricted affordable. Both of these tools will help to increase housing type diversity and affordability in Metro Boston and across the Commonwealth.

To meaningfully address our state’s housing crisis, we have to dedicate greater resources to preserving and producing affordable homes. Some particularly important elements of our housing production system include adequate funding for the Low Income Housing Tax Credit, the Affordable Housing Trust Fund, the Housing Innovation Fund, and the Massachusetts Rental Voucher Program. Adequate funds for the modernization of public housing are essential. The state should continue to fund the Commonwealth’s smart growth incentive programs under Chapters 40R and 40S, so that cities and towns can implement smart growth zoning overlays and feel confident that when they do, any possible impacts on school capacity will be meaningfully offset by state funding.[^9]

Legislation that would give tenants a right to counsel in eviction proceedings, require just-cause evictions, protect paying tenants when a home is foreclosed or sold for a tax lien, and offer tenants the right of first refusal in the event that their property is sold are modest steps that would help reduce housing insecurity. When tenants are defended by counsel in court proceedings, they are more likely to remain in their homes. Just-cause eviction laws protect tenants from unfair or discriminatory evictions, while a right of first refusal would give tenants an opportunity to purchase or assign their right to purchase a property, thereby increasing housing stability. Additionally, we should pass legislation that would give a tax credit to landlords who rent at below-market rates, helping to incentivize these landlords to maintain rents that are affordable, especially for low- and moderate-income tenants, and to protect neighborhoods from the effects of inflation. Also, tenants generally lack any protection against eviction when the home in which they are living is foreclosed, or when a municipality sells the property for tax collection – even if the tenant is up to date on her rent. Protections in such instances are essential ways for the tenant’s housing circumstances to remain stable, even if the underlying property is undergoing a change of ownership.

Currently, most affordable housing requirements are aimed at households with incomes at 80% of the area median or below. As a result, the majority of new units are affordable to households with incomes closest to that ceiling. The area median income (AMI) for a four-person household in the metropolitan statistical area (MSA) for Metro Boston is $103,400. The MSA is an area so geographically large that it includes municipalities in Middlesex, Norfolk, Suffolk, Essex and Plymouth Counties, and even parts of New Hampshire. High wealth suburbs in the MSA drive up our region’s AMI, which ultimately means that most deed-restricted affordable units are not actually within financial reach of many in need in Metro Boston. Moreover, very low-income (30-50% of AMI) and extremely low-income (30% of AMI and below) working households are growing in number and as a share of the region’s population. To address the increasing need within the context of an elevated AMI, affordable housing requirements should be adjusted to include a portion of homes for those with incomes between 50% and 80% of the AMI, between 30% and 50%, and even 30% and below.

The rule, promulgated under the Obama administration, required that jurisdictions that receive federal housing funding not only document barriers to integration and opportunity, but also detail and prioritize policies to eradicate these barriers. The Trump Administration has delayed implementation of this rule, and indicated they have no intention to read any plans currently submitted until 2020. But the main purpose of these plans – to help local governments to understand and eliminate discriminatory practices – remains as important as ever. At the local level, cities and towns should continue moving forward to develop Assessments of Fair Housing, and MAPC will continue to assist them both to develop these plans and to implement their recommendations.

Across our region, small single-family homes are being torn down and replaced with larger, more expansive single-family properties. The new homes are generally higher priced and are not viable options for low- and moderate-income would-be homeowners. At the same time, developers of new, multi-family residential developments often disregard guidelines that encourage a bedroom mix inclusive of 3-bedroom units, instead opting to build studio, one- and two-bedroom units, which limits opportunities for displaced families seeking homes in gentrifying neighborhoods. Local legislative action should request that a range of home sizes be provided through redevelopment or limit replacement to similar footprints. These actions may help minimize the impact of teardowns on neighborhoods. In addition, municipalities should encourage development of smaller single-family homes, multi-family units in smart growth locations and the opportunity for accessory dwelling units (ADUs) that make homes more accessible, especially to those with limited incomes, aging residents, and people with disabilities.

Automatic voter registration enables a government agency, usually the Registry of Motor Vehicles, to automatically register a citizen upon state license or ID issuance or renewal, unless the person declines to do so. The citizen’s information is then sent to the appropriate election office for verification of voting eligibility. Currently, nine states and the District of Columbia have enacted automatic voter registration policies, as they serve to increase voter registration rates and help to eliminate existing barriers to voter registration.

Federal law bars state and local agencies or officials from restricting the transmission of information regarding the immigration status, lawful or unlawful, of any individual.[^15] Sanctuary state legislation could take several different forms, but at its core, it would prohibit state and local resources from being used to enforce immigration laws that are the responsibility of the federal government, even while the state and municipalities comply completely with federal law. It could also go further to prevent law enforcement officers from inquiring about an individual’s immigration status unless it is pertinent to the crime at issue or further limit federal Immigration, Customs and Enforcement (ICE) agents from accessing information on booking lists or release dates unless a person is serving a sentence for a serious violent felony. Ensuring that our state continues to foster trust among and remain welcoming to all residents, regardless of where they come from or the circumstances of their arrival, is vital to the long-term economic and social wellbeing of the entire Commonwealth.

As a just and fair society, we seek and use approaches that allow for greater inclusion. In Metro Boston and Massachusetts, there are policy actions that can foster greater inclusion and responsiveness to lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, and queer (LGBTQ) residents. This includes partnering with representatives of the LGBTQ community to build capacity among public and private service providers for greater cultural competency. An example of such a proposal is the An Act Relative to LGBT Awareness Training for Aging Services Provider, which would support development of a training program for the delivery of accessible and appropriate services to LGBTQ older adults and their caregivers. This act would prevent older LGBTQ residents from any need to hide their identity and receive care that is relevant and respectful.

Massachusetts continues to struggle with high levels of racial, ethnic and income segregation, a legacy of many years of public and private actions. We must recognize that restrictive local zoning and permitting decisions are a contributing factor to this persistent segregation, often limiting the development of both deed-restricted and market rate affordable units, especially for families with children. Real estate and finance practices often have the additional impact of making it difficult for low-income households and people of color to purchase homes, even when they could otherwise qualify to do so. Massachusetts must clarify that such practices are a violation of state law, and must take stronger steps to advance fair housing throughout the state.