40B is a spectacular failure in Massachusetts

To the Editor:

We're writing to rebut portions of the letter from Colin Balogh, in defense of 40B, the state's "affordable housing" law, a law which is currently, and rightly, under siege from various groups, including the state Inspector General, many suburban legislators looking out for their communities, and a grassroots citizens' petition to radically reform the law.

The general theme of the letter--that a town's character changes over time, so therefore 40B is OK, is off-topic. Of course towns change over time, but that has absolutely nothing to do with the attempt to reform 40B. The question is how a town changes, for better or worse, and whether taking all control away from the local citizenry and giving it to land developers will change a town in a good or a bad way. You can manage change, and for that I'd trust our local boards and citizens more than large developers, which is why the citizens' petition to reform 40B gives more control back to the towns.

The statement that "housing prices tend to increase at the rate of inflation" in areas that are not zoned for large lots is blatantly incorrect- growth in housing prices has far exceeded inflation for years, and a home is one of the best investments anyone can make. The area of town we live in is zoned for multi-families, many lots are less than ½ acre, and prices have tripled in the last 10 years. Boston (or NYC or LA) is certainly not zoned for large lots, and prices have skyrocketed there. In fact, home prices have been one of the best investments over time in the entire U.S. If you want an investment that merely keeps pace with inflation, I'd suggest putting all your money in a very low interest savings account. This is why 40B houses, although called "affordable," are a bad investment. You can't make money on them.

Another alleged "fact" is only partially correct, and is part of 40B we're trying to reform. It's stated that "40B helps people earning less than 80 percent of the median income in a particular town buy a house." The income requirement has a second part- you also must qualify for a mortgage under fairly stringent guidelines, which makes the income range to qualify for an "affordable" condo very narrow- in Ashburnham you must make between $45,100 and $51,600 a year, which excludes most two income families. That's why this law is such a spectacular failure. People who can actually qualify for a 40B condo are few and far between, which is why so many are currently vacant.

40B is a remarkably bad law, and needs radically reformed. State reps and senators west of Boston have filed so many motions to change this law, and why we are trying to reform it. 40B is bad for our environment (it overrides local environmental laws), bad for preserving a town's character (it overrides local control), is unfair (the appeals process is to the same agency that pushes 40B development- the appeals process is more fair if you rob a convenience store), and the law doesn't work. When the repeal of 40B appears on the ballot, vote to fix it. Don't fall for the well funded campaign, by large land developers, to keep this law intact, to the detriment of both our towns and the people who really need affordable housing.

Jay and Jennifer Shenk

Westminster