Submitted letter: “The MBTA Communities Law: A well-intentioned but flawed solution to Massachusetts’ housing crisis”

This is a letter that was submitted to Fall River Reporter.

“As the Commonwealth grapples with the escalating housing crisis, the MBTA Communities Law, enacted in 2021, aims to address this pressing issue by mandating multi-family housing districts near public transportation. While the law’s intent is laudable, its implementation raises critical concerns about local control, funding, and potential unintended consequences.

“On the surface, the law appears to be a panacea for the state’s housing woes. By requiring 177 cities and towns to establish multi-family housing districts, it seeks to increase affordable housing options, reduce reliance on personal vehicles, and promote sustainable development. However, a closer examination reveals a more complex narrative.

“The law’s limitations on local control are a significant concern. By mandating zoning decisions, the state potentially overrides local preferences and needs, undermining the autonomy of municipalities to shape their own futures. This top-down approach may lead to a one-size-fits-all solution, neglecting the unique characteristics and requirements of individual communities. For instance, smaller towns like Marblehead and Swampscott have expressed concerns that the law’s density requirements will lead to overcrowding and strain on local resources.

“Furthermore, the law’s funding structure raises questions about equity and fairness. Communities that fail to comply risk losing state funding, which could exacerbate existing financial struggles. This punitive approach may disproportionately affect smaller towns and cities, already grappling with limited resources. The allocation of funding and technical assistance may also favor larger communities, perpetuating existing inequalities. For example, the city of Boston has received significant funding for its affordable housing initiatives, while smaller towns like Easton and Raynham have been left with limited support.

“Moreover, the law’s focus on multi-family housing may inadvertently contribute to gentrification, displacing long-term residents and small businesses. As more affluent residents move into these new developments, the character of neighborhoods may be irreparably altered, erasing the cultural identity and community fabric that defines them. In Somerville, for instance, the influx of new developments has led to concerns about the displacement of long-time residents and the loss of small businesses that define the community’s character.

“The law’s impact on environmental sustainability is also a concern. While the law promotes transit-oriented development, it neglects to address the environmental impact of large-scale construction projects. The destruction of green spaces and the increased carbon footprint of these developments may outweigh the benefits of reduced reliance on personal vehicles. In addition, the law’s emphasis on density may lead to a lack of green spaces and community areas, further exacerbating the environmental impact.

“Despite these concerns, the law’s supporters argue that it is a necessary step to address the state’s housing crisis. They point to the success of similar initiatives in other states and the need for bold action to address the crisis. However, this approach overlooks the unique context and needs of Massachusetts communities. For instance, California’s similar law, SB 375, has been criticized for its one-size-fits-all approach, neglecting the diverse needs of different communities.

“So, what can be done to address these concerns and ensure that the law achieves its intended goals? First, the state must adopt a more collaborative approach, engaging with local communities to understand their specific needs and preferences. This could involve providing additional funding and technical assistance to support community-led initiatives. For example, the state could establish a community engagement fund, providing grants to communities to engage with residents and develop community-led housing initiatives.

“Second, the law’s funding structure must be revised to prioritize equity and fairness. Communities that require additional support should receive it, rather than being punished for non-compliance. The state could also explore alternative funding sources, such as public-private partnerships, to supplement existing resources. For instance, the state could establish a housing trust fund, leveraging private investment to support affordable housing initiatives.

“Finally, the law must be amended to include provisions that protect against gentrification and ensure that new developments align with community needs. This could involve incorporating community land trusts, rent control measures, and other safeguards to prevent displacement. For example, the law could require developers to include a certain percentage of affordable units in new developments, ensuring that new housing is accessible to existing residents.

“In conclusion, while the MBTA Communities Law is a well-intentioned effort to address Massachusetts’ housing crisis, its implementation requires careful consideration of local concerns, funding equity, and potential unintended consequences. By adopting a more collaborative approach, prioritizing equity and fairness, and protecting against gentrification, we can create a more effective and sustainable solution that benefits all communities, not just a select few. Only then can we ensure that the law truly serves the needs of the Commonwealth and its residents. The future of our communities depends on it.”

RONALD BEATY
West Barnstable, MA 02668