Tell Us
One lawmaker proposed reforms to open up more housing. Would you support changes to the affordable housing law?
Should Massachusetts overhaul its decades-old affordable housing statute, Chapter 40B? One lawmaker has proposed “nuclear” reforms that could open up more housing, but not without a unilateral decision from Governor Maura Healey.
At a Charles River Regional Chamber event last week, Congressman Jake Auchincloss responded to a question on how to increase housing supply and affordability from Chamber CEO Greg Reibman. Auchincloss suggested a three-pronged approach, beginning with the expansion of the state’s Momentum Fund to accelerate housing projects ($50 million from the Affordable Homes Act has already been earmarked for the fund).
Second, he suggested the state take advantage of land it already controls – specifically, decommissioned military bases – to build thousands of homes.
And finally, his third proposal: that Governor Maura Healey could unilaterally alter Chapter 40B regulations, specifically the “safe harbor” threshold that protects certain communities from the law’s impact.
“That would be a nuclear option, to be clear,” he said, recognizing the potential backlash to changing the statute. “But it would be the kind of stick that could galvanize more local action.”
Chapter 40B is a state statute established in 1969 to streamline the often tedious local zoning approval process developers undergo and to remove barriers to building affordable housing.
Under Chapter 40B, if less than 10% of the town’s entire housing stock is deemed affordable, developers can obtain a “comprehensive permit” (essentially, a consolidated local review and approval process) to circumvent certain aspects of local zoning bylaws to build multifamily housing (provided that 20-25% of the units have long-term affordability restrictions).
Cities and towns with less than 10% affordable housing stock have more difficulty in rejecting 40B proposals, while those that meet or surpass the 10% threshold can claim “safe harbor” and can deny a developer a comprehensive permit for a 40B proposal.
While 40B has faced criticism for undermining local control, it has also been credited with sparking the construction of much-needed multifamily housing in areas that would otherwise be resistant to it – and in a state with an affordability and housing crisis.
A recent report from a commission appointed by Healey, released in February, highlighted several recommendations for unlocking more housing in the state, which faces a 222,000-unit housing deficit, according to the report.
Among the suggestions were reforms to 40B, like requiring bond postings for challengers to 40B permits, offering incentives to communities with 12% or more affordable units, and even considering a phasing out of market-rate units from the 40B count after 10 years. But despite the potential positive impacts, reforming one of the state’s most foundational housing laws is likely to come with challenges and resistance.
As discussions around housing continue to intensify, the debate over how best to modify 40B remains unresolved – and it’s not lost on Healey that any kind of reform to the “pivotal” housing statute should be handled carefully.
“The Commission is acutely aware of the sensitivities involved in revisiting such a pivotal policy and seeks to balance the preservation of 40B’s strengths with targeted reforms to maximize its impact,” the report reads.
We want to know: Should Massachusetts overhaul Chapter 40B to address the growing housing crisis? Or is it essential to preserve the law in its current form?
Tell us by filling out the form or e-mailing us at [email protected], and your response may appear in a future Boston.com article.
Should Governor Maura Healey reform 40B?
Sign up for the Today newsletter
Get everything you need to know to start your day, delivered right to your inbox every morning.
