Burhan Azeem
Cambridge should increase funding to the Affordable Housing Trust, and the Council should make sure that the money is actually being spent and that there is adequate managerial capacity to put the money to good use. The Affordable Housing Overlay has already added 350 (and counting) affordable income-restricted units, and protecting and possible expanding it are key. “Superinclusionary” zoning, as described in the Envision Cambridge plan, is another policy I support.
Dana Bullister
Cambridge should experiment with every possible way of encouraging income-restricted affordable housing. Limited equity co-ops and land trusts are two models that could help organize and administer such developments. Additional funds toward public housing, housing vouchers, as well as increasing the percentage of required affordable housing as part of inclusionary zoning are other measures that should be reconsidered. We could also explore programs that support and incentivize homeowners in renting out individual units as affordable. Inclusionary zoning also has the potential to be useful in fostering fully mixed income developments. In addition to the 20% already required to be earmarked as "affordable" for large developments, an additional 20% could be required to be moderate income units. These units would be tailored to those of middle income - people who fall through the cracks, currently, in their access to housing in our present system. This would be one way of addressing our increasingly bipolar income distribution. Ultimately, I think we should be open to creative solutions to enable more units for low- and middle-income people to live in our city. We also need to encourage integrated, vibrant neighborhoods of people across the income spectrum so that all have access to similar, largely geographically-based community resources. Cambridge, unfortunately, is a tale of two cities. A critical, though by no means sufficient, step to addressing this problem is making sure that less advantaged residents are not confined to worse neighborhoods with poorer resources, creating destructive spirals.
Robert Eckstut
It all comes down to funding. ABC wants more housing, which I obviously agree is a necessary part of the solution. I favor the 3 and 1 model (3 new units per 1 affordable housing unit) which would bring Cambridge closer to 25% affordable housing. (A goal that is both pragmatic, as well as actually moves the needle as far as the CHA list is concerned)
Alanna Mallon
Now that we have the Affordable Housing Overlay as a tool in our policy toolbox, we need to make use of it as frequently as possible. Additionally, continuing to reform our overly-restrictive zoning code must continue to be a priority. Because our zoning code was written after much of our City was already built, 67% of all existing structures are non-conforming in Cambridge, which makes the creation of new projects extremely difficult. Even the slightest variance must go through the BZA, which is not representative of the changing demographics of our City, and does not align with the Council’s goal of creating more affordable housing. I am supportive of adding more housing through both the creation of more rental units, and expanding access to homeownership for low to middle income families. I’ve always been a proponent of our Homebridge Program, and want to continue to ensure it has the resources to keep our middle income families in Cambridge. However, Homebridge and other home ownership models need to be reformed to both ensure a greater amount of annual equity, and the ability to pass the home to a future generation. Homebridge was created as a housing stability tool, but has not been a tool for wealth building and this needs to be remedied if we seek to close the racial wealth gap. I also support the repeal of racist, exclusionary zoning, but want to caution that this is not a blanket solution due to the persistent high land costs in single-family areas. If we are able to end single-family zoning, I would be the leading candidate to ensure that we partner with our affordable home builders so that they are able to compete fairly for available lots.
Marc McGovern
The AHO was a great start but not the end. I would like to amend the AHO to allow for up to 12 stories on main corridors. I would like to legalize multi-family housing in every neighborhood. I would like the city to build on surface parking lots, purchase more land and limit rent increases.
Gregg J. Moree
Build 20,000 net zero, low income housing units with trees.
Roy Ribitzky
The fact that we are still dealing with a global pandemic means we need to take bold action to address a housing crisis that has existed for decades. People lost work for over a year, meaning people lost their ability to pay rent for a year. I think we should mandate a rent and mortgage freeze for at least two years to buy renters, landlords, and homeowners the time they need to get back on their feet. We must also create Rent Control measures that take into account the minimum wage, skyrocketing rents, and standard of living.
E. Denise Simmons
The single biggest thing that we did this term was to pass the citywide Affordable Housing Overlay District, which is going to make it easier for developers of 100 percent affordable units to build as a right – but we are already seeing some community pushback on projects that would fall under this new policy, with community opponents either mistakenly thinking they can still band together to create legal challenges to these projects, or otherwise trying to exert pressure on developers and the Council to delay or block these developments. I believe we do need to have more of a public education campaign to show what is and is not allowed under the AHO, and part of that campaign does need to attempt to cut through some of the bias and stigma people hold against affordable housing and the people who live in these buildings. Beyond this, I will point to the Comprehensive Housing Plan that I released to the City Council in September 2017, which had a number of policy recommendations that I think remain worthy of discussion and consideration: https://cambridgema.iqm2.com/Citizens/Detail_LegiFile.aspx?Frame=&MeetingID=1914&MediaPosition=&ID=5496&CssClass=
Theodora Skeadas
Cambridge, like so many other areas around the country, is facing a housing crisis. We are increasingly losing the middle class in Cambridge. I believe there are many different contributing factors to this crisis including, but not limited to, gentrification, rising rents and a narrowing pathway to homeownership. Our challenges are threefold: unrealistic and restrictive requirements prevent those experiencing homelessness from gaining services and housing; tenants face rising prices, housing instability, and a lack of protections; and paths to homeownership reside behind a barrier of privilege and generational wealth. Consequently, the lack of affordable, accessible, and equitable housing is devastating for those experiencing homelessness, renters, and homeowners, and alike. At the center of the housing crisis in Cambridge are a few wealthy, multinational corporations that are buying up large swaths of land. The commercialization of Cambridge land contributes to displacement, increased rent, and limits regular people’s ability to buy homes. Additional challenges include an inadequate supply of permanently affordable housing to meet growing regional demands, and zoning laws that prevent increased density in transit corridors. Here are some models and strategies Cambridge should use to create more income-restricted affordable housing: 1. The use of Boston’s Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing (AFFH) Rule for zoning, which will ensure new housing while taking into consideration the effects on local communities that have historically been discriminated against. 2. Support the adoption of a real estate transfer tax up to 6% on new sales of real estate above the city-wide median sale price of $1.1 million and direct proceeds to the Cambridge-only Affordable Housing Trust. 3. Advocate for a vacancy tax on individuals and corporations who buy housing without the intent to occupy those units to discourage commercial speculation- adding additional fees for owners who fail to register their properties as vacant, and for properties that are left vacant for multiple years. 4. Push for community land trusts and publicly-funded social housing focused on permanent affordability, social equality, and democratic resident control.
Jivan Sobrinho-Wheeler
To create more affordable housing in the city, Cambridge should expand the Affordable Housing Overlay, increase the commercial linkage fee, and utilize our prop 2 ½ levy capacity to put millions more dollars toward affordable housing each year. Cambridge should expand the Affordable Housing Overlay to allow for more units and diverse types of affordable and public housing throughout the city, especially on major corridors and near transit. Raising the commercial linkage fee from its current amount of $20/square foot to at least $33/square foot would generate millions of desperately needed additional dollars for affordable housing. And unlike many other municipalities in Massachusetts, Cambridge is more than $150 million away from our annual Prop 2 ½ levy limit. Even a modest increase would generate millions more dollars of revenue in the annual budget, a large portion of which would come from levies on corporate landholders and asset management companies. Ensuring that whoever the Council hires next as City Manager is willing to prioritize affordable housing over fiscal conservatism and keeping rates low for corporate landholders and well-off property owners will allow us to generate millions more dollars for affordable housing that we can put to use.
Test Candidate
Test Candidate believes we should restrict all Cambridge residents' incomes!
Paul F. Toner
Cambridge is well-situated to lead and do more in housing with substantial resources, forward thinking policies, staff capacity, strong public infrastructure, and employment opportunities. We can use our inclusionary zoning and AHO ordinance to support the development of more local affordable housing, especially along major transit areas and around transit hubs. We can also invest more in our affordable housing trust and incentivize more public private partnerships to develop abandoned or underutilized properties. For instance, I support projects such as the one proposed for 2072 Massachusetts Avenue. Instead of having a shuttered business near a public transit station, I believe that a seven- or eight-story building with 48-55 units of affordable housing is a smart way to develop this lot. We must, however, recognize that this is a regional problem. Many of the 20,0000 families on the Cambridge Housing Association waitlist are also on the Boston and other local housing authority waitlists. 20,000 people are seeking public housing in our region, meaning they earn less than 60% of area median income. Many of them will be passed over for housing because public housing authorities are allowed to give “local preference.” Our housing policy must address the range of housing needs if we want to maintain a vibrant community. Advocating on the state and federal level for more resources to support people earning less than 100% AMI is part of the solution. Advocating for more equitable land use policies in the surrounding communities is also needed, especially from our state elected officials, because Cambridge cannot do it alone.
Nicola Williams
I believe in a Cambridge for all residents, regardless of their race, income, or documented status. Unfortunately, Cambridge’s position as one of the nation’s most expensive and inflated housing markets is pushing out Black and low-income residents, and displacing middle income families. According to the recent Cambridge Community Foundation Equity and Innovation Report, there is a $62,000 income gap between Black residents and all collective Cambridge households. The lack of affordable housing has been one of the top concerns among Cambridge residents and the Cambridge City Council has consistently provided weak solutions to resolving this issue. Increasing affordable housing and pathways to homeownership for low and middle-income residents is necessary for retaining our continued racial and economic diversity in our city. My housing plan centers on empowering communities to 1) build wealth through homeownership programs, cooperatives, community land trusts, and innovative down payment programs; 2) create pathways for families that allow them to accept promotions without risking their housing and without strings attached; and 3) change Cambridge’s ineffective homeownership program to allow families to be able to build equity and pass along their homes to their families. We need pathways for transitioning residents as their income improves, so they are not displaced; develop a comprehensive and regional approach to housing and transportation that is affordable and environmentally sustainable for all; and institute rent stabilization policies that incentivize property owners to offer below market rents for stable housing.