Newton is Massachusetts' housing problem in miniature

Written By Kathy Pillsbury

Newton loves housing. Just not here.

In the March 2020 presidential primary, more than 90% of Newton voters took a Democratic ballot and voted for candidates (Sanders, Warren, Biden) who all ran on ambitious housing platforms. On the same day, at least 35% of those same voters voted against Northland, a large development (with a significant number of affordable units) right here in Newton.

That gap was the thread running through our Sept. 24 event, "How Housing Scarcity Is Costing Massachusetts Political Power." BU political science professor Maxwell Palmer (who grew up in Newton) and Rep. Jake Auchincloss (also from Newton!) came to Congregation Dorshei Tzedek to talk about how the state's housing shortage is affecting our clout in Washington. A lot of what they described could have been about Newton specifically.

Why Massachusetts keeps losing Congressional seats

Massachusetts had 12 seats in the US House in 1970; it has 9 today. Seats (and Electoral College votes) follow population, and since 1990, state-level population growth has tracked home building almost exactly. Massachusetts sits near the bottom on both. As Palmer put it, accepting very low home construction is the same as choosing very low population growth.

Florida is the top destination for people leaving Massachusetts. New Hampshire is second (which surprised even Palmer), and our New England neighbors together account for about 60% of the state's net loss. 

The single biggest county-to-county move out of Massachusetts is from Middlesex County (that's us) to Hillsborough County, New Hampshire, where homes cost about 44% less. Many of them keep their jobs here and just commute farther.

Why does it matter if Massachusetts loses seats?

Rep. Auchincloss, noted that if we lost a seat in Congress, this would mean one less person to sit on and have a voice in Congressional Committees. Also there would be  fewer staff to write and research bills that advance our values. One less seat would also mean one less Electoral College vote. With southern states increasing in population and getting more Congressional seats and more Electoral College votes, the outcome of presidential elections would shift to those states.

Who shows up to vote & public hearings

Palmer's explanation for the gap between how we vote and what we permit is that local decisions get made by whoever shows up, and those people aren't a representative sample. 

He and his BU colleagues matched everyone who commented on multifamily housing proposals in 97 Greater Boston communities to voter files and property records. 73% were homeowners (versus about 45% of voters), 75% were over 50, and they opposed the projects by at least 2 to 1. 

Local elections skew the same way. Older homeowners are about 14% of registered voters statewide but 27% of voters in off-cycle local elections (those held in odd years or in spring, when hardly anyone turns out). 

Part of this is just how notice works. Abutters (the neighbors of a proposed project) get a notice in the mail about every hearing. The people who would live in the new homes don't live here yet, so there's no address to mail them anything.

Our moderator, NfE President Luke Mann-O'Halloran, had watched exactly this play out a few days earlier at a hearing for 1314 Washington Street in West Newton: 72 affordable homes, many of them sized for families, and a room full of neighbors worried about parking. "There's 72 families who are not on the call," he said. "We do not hear from those people."

Then there's Northland. The City Council approved it after 18 months of permitting, then opponents forced a citywide referendum that added three more. Nearly 60% voted yes, and it's under construction now. But every step brought another demand for study ("a traffic study, another traffic study, another traffic study," in Palmer's words), and each one made the project smaller and every unit more expensive. "It shouldn't require a citywide campaign, 18,000-plus voters, to get one single project approved," Palmer said. "If that's the standard, we're never going to actually address the housing crisis."

To be fair, Newton isn't the worst offender. Palmer's worst examples were elsewhere (Wellesley, for one, spent $3.5 million buying land next to an elementary school to stop an affordable housing project). But like most towns, we met the MBTA Communities Act but didn’t go beyond. We're pretty typical (better, even, than some other towns!), and that's the problem.

What we can do

Palmer did have some good news: it doesn't take many people to change the balance. When supporters do attend hearings, councilors hear from someone other than abutters.

But we shouldn't need a fight over every project. Zoning can allow good housing "by right" (meaning without a special permit, as long as it follows the written rules). 

That's what our citizens' petition asks the City Council to take up:

  1. Housing and business uses in manufacturing districts, so underused parking lots can become homes.

  2. Residential buildings up to five stories in business districts, so more people can live in our village centers, near shops and the T.

  3. Up to four units where two are allowed today, so the same-size building that now holds one big house can hold several smaller, more affordable homes.

New idea for zoning reform from Rep. Auchincloss

Rep. Auchincloss thinks state override of local zoning ("preemption," which is how we got Chapter 40B and MBTA Communities) is running low on political juice, so he proposed "street votes": the residents of a single block could vote, by a supermajority, to upzone their own street from a menu the Council sets. Think converting existing homes to multifamily, duplexes, or letting buildings sit a bit closer to the lot line. 

The neighbors who vote yes would see their property values rise, giving them a reason to vote yes. Palmer was skeptical; he figures the next street over would "go ballistic" about the spillover, and he'd rather see stronger statewide rules.

Palmer’s presentation ended on a familiar sight: an "everyone is welcome here" sign on one lawn and a "stop this development" sign as well. Or, as he put it in the Q&A, "If you can't live here, if you can't move here, it can't be a welcoming place."

Thanks to Professor Palmer, Rep. Auchincloss, and Congregation Dorshei Tzedek for a great evening.

If you want to help

  • Sign the petition

  • Help collect signatures at our table at the Newton Harvest Fest - October 18.

  • Show up at the next housing hearing, and bring a neighbor.

More information from the event

Kathy Pillsbury
Next

City Council Needs to Take Action on Housing