Battle heats up for future of 40B

I am a strong supporter of the Slow Growth Initiative. We need to stop the developers from making money on these 40B developments. I will also be posting signs in as many places possible to make sure people vote it out.

It isn't the 25% affordable housing requirement which vexes towns and residents, it's the other 75% of the developments that is stuffed down our throats which is the problem. Yes, it is time to revamp 40B into something that really benefits the towns and those who need affordable housing.

Don't destroy our wetlands! PLEASE

40B needs to go. It has not done what it was supposed to and there are numerous cases of developers finding ways around the laws and making huge profits for themselves and to heck with the neighborhoods and wetlands they have ruined. Before anything else is done there should be a complete and thorough investigation into every single 40 B development - and the results should be published.

todays 40b's = tomorrows ghettos!
40bs destroy communities and the enviroment!

Why is it that these homes are never built in the Mega-Mansion neighborhoods?

Can you say discrimination?

Yes to repeal taxes on alcohol, yes to repealing 40b, yes to reducing the state tax to 3%, yes to voting out Deval Patrick!

Everyone in Massachusetts who are sick of these tax and spend politicians. All together now -- "Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can!"

I support 40B because I live next to owners that have benefited from the program. Even in this soft real estate market many people are still unable to afford to live in Chelmsford. Basically I'm talking about anyone makng less than $100,000 is unable to qualify for a loan for a new/existing home. There is no more creative financing in qulaifying for a loan. In addition, we all should bone up on the many changes to the law (maybe all not statuatory) since 2006. Believe or not developers feet are held to the fire. Can any name a project built in the last 24 months that has been cited by the Inspector General. By the way does the Inspector General support repealing the law?

Supporter wrote:

I support 40B because I live next to owners that have benefited from the program. Even in this soft real estate market many people are still unable to afford to live in Chelmsford. Basically I'm talking about anyone makng less than $100,000 is unable to qualify for a loan for a new/existing home. There is no more creative financing in qulaifying for a loan. In addition, we all should bone up on the many changes to the law (maybe all not statuatory) since 2006. Believe or not developers feet are held to the fire. Can any name a project built in the last 24 months that has been cited by the Inspector General. By the way does the Inspector General support repealing the law?

So you support artificially lowered prices so people that cant afford a home can move into one? There is already housing for that demographic. Its called an apartment.

Truth writes the truth:

As you know 40B is also for rental units thanks for mentioning it. Another good reason why 40B is necessary.

Supporter wrote:

Truth writes the truth:
As you know 40B is also for rental units thanks for mentioning it. Another good reason why 40B is necessary.

So another name for 40B is 'low income housing project'?

The law does not take into account the over burdening of a town's services. the increase, rapidly and dramatic demands on the school system, road traffic, police and fire department. Why is it that the home owners who have sacrificed and saved to afford a home in the neighborhood of their choice must accept a developer who can come in, ignor any and all zoning regulations(which the current home owners had to abibe by), and over build a neighborhood. The 40B will get sew hook-ups, even though there are many home owners in the town, who have been paying taxes for years, will probably NEVER get hooked up. The law is discriminatory to all the exisitng home owners who should have their rights protected. Our constitution does not guarantee home ownership, that should be earned.

Actually what you state and assume to be true in regards to 40B being a drain on Town services is unsubstantiated. In fact, Chelmsford commissioned a study and found the opposite. The study identified 4 projects and the conclusion was that in the aggregate the creation of 40B housing is not a financial burden to our community. Unfortunately the group that opposes 40B has and will make a great effort to hoodwink us all. NOTHING they claim to be the truth is the current reality for our town or any other town in the Commonwealth. Furthermore, not many people have personally been negatively impacted by the 40B law. The law has benefited many communities in support of economic development for example job creation and retention. It has allowed business to attract employees like admins, sales associates, school teachers, public safety officers, grocery store workers, retail employees and many others that cater to our demands on a daily basis.As you know this benefits us all including you and me.

Back to To Tired wrote:

Actually what you state and assume to be true in regards to 40B being a drain on Town services is unsubstantiated. In fact, Chelmsford commissioned a study and found the opposite. The study identified 4 projects and the conclusion was that in the aggregate the creation of 40B housing is not a financial burden to our community. Unfortunately the group that opposes 40B has and will make a great effort to hoodwink us all. NOTHING they claim to be the truth is the current reality for our town or any other town in the Commonwealth. Furthermore, not many people have personally been negatively impacted by the 40B law. The law has benefited many communities in support of economic development for example job creation and retention. It has allowed business to attract employees like admins, sales associates, school teachers, public safety officers, grocery store workers, retail employees and many others that cater to our demands on a daily basis.As you know this benefits us all including you and me.

40B benefits developers, primarily. The benefits you claim are not substantiated. Unless 40B housing developments are 100% and PERMANENTLY affordable, will it even begin to make sense. When affordable units become market rate after 10 years, this is nothing but a ponzi scheme where the municipalities are victims. Even if we hit 10%, the affordable units will just add to market-rate numbers, then you'll need even more, new, affordable units to replace them. This is a ponzi scheme! The law needs to be changed from partial, temporary affordability, to complete and permanent affordability if it is to make any lasting, positive, impact and benefit. Until then, it is a law that benefits developers only. So "Back to Tired" explain to me how any municipality will ever reach 10% without permanent and ever-increasing development (primarily which would be market-rate). I'd love to see your explanation...

40B was the creation of Tom Finneran back in the 60's. The only reason for it was to get back at the suburbs for voting for forced bussing in Boston. There was no other reason for it. From there lobbyists like Gornstien have made millions and millions...

Semantics Game wrote:

<quoted text>
40B benefits developers, primarily. The benefits you claim are not substantiated. Unless 40B housing developments are 100% and PERMANENTLY affordable, will it even begin to make sense. When affordable units become market rate after 10 years, this is nothing but a ponzi scheme where the municipalities are victims. Even if we hit 10%, the affordable units will just add to market-rate numbers, then you'll need even more, new, affordable units to replace them. This is a ponzi scheme! The law needs to be changed from partial, temporary affordability, to complete and permanent affordability if it is to make any lasting, positive, impact and benefit. Until then, it is a law that benefits developers only. So "Back to Tired" explain to me how any municipality will ever reach 10% without permanent and ever-increasing development (primarily which would be market-rate). I'd love to see your explanation...

I agree with everything you say. 40Bs are unneeded as we already have housing projects to create low income housing.

Repeal of Ch 40B will send this state further into recession. CH 40B provides thousands of people with jobs AND discount housing to lower income families NOT at the cost of the taxpayer.

Look at who supports Ch40B repeal, it's a bunch of Liberals!

pitboss wrote:

Yes to repeal taxes on alcohol, yes to repealing 40b, yes to reducing the state tax to 3%, yes to voting out Deval Patrick!
Everyone in Massachusetts who are sick of these tax and spend politicians. All together now -- "Yes We Can! Yes We Can! Yes We Can!"

Wow, you really don't understand taxes.

I'm all for paying less in taxes. This much we can agree on. But the state sales tax is a flat tax. This is GOOD for tax payers. Scaled tax systems are necessary, but unfair. This year half Federal tax filers paid NO taxes. That's right, NOTHING!

It's a broken system that needs fixing, but reducing the state sales tax IS NOT ONE OF THEM. Think about it? ;)

FWIW< I'm in agreement with Dumping Duval and all the Liberals in office!

truth wrote:

<quoted text>
So you support artificially lowered prices so people that cant afford a home can move into one? There is already housing for that demographic. Its called an apartment.

I don't believe in the government giving loans to people who can't afford them, then the government stepping in and giving them yet another break. This is ludicrous!

But I DO believe in houusing discounted by a developer! A mortgage they can actually afford. At least I'm not the one bailing them out.

40B makes sense. Don't listen to these whacky moonbats and their proposed repeals. They've already driven this country into the ground.

tired of 40B in town wrote:

The law does not take into account the over burdening of a town's services. the increase, rapidly and dramatic demands on the school system, road traffic, police and fire department. Why is it that the home owners who have sacrificed and saved to afford a home in the neighborhood of their choice must accept a developer who can come in, ignor any and all zoning regulations(which the current home owners had to abibe by), and over build a neighborhood. The 40B will get sew hook-ups, even though there are many home owners in the town, who have been paying taxes for years, will probably NEVER get hooked up. The law is discriminatory to all the exisitng home owners who should have their rights protected. Our constitution does not guarantee home ownership, that should be earned.

Foolish post!
CH 40B is not a form of birth control. People are still going to have kids, whether you like it or not. If anything, repeal will make rich towns richer and poor towns poorer.