Cambridge remains addicted to development, while our housing policies still miss the mark
Cambridge is addicted to development. The housing crisis in Cambridge is intrinsically linked to an affordability crisis. Building our way out of this crisis in a city that is already among the densest in the country is missing the mark. The city’s housing agenda is developer-driven and has focused largely on building new housing. Since the abolition of rent control in 1995, there has been no major housing policy that specifically and significantly addresses the rising and out-of-control rents in Cambridge. The average rent in Cambridge is $3,243, which is 70 percent higher than most other cities in the state.
My vision is that any Cambridge resident who wants to stay here will be able to, without being displaced, kicked out or becoming homeless – whether they are low-income, middle-income or the working poor. Unfortunately, Cambridge’s position as one of the nation’s most expensive and inflated housing markets is actively pushing out Black and low-income residents and squeezing out middle-income families. According to the recent Cambridge Community Foundation Equity and Innovation Report, there is a $62,000 income gap between the average Black household and the average for all Cambridge households. Further, between 2010 and 2018, the Black community did not experience the same increases in median household income as other races.
How do we address this? Increasing affordable housing and pathways to homeownership for low- and middle-income residents is necessary for retaining diversity in our city.
My 50/20 housing goal would increase the amount of affordable housing in Cambridge from to 20 percent from 14 percent and increase our homeownership to 50 percent by 2040 from 35 percent. It is not only about building housing units; given that the price of new affordable housing construction is upward of $900,000 to build one unit, we need to consider options that invest in people and not developers. The city’s commitment for investing in an affordable rental unit is typically a third of the cost, which based on recent estimates would amount to $300,000. Why not offer similar investments for homeownership in Cambridge for residents who are in need?
I would like a more affordable Cambridge and want to see more tenants become owners. I think this is achievable with thoughtful, deliberate and proactive policy planning and execution. Cooperative housing, social housing, community land trusts and down payment programs should be seriously considered and developed in meeting this 50/20 goal. I am proposing that we pilot innovative housing strategies that could be viable options for quicker implementation in addressing the affordability crisis.
- Rent stabilization. Let’s model the New York Rent Stabilization policy, in which landlords are incentivized with a property tax break for reducing rents. This program was launched just a few years ago, and today 50 percent of the qualified landlords have taken advantage. I believe that a plan that engages landlords as part of the solution is our best chance to lower rents. This pilot program would need a home rule petition to be approved by the state Legislature. I have spoken with key legislators and affordable housing activists in Boston and Somerville, and they like this program. I believe that if Boston, Cambridge and Somerville are on board with this rent stabilization model, we have a greater chance of seeing it passed.
- Affordable down payments. I would like an easier pathway for homeownership so families are able to pass down their homes to their children and build equity. The city’s current affordable homeownership program, HomeBridge, does not do either of these things. In fact, you might as well call it a permanent rental program.
I propose an affordable down payment program in which the city offers a significant down payment – from 30 percent to 40 percent – in the form of a loan that shares ownership of the house. This allows the homeowner to afford a place they would not normally qualify for or have any hopes of owning. Over time, and with the building of equity, the owner may be able to buy out the city’s stake and fully own the property. To discourage flipping, the loan could be fully or partially forgiven after 20 consecutive years.
Most renters are paying much more than the equivalent of a mortgage with the high cost of rents in Cambridge. The average rent in Cambridge is equivalent to the monthly payment of a $600,000 mortgage at today’s rate. What is most challenging for low- and moderate-income families, including those with Section 8 vouchers, is lack of money for a down payment. This housing strategy leverages city funds to build stable housing and could be a game changer in addressing the acute wealth gap that exists for many Black, Brown and low-income residents in Cambridge.
Nicola Williams, candidate for Cambridge City Council
Greatly increasing financial support for a broader cohort of Cambridge residents, without meaningfully changing the limited supply of Cambridge housing available? This is playing musical chairs. I share your concern of the prosperity disparity, but feel that the needs can be better addressed with large scale creation of higher density affordable housing in Cambridge.
GREAT PLAN! This is the most sensible and sustainable approach I’ve seen. My son lives in a New York rent stabilized apartment on a modest income as you describe. The landlord gets a break on real estate taxes and tenants pay a small increase in rent each year–enough for the landlord to make a fair profit but not so much that tenants worry about being displaced. Most families in his very nice building are there for decades.
It’s great to read a housing plan for people instead of developers–I hope you can bring these ideas to the City Council
Looks at least very interesting, and innovative (I don’t really know if this is a novel idea; it is for me.)
The issue mentioned by taguscove seems real to me, though. How can this be addressed? To this I’d add 2 other observations:
a) Cambridge is expanding the high tech footprint. With this come massive numbers of folks from outside the city or state who, having a way higher income than the median, can afford to pay high rents – this is surely a factor in the rent inflation, given the limited supply of rentals units, and in fishing black and low income residents out of the market;
2) One other significant constraint is that the new, tall residential buildings exacerbate the competition for parking places; this addressed by taking parking places away, without offering the many elderly, handicapped, etc. an alternative option to using their cars – given the shabby public transport infrastructure. BTW, when using NY as an example, one forgets their great public transportation network. This enable many folks to rent in more remote neighborhoods, thus passing the pressure on the mid-town rental stock.
I could add other factors – it is a multi-challenge problem – but I’ll leave you with these two.
PS How many true urbanists experts, perhaps from the academic community, are involved in seeking a solution? In the ideal world, this would be voluntary – I am suspicious of those royally paid to address a narrow aspect or another – how can they not bend under the pressure of city management who are the holders of the purse?
It has been estimated that one million people would like to move to Cambridge, and while I personally question that number, it’s abundantly clear that WAY more people want to move here than can be accommodated. Housing is a REGIONAL issue, not a Cambridge issue. The issue we face as a city is what we want our max population to be. A significant increase will not only burden the city’s infrastructure, but also change the change the city’s socioeconomic makeup. We’re already seeing a horrific amount of displacement due to uncontrolled development and lack of planning.
Peace Be Unto You,
Cambridge, I agree with the author when he state’s that “Cambridge’s position as one of the nation’s most expensive and inflated housing markets is actively pushing out Black and low-income residents.” This has been happening for quite sometime here in Cambridge. It is a package of discrimination (civil rights,human rights,fair housing rights and other violations), that federal, state, and local enforcement agencies stand by observing and witnessing but taking no action to protect the violated citizenry. It pure tyranny and sadism. Even the major academic institutions in the area are also guilty of injustices, unfair and unethical and discriminatory outcomes to our underclass populations here.
Yours In Peace
Hasson Rashid
Concerned Citizen
Cambridge, MA