The Legislative Road to Hell, 40B & Oak Point

Massachusetts Legislators pass legislation with good intentions that frequently have long-term unintended and unforeseen consequences.

In a reasonable attempt to provide lower cost housing, the legislature ensured that mobile home park residents would pay $144 excise tax each year for their mobile homes.

It would seem that their sincere attempt was to assure that places like Hill Crest remained affordable to residents who had spent their lives in a community, but once retired, were on reduced and fixed incomes.

That sincere attempt created Oak Point, where many have argued that the homes are modular homes, with untaxed sheds and garages.

Oak Point residents pay park fees to Saxon Partners, so had no way of knowing their annual contributions to Middleboro were only $144.

Their fees for amenities (club houses, pools, lawn mowing, snow plowing, trash removal) in fairness, are pretty steep, but don't go to the Town.

It has been estimated that were Oak Point residents to pay taxes on their homes at the same rate as other homeowners, it would provide the Town with + $ 1 Million annually.

But there's a further complicating issue of unspoken impact.

The Legislature, in efforts to ensure 'affordable housing,' passed the now infamous 40B.

To simply explain: the goal is to assure that 10% of each town's housing stock is 'affordable'; it allows developers to construct 40B subdivisions at higher densities than allowed under local zoning with the provision that 25% of the newly constructed units will be 'affordable.'

Those 'affordable units' are permanently deed restricted and will pay a reduced real estate property tax.

Oak Point constitutes 'housing units,' and as such, are added to the mix when calculating Middleboro's 10% affordable housing goal.

For each 100 units that are added to Oak Point, Middleboro MUST ADD 10 affordable units, but it gets more complicated than that.

Since a 40B developer must dedicate 25% of his new construction to 'affordable housing,' to balance those 10 units caused JUST BY NEW OAK POINT EXPANSION, he must build 40 new homes. (Of his 40 new homes, 25% or 10 units will be 'affordable.')

Part of the solution is to have Oak Point absorb the 'affordable housing.' Part of the solution is for the legislature to correct those 2 pieces of legislation.

Have you heard Middleboro Selectmen address the issue or offer solutions? Below is Bridgewater's solution.

Bridgewater zoning change could add 500 units of housing

http://enterprise.southofboston.com/articles/2007/11/15/news/news/news12.txt

Bridgewater bylaw changes would aid Bridgewater State College
By Theresa Knapp Enos, Enterprise correspondent
BRIDGEWATER —Zoning bylaw changes make up the bulk of this year's 66-page fall town meeting warrant, 30 of those pages are dedicated to the proposed Waterford Village Smart Growth Overlay District.

http://enterprise.southofboston.com/articles/2007/11/12/news/news/news13.txt

The KoolAid Formula of Town Fiscal Planning

Part of the KoolAid formula includes accepting that the Town of Middleboro needs either a debt-exclusion or an override, as well as new revenue sources.

When the numerous proponents present their dubious arguments, economies are conspicuously omitted. No where is it mentioned that the Town needs to live within its budget.

The Annual Town Report includes a statement from the Finance Committee on page 182-183 that includes the following:
Fiscal year 2004 from 2003: Increase of 2.6%
Fiscal year 2005 from 2004: Increase of 7.5%
Fiscal year 2006 from 2005: Increase of 10.4%

The Annual Town Report is posted in pdf format on the Town's Web Site for those seeking to inform themselves.

The above increases are unsustainable.

How much of the percentage increases can be attributed to excessive pay increases, in excess of what private industry offers?

Recently, a contractual town employee was hired with a 20% pay raise and a 4 day work week. That reduction in work hours seems to be a 20% reduction. Isn't that a 40% increase?

How much can be attributed to our failure, as voters to question expenses?

In July 2007, a lawsuit (begun in 2003) was lost by the Town of Middleboro that had been appealed to the SJC. Did anyone question what the legal fees cost the Town?

How much more don't you know about?


SELECTMEN’S MEETING
JUNE 2, 2003
Upon motion by Selectman Eayrs and seconded by Selectwoman Brunelle, the Board VOTED: To authorize payment of the bill submitted by Daley & Witten, LLC in the amount of $2,581.25.
Unanimous Vote.
This bill is in connection with the Rocky Gutter 40B litigation. The Board asked that Town Counsel provide a report of what has been paid up to date.

Enterprise:
Cusson ... said the town took just a few months to wrap up a multi-million deal for a casino, but years to resolve a 10 lot project. “Something's not right, towns just don't like 40B.”

“It feels good to win,” Cusson said, but he said the town kept appealing on every single level, “it was not a good use of the town's resources.” Enterprise

"Jane Lopes"
Jessie,Yes, this WAS temporarily lost amidst the casino frenzy - but you'll find that most of the legal fees were paid by the citizens' group that asked the town to fight the 40B, and also asked the town to appeal the initial decision.Jane
At 11:02 PM 8/3/2007, you wrote:Amidst the casino frenzy, this article was overlooked.Are you asking the BOS what this cost the town in legal fees?This case was a looser that Attorney Witten appealed.Is anyone asking who authorized the appeal?Does Attorney Witten view the Hayseeds as a 'CashCow'? Is anyone wondering why this wasn't included in the Gazette?