Marking a key step in the concerted push to create a housing bank on Martha’s Vineyard, a draft warrant article was unveiled at an online public forum Saturday morning.
Marking a key step in the concerted push to create a housing bank on Martha’s Vineyard, a draft warrant article was unveiled at an online public forum Saturday morning.
More than 70 people attended to hear the presentation by a coalition formed last year to press for passage of legislation at the state and local level that would allow a housing bank modeled after the Martha’s Vineyard Land Bank.
Still in draft form, the lengthy article is expected to appear on annual town meeting warrants next spring.
The coalition has been working all summer to gather support among a wide range of local officials.
“The purpose of our sessions, our forums, last spring and again today is to refine the language,” coalition steering committee member Doug Ruskin said at the forum. “The warrant article says draft all over it and we really mean it. This is all about listening to you and making things as good as we can, and as acceptable to as many people as possible.”
The meeting saw many questions and comments and also strong support for the concept.
Under the current proposal, the housing bank would be funded by a two per cent transfer fee on real estate sales over $1 million. The fee would be paid by buyers.
A housing bank commission would include seven elected commissioners, one from each town and one elected at large. The commission would review proposals and grant funds for affordable housing initiatives to public entities, nonprofit and for-profit organizations, and individuals, according to the draft.
“Generally it would be organizations proposing projects, developers proposing projects, not necessarily individuals, although that’s not excluded,” Mr. Ruskin said.
The commission could buy, sell, or lease land, but would not be authorized to develop or manage properties.
“It’s not going to be an operating organization,” Mr. Ruskin said. “The purpose of buying land is simply to be able to make it available for redevelopment and restriction.” But the commission would also be granted autonomous powers, similar to the powers vested in the municipal housing trusts that exist in almost every Island town.
“The purpose [is] to be able to act nimbly,” Mr. Ruskin explained. “The real estate market can’t wait for a town meeting vote to spend some money, and today the municipal housing trusts . . . have the ability to buy land in the open market.”
Similar to the land bank, there would also be six town advisory boards.
Funds would be available for projects targeting people who make up to 240 per cent of the area median income, which is $178,000 for an individual, a sizable increase from the current 100 per cent eligibility level used in current state and local programs.
The income threshold was a significant point of discussion at the forum, with some speculating that six-figure earners don’t need affordable housing, and others worried that without proper messaging, the figure could give the impression that the program does not focus on people on the lower end of the spectrum.
“How was it determined that [240 per cent] was the correct number? Frankly that seems a little high to me,” asked John Rau, who attended the forum.
Coalition coordinator Laura Silber said the figure is based on a housing bank model developed in Aspen, Colo. in 1989. She said in that resort community the bar was set high in anticipation of continuously increasing housing prices.
“Aspen didn’t need to really focus on units at that range, but as their housing situation worsened and the area median home price . . . continued going up, their legislation did allow them the flexibility to create inventory at that level,” Ms. Silber said.
Still, Mr. Rau asked rhetorically whether it made sense for someone who makes $250,000 to be eligible for assistance.
Steering committee member John Abrams said that’s where the housing bank commission comes in.
“The people that are elected . . . their job is going to be to spend that money as wisely as possible and to give subsidies in proportion to need,” Mr. Abrams said. “So even if the housing bank determined that somebody at a very high income under the 240 [per cent] needed a subsidy, they would probably give a very small subsidy in comparison to what they give for somebody at 150 [per cent] or somebody at 100 [per cent].”
Steering committee member Kimberly Angell said there are people who make too much money to qualify for assistance under current programs, but not enough to afford a house on their own — and those people are leaving the Island.
“While it may be that the need is greater [on the lower end],” Ms. Angell said, “it does not mean there isn’t a great need at the higher end also.”
Nevertheless, funds would be focused on people who make the least amount of money and therefore need help the most, Mr. Ruskin said.
“It is a shortcoming of the current language that we have not prioritized low-income [families], so I think we’ll really be thinking about this” Mr. Abrams added.
Under the proposal, funding would be restricted to projects for year-round occupancy, Mr. Ruskin said.
“Year-round housing is the problem,” he said. “We know that attainable year round housing is simply not available, there’s just no inventory, at almost any price that most folks can afford.”
Priority would be given to projects that repurpose already-developed land, that are close to existing services, and which address climate change and water quality.
“One of the concerns we heard very loud and clear very early on was, where are we going to put all these new houses? Well, it’s not only about new houses,” Mr. Ruskin said.
The Island has lost 600 units of year-round housing over the last decade to short-term rentals and seasonal housing, he said, referring to a study by the Martha’s Vineyard Commission.
“The point here is that if we can recapture some of those properties and then restrict them, we don’t necessarily have to build new [ones].”
The housing bank would expire after 30 years unless it is renewed by a majority of the six towns.
Other potential changes to the draft based on feedback at the meeting include:
• Clearly stating the range of income levels served and priorities within that service range to make it clear that low-income households are the priority;
• Specifying that the housing banks pays its own expenses;
• Deciding whether housing bank commissioners would be paid;
• Deciding whether to add a definition of year-round occupancy.
The goal is to have a final draft of the warrant article ready by late December, Mr. Ruskin said.
“I just want to thank everybody for your interest, your support, and your activity,” he said. “This is really a community effort and it’s going to work because of that.”
Comments
How is it fair to tax the
Mark EdgartownHow is it fair to tax the retirement nest eggs of islanders that have invested in and cared for their properties?
"The fee would be paid by the
Wolly Aquinnah"The fee would be paid by the buyers"
The tax is on top of the land
Mark EdgartownThe tax is on top of the land bank fee and buyer / sellers commission. More fees and taxes means the clearing price for a sale will be lower. Please don’t mess with retirement nest nest eggs.
If you are selling your house
Zed WtIf you are selling your house to retire a, a 2% lower sales price to accommodate the new fee won’t ruin your retirement.
Typical island math … pay 6
Brian Vineyard HavenTypical island math … pay 6 people to do do one job…. Six police chiefs …. Six Fire chiefs …. Six principals … six selectmen … six governments …. The best goes on… total mismanagement…. For a year round population of fifteen thousand… the most egregious waste of money is the school administrations … let’s use the money to educate the students…
I would consider supporting
Mitchell Greess ChilmarkI would consider supporting this, but probably not at 240% of the median income. What percentage of year-round residents does that figure represent? 50%? 70%?
Median income means just that
mike SomewhereMedian income means just that. The median average. Some (many) Island people make around $50-$60K per year, many do not. How does $178K fit an average. It does not. The % should be a more realistic number. The qualification should be 100 - 125% AMI(average median income.) $50-$60k is the mortgage, and BTW - where is all of this land coming from. We are an Island - land is finite. Also, - targeting summer second homes and potentially forcing rentals on the owners should be against the law. I worked very hard for what I have, and now I am supposed to give it to someone who cant afford to live here? Potentially trashing the home, as many renters do. How about living where you can afford to live. Government subsidized housing. There are always going to be affluent areas until they are overrun by people wanting a hand out. Preposterous.
$100k a year for a family of
Zed Wt$100k a year for a family of four doesn’t go far on this island. A family of four that makes $100k a year cannot currently afford to purchase a house at market value. I hope they’d make the income cutoff even higher.
"Funds would be available for
Mitch Chilmark"Funds would be available for projects targeting people who make up to 240 per cent of the area median income, which is $178,000 for an individual, a sizable increase from the current 100 per cent eligibility level used in current state and local programs."
This is for an individual, not a family of 4. "Median" means that 50% of the population is making less than $74,000. At $178,000 it's got to be up around 70-80% at least.
I can get behind this as a vehicle for people who need help affording to find a place to live (read "rent"). I can't see how using this to subsidize home ownership makes any sense.
Let’s call this what it is,
John Aldeborgh KatamaLet’s call this what it is, wealth redistribution or a new type of tax. Only this isn’t about the rich on Martha’s Vineyard where the average and median housing prices show a material percentage of home buyers are going to be subjected to this new tax. Also, remember this is how the federal income tax started. As a history lesson: it was because of the 16th amendment passed in 1909 that federal income taxes were established in 1913 (the government had tried once before but income taxes were struck down by the Supreme Court as unconstitutional) , initially it only impacted the top 1% of income earners and for them at roughly 1% of there income. Do we want to open this new floodgate? Once established it just a stroke of the pen in the dark of night and this “fee” can easily be 15% or on houses selling for more than $100K. I for one think we have a wide enough range of taxes already….Federal, State, Property, Sales, Social Security, Excise , Personal Property and then there are the government fees for doing just about anything. When is enough, enough; when it comes to the government, the answer is never but that’s lovingly phrased as “all we’re asking is that you just pay your fair share”, sounds innocent but it’s not.
So another fee placed on the
gina Menemsha / NYCSo another fee placed on the Buyer to create a new Bureaucracy.. I'm confused as to what their agenda is?? to compete with the already established agencies that provide this service..?? Also find the Income requirements confusing....
Why not focus on Local zoning issues..?? That could be fixed way before the State approves a Housing Bank IMO.. without creating a new Bureaucracy to operate .. ...
Intriguing article. Curious
Jacob EdgartownIntriguing article. Curious to see what will happen next.
This is yet another tax that
Jonathan K.This is yet another tax that will make buying a home a luxury to those that can afford an additional 2% increase in the price. It does not help those young families that want to get established on the island but creates a new socio-economic problem while trying to solve the problem of (global) overpopulation. Where do these people get the courage to come after YOUR homes and your hard earned money! All these compounding taxes will soon run us all bankrupt and force us off the island. Where will you find your funding then?
With sea level rising and
Dr. Charles Shabica Oak BluffsWith sea level rising and more intense storms, we might want to consider a Sand Bank where the 2% could be used for coastal sustainability.
Its really a slap in the face
here we go again edgIts really a slap in the face to those who worked hard, saved, rented rooms in their homes to strangers in order to build a nest egg investment. I've heard the same song for my whole life here. If there is a will there is a way to find a place to live. I know LOTS of people who worked hard, started with a pickup truck and a lawn mower and became millionaires. Some were born here, some came, liked it and stayed. We all know our 'peers' who blew their money in the bars, expensive winter vacations, fancy suv's and boats. Are they 'deserving' of this 'gift' as the rest of us worked hard and chose to be prudent? I notice some of the names 'advocating' for this tax. Connect the dots and you will see they are the beneficiaries of the contracts to construct this sort of govt gifted housing. Here's a prompt solution. Take the town owned closed landfills, and create 'little house' communities. Add a few 'bigger' ones= manufactured homes. Trailer parks are commonly 5-9 units per acre. Put in a road, run sewer, water, and electric lines and bingo.... its done. Except those strong advocates won't get paid to build the community... will it then have the same support? I'm not in favor of subsidizing someone who benefits from the grossly inflated wages here and then expects subsidized housing. Try running faster passenger boats from New Bedford and the problem is solved. (and even if you gave free housing to people they would still bail out for warmer climates from december till may so its not going to 'add to the community')
Agree with many - another
MarieAgree with many - another tax. Everyone wants to tax the other guy. Will a college bank be next? How about a retirement bank?
“ that are close to existing services, and which address climate change and water quality.”. Meaning Down Island towns? No affordable housing in Chilmark?
It would seem reasonable to
Martha EdgartownIt would seem reasonable to me if the land bank tax were reduced by the percentage this new tax will cost homebuyers. The benefit of that would be twofold, less property removed from the housing stock by the almighty and VERY wealthy land bank, and less land bank competition for buyers. I would like to see this new tax heavily weighted toward home sold for 300% of the median home price. I would think folks with that much wealth would readily pay a higher share of taxes because they can clearly afford to pay more, as evidenced by the purchase.
Thanks to everyone working on
Frank Brunelle Vineyard HavenThanks to everyone working on this possible solution. Having recently sold 4 units all at or under $350,000 I would take a different approach and try to create market affordable units but make each one exceptional in some way. If the goal is to allow current prices of over $1 million to be considered affordable by a gift of cash to wealthy islanders then my intuition tells me something is wrong. Statistically how many individuals would actually qualify? If they did then is the property now restricted to same conditions at sale? For businesses I would say we need very low end properties - even dorms - to provide summer housing for help. And low income islanders? Yes we need to do something as a community. Is this it? I see red flags at every level.
This proposal, if it is
Frank Brunelle Vineyard HavenThis proposal, if it is evaluated, no matter how or if it becomes reality, this month, this year, we as a community should make any changes subject to real and substantial reductions in Co2. What is the point of anything if our island is not secure? Our leaders talk about it but the reality is that globally we are not reducing Co2 and October 2021 saw an increase of 2.42 parts per million (ppm) compared to .75 averages when measurements began - a tripling of emissions and rapidly increasing at unsustainable record levels. Modest housing prices affordable by design would not create more Co2 or if so would be absolutely minimal if all factors going into the design were well considered. We talk about Co2 at our Martha's Vineyard Commission and these are all voted in or appointed by towns and the continuous inaction to reduce Co2 and in fact incredible increases approved by them are a model we in fact approve of and respect, and yet, it is backwards. These kinds of bodies scare me and should be a concern to everyone.
I’d previously read that the
Jack ChilmarkI’d previously read that the proposed 2% tax would be paid by the seller, not the buyer, which is different from the Land Bank where the buyer pays a 2% of the purchase price to the LB. is this reporting correct?
Can't raise taxes? Just raise
Ken Rusczyk Oak BluffsCan't raise taxes? Just raise fees! Easy Fix....right?
we don't care, It's somebody's money....easy peasy.
My concern with this is that
NellMy concern with this is that it might actually fuel the loop of rising prices. One idea (modeled after the way some universities operate in expensive areas) would be for the housing bank to retain ownership of the land, and to give a long term lease (99 years) at a very nominal cost. The homeowner owns the house and benefits from any improvements that are made to it, but the price of the underlying land is fixed and the property can only be sold to another qualified buyer. This allows the homeowners to build equity and potentially be able to trade up to another house, but maintains a supply of affordable housing in the market through the land that is owned by the housing bank.
Add new comment