2021-11-23 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses
2021-11-23 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
um and welcome everyone to the Joint Committee on Community Development and small business. Today's public hearing is um pertaining to matters that deal with zoning and planning. We do have some speakers already signed up and um as is the normal case, we will start with um elected officials26 that have signed up and that are on the call, ready to go.
[REP COPPINGER:] So first we have um Representative gentile Who was speaking on behalf of House Bill 286 an act authorizing municipalities to expand certain funds for acquisition of land to be used for real trails.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And with that I'll turn it over to correct Gentile to offer the first testimony.
[REP GENTILE:] [HB286] [SB148] Well, thank you very much, cheer Carpenter. Uh Good morning. And uh Senator Kennedy and other members of the committee, thank you very much for the opportunity to speak today. I'm happy to report that amended language from house 286 And Senate 148 an act authorizing municipalities to expend funds for the acquisition of land to be used as real trails was Included in outside section 10 of the commonwealth physics F. Y. 2022 Budget. We worked in partnership with the Governor's office, particularly the Department of Conservation, Recreation,97 the Department Transportation and the Department of Revenue to draft language that would benefit our communities as well as language that was acceptable as well as language that was acceptable to all the interested secretariats, rail trails encourage people to exercise outdoors and they offer substantial positive benefits to the communities in which they are located, including the revitalization of town centres, increasing business opportunities, decreasing traffic congestion and air pollution and increasing tourism. I'm grateful to my colleagues. Representative Sabadosa Senator Eldridge and Senator Velis for working with me to help our communities access this crucial source of funding. I want to thank you again for the for the time to speak before the committee140 and for taking me out of turn today. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you Representative um I don't have any questions. Do any members of the committee have any questions for rep gentilly
seeing none. We will move on to our next speaker. Next speaker signed up with Representative Patricia. Duffy don't see her in the U. S. Um
rep Duffy are you there? SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
It's not, we will move on. I do see that my coach has Senator Collins is on zoom now so welcome Senator Collins um the next week to sign up thank you nick. Um the next Spilka to sign up was a former colleague Aaron vega
[COPPINGER:] speaking on behalf of H 285 which rep Duffy was194 going to speak on as well and that is an act to help developers revitalize underutilized buildings
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
so with that I'll turn it over to Aaron vega to offer his testimony.
[AARON VEGA:] [HB285] Thank you Mr Chairman Mr Chairman Carpenter and Senator Collins Great to see everybody once again. Um I do believe that213 Duffy is en route so hopefully she'll be able to join this meeting this hearing at some point. Uh I know she sent some testimony, written testimony. Um so just222 just briefly I'm very fond of this bill as this was something that I filed back when I was with you all, we worked with mass development to come up with the language, think of this as the Brownfield232 remediation fund. Many of you have probably utilized that fund in your city or town. Um it's a huge tool for us as we develop uh redeveloped properties, huge tool for us here in planning. Another director of the Economic Development office for Holyoke.
244 So Economic Development office for Holyoke.
244 So Economic Development office for Holyoke.
244 So we've utilized things like the Brownfield Mediation Fund numerous times and as many of you know,249 in our, in our urban course, not just our gateway cities but in our urban cores as we look to rehab old buildings. Um sometimes just the pure getting things up to code can can sink a project, uh updating sprinkler systems, an elevator, getting things up to code can often be millions of dollars before you can put some drywall up here locally are redevelopment authority and again, many of you probably have redevelopment authorities within your cities and towns. Um we're looking at trying to set up a similar fund like this locally that we could have some funds available to people that take on some of our more challenging buildings to get285 rehab. How just having that extra couple $100,000 to maybe cut some of the289 costs and close that gap as you know, the gap between making these projects happen and make these projects have these projects fail is often very thin.
So this fund similar to the Brown for300 remediation fund would be, could be a competitive grant, you can even maybe working something where there is a local match. Um obviously running this out of mass development uh, probably makes the most sense, but maybe there's somewhere else, Maybe it's D A C D but this would allow us to build on other grant programs that the city provides. Maybe even local tax incentives as we bring these buildings back up up to code, bring them back online as functioning buildings once again providing taxes, providing jobs, we're providing housing. Um so again, hopefully this is something that the committee can entertain um and look for ways to to move this forward. Um happy to answer any questions. Um but again, hopefully this is something that resonates with all of you uh in the cities and towns that you may have as well. Just giving those developers a little bit extra support to get these projects off the ground. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you erin appreciate the testimony. Um I don't have any questions or any members of the committee of questions.
Mr trip.
[SEN COLLINS:] Yes,360 yes, this is senator Collins. Thank you very much Aaron for joining us this morning and for your testimony, Congratulations on your new role. Um I hear a lot and clear your um your viewpoint here as as you discuss the urban core challenges we're facing some in my district to think I've been part of the district that on the edge of this are you represent and soon385 to be more of the community in Roxbury. Um, there are a lot of projects like that and, and a lot of assets that are in sort of older, that could be utilized for a lot of challenge that we're trying to meet.401 So one question I had was in terms of the contributions to the fund, How are the fund receive contributions this from an assessment uh, potentially is it sort of a feed414 by development, um, firms or is it, you know, is it's something that the city would raise charitably or is it just public contribution?
[VEGA:] Uh, great question senator. And I think that, you know, similar to the Brown for remediation fund, there was, there was a tide revenue source. Um, I leave that up all to you to find the best path forward, but you know, I wouldn't obviously support increasing a fee or a tax to support this fund. Perhaps there could be Arpa funds utilized to start the fund. Perhaps the percentage of some developer fees across the state could go into to maintain it. I also think that if you created it to sort of be a matching fund, it would, would require cities and towns to also find a way to support a program similar to this. Um, but you're exactly right. It needs a funding source, uh, similar to Brown's remediation, similar to all the other tools in the toolbox that that we utilize you know separate of state tax credits which comes down the longer longer road as far as revenue. Um So you're exactly right finding that finding that stream of funding um Perhaps if this is something that the committee would would entertain you know, I would obviously you know uh invite uh former Mayor Rivera now the mass development head of the mass development. Maybe I have that conversation as well. Um Happy to brainstorm if there's a small group that wants to talk about that but you're exactly right. It's always about where the money comes from.
[COLLINS:] Yeah I figured to be of course like other for state appropriation but I agree about mass development. The great and unique thing about them. Maybe you're playing authority. I know locally in boston's um is there cause our status that allows them to do bonding um and stretch those dollars out further sometimes and again you know they've had created513 programs in the past but they do use a combo of uh resources local you know like you project programs519 are a good example but there is a local estate in a private component there. So but anyway it's great idea and hopefully we can, I would love to see something happened uh to help address those urban core issues. So thank you for your testimony in field legislation.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Senator have a great great rest of your day.
[COPPINGER:] Thank you. I do any other members of the committee have any questions for ERin on H 285. 285. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Alright, seeing none. We'll move on. Thank you erin. Um Our next figure was signed up is Vincent Lawrence Dickson Who signed up to speak for S- 15 to an act for community housing packages. Okay, Get the tax. Hello, SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
can you, can you hear me? Ok? Yeah, we can hear you okay? Very good.
[VINCENT LAWRENCE DIXON:] [SB152] Thank you. Ah Co chairs Senators, Representatives and staff. My name is Vincent Lawrence Dickson of 60 Lake Street unit in Winchester Maso and 89 0. I appear to support S 15584 to and act for community housing packages. The relevance to housing is that Winchester where I live like many surrounding communities, we noticed such as Stone of Maldon, Melrose Wakefield Reading and others nearby are clearly exhibiting many of the same concerns about stretched local planning functions, revenue, economic development issues and the need to have useful information and tools in the face of substantial development projects. Such projects are often needed for various reasons, including affordable housing needs, but are not always welcomed in their form or substance scale and density are both important cosmetic issues and have potential impacts on local school budgets and other public services, especially eastern massachusetts is deeply challenged by issues of insufficient affordable housing on desirable developments and often overwhelmed local development contact.
This bill seeks to provide mechanisms by which the Department of Housing and Community Development can usefully assist cities and towns but especially smaller cities in smaller towns with useful overall information in those communities with up to date653 planning processes. This approach would be a tremendous what we might call turnkey information in smaller communities. Such information and useful guidelines could help to balance the overwhelming nexus of heavy duty developers, economic needs and the striving to keep important aspects of local character drawing from some important anecdotal674 information and other Western and pacific jurisdictions. These provisions hope to help screen for developers who operate by high quality standard. We're dedicated to being community cooperative, interested in building high quality, durable and mixed use and mixed income development in so doing this would be a set of tools that can plug into the overall challenges that must be met in ways that facilitate continued long term economic growth for massachusetts in ways that do not produce a tidal wave of cheap, ill fitting development without the context of the many different and varied community and local values that we treasure. Of course, flexible, smaller scale and local mass options will need to be considered.
But right now, for various717 reasons we can't even get their and most developments are being done without much reference to these transportation needs. In any case, it is vital to recognize the role that different levels of government can usefully play in helping more effective community options separately. For some of these similar reasons, I have proposed a Middlesex Regional Commission such as the Cape Cod Regional Commission to provide some additional tools on such important issues. It is important to remember that for many years county government has largely shriveled and ceased to provide functions and capabilities that may be useful in terms of areas and or subregions smaller than the commonwealth as a whole and yet larger than just one or two localizes communities. In conclusion, while the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, M. A. P. C does valuable work, cannot provide all the answers or answer all of the needs. We need more significant engagement by the commonwealth and this proposed legislation would be an important step774 in this direction. Please seriously consider a favorable report on S152 and feel free to explore this set of ideas in more detail. And I thank you.
[REP COPPINGER:] Thank thank you very much. So. So the main789 purpose of this bill is to kind of try to do some commercial mixed use property and and795 maintain a list of strong developers. Is that is that correct?
[DIXON:] Um Yes, that that's an essence of it. A lot of basically every local city in town. I mean you give you an example in Winchester not too many years ago, we only had a halftime one person planning officer. Now we have one full time and each city and town gets all the same developers come through if the commonwealth developed a detailed list of developers that had some type of rating or description827 of what they did through some interviews, it might help Provide a database for the local cities and towns to access as opposed to 351 cities and towns, many of which have thin planning resources to have to do it, each of them on their own. Duplicating much of the same thing and many of the suburban and rural communities, I really do need to engage Affordable housing. Perhaps, for example, you might be able to find a community out there that would love the revenue of having 500 or 1000 new people with some regional transportation. Presently they may just be sitting there where other communities are competed for and the prices get driven up on the local residents. So this I think this is looking towards the state perhaps being a more positive actor in encouraging constructive and good housing development together with the mixed use that we all support.
[COPPINGER:] Okay, very good. Thank thank you for that answer. Vincent, does any members of the committee have any questions on Senate? 152 for Vincent? I do mr. Chair, go right ahead. Senator Kennedy.
[SEN KENNEDY:] [SB152] Thank you The so, if I understand uh, part of the reason for this legislation would be so that smaller communities that don't have planning agencies within their municipality would be able to have a that the commonwealth would collect a certain amount of information that would give them a jump start on projects uh in their community going forward. Um And and probably saved them some months and some and some money and time is that correct? I get that right,
[DIXON:] Sen. That's exactly correct. I served on the finance committee here in Winchester for four years and frankly at times we were blindsided by developers showing up claiming various kinds of opportunities to do things and we had to start over with each one. If the commonwealth does some background work and provides a yearly update, they would also tell people offhand which developers may be really good developers and others that are kind of just hostile and looking for the cheapest construction and the fastest buck. And uh remember much of the towns of massachusetts even here in Winchester are a volunteer government. Uh so they could use some good high quality professional uh database on this kind of material I think would be a tremendous help.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, thank you Senator. Do any other members of the committee have any questions for Vincent.
No seeing none. Um Mr Dixon will let you go and thank you so much for your testimony and
[DIXON:] thank you for the time and for the challenges that we are all facing. 100%. Thank you. Thank you. Um The next signed up speaker is Salim furth Who was speaking on H 298 and act improving housing opportunities.
[SALIM FURTH (MERCATUS CENTER):] [HB298] Thank you. Chair Coppinger and Collins and members of the committee. Thank you for the opportunity to testify on H 298. My name is Salim furth and I study land use regulation and housing markets as co director of the vanity project at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University. The policy is invited in H2298 reflect the rising trend of state laws around the country that reframe local zoning authority with the intent of expanding housing supply. The US and massachusetts especially need more Holmes The steady rise of prices and rents reflected decade of under production nationally and decades of under production in eastern massachusetts, easing the supply of new housing would slow the rise of rents and home prices, reduce residential segregation and expand opportunity for thousands of citizens. H tonight includes a mix of worthy measures, some of which empower elected town officials to permit new housing and some of which limit the scope of local authority in maintaining barriers under current law, massachusetts requires a supermajority, votes of the planning board, town meeting or other governing body for most development decisions. To my knowledge, no other state takes this approach, the results in massachusetts is that a few vocal opponents of growth can veto popular projects, uncertainty, scarce developers away and raises costs for home buyers and renters. Massachusetts took the first step Toward weakening the veto power of vocal minorities in the last session's H5-5,
which allows a simple majority, vote for rezoning that expand housing opportunities H tonight would build on that success. It would empower local officials by enabling town boards to issue special parents and approve site plans with simple majority votes. It would also clarify that site1123 plan review is intended to be an objective, not discretionary review. Both of these steps would add certainty and clarity to the development process. Another provision of H298 is much more ambitious. It would require that every town legalized multi family housing in at least 1.5% of its develop a ble land. This is a good idea and would decrease socioeconomic and racial segregation as well as lowering housing costs. However, the legislature already took a similar action in section 18 of H 5250 and it may reasonably want to wait until that law is fully implemented via regulations currently being drafted by the Executive Office of Housing, Housing and Economic Development. Thank you for your time and your attention to the vital matter of expanding housing opportunity throughout the common
thanks so much for your testimony today. Um Do any members of the committee have any have any questions
adam? We're asking the question.
[REP SCANLON:] Mhm. Hi Mr Chair, thank you for recognizing me. Chair. Coppinger chair. Uh Sorry, you can't see me salim but my question was I was wondering if you could kind of give me a specific example of the issues that you just mentioned in the first bill. Uh and I was also curious if you knew about how many communities aren't already in compliance with what you were trying to do, uh, in the second bill, that makes sense.
[SALIM:] Uh, so If I understand you correctly, when you say first build, you mean 298 or 5250,
[SCANLON:] The one1224 that you mentioned 1st.
[SALIM:] So 298 which is under consideration in the committee today. So basically the state sets the rules for towns to approve1238 um, special permit site plan review et cetera. And then the town's implement that. So right now, what makes you massachusetts unique Is having this two thirds majority requirement for those kind of reviews everywhere else that I've ever worked, which is most states1251 in the country. Uh, it's a, it's a 50% majority unless there's some kind of protest. The result is that, you know, if you get almost any kind of development that's bigger than one or two houses is going to be site plan reviews of somebody builds a new shopping center, apartment complex, subdivision, site plan review sort of makes sure that, you know, the roads connect in a reasonable way. The layout is good and isn't going to dump all the stormwater off into one specific place or something like that. So it's a reasonable review for the town to have to make sure just like a building a building code review to make sure they're following the rules and doing things reasonably.
Um, but what that runs into trouble with is if you get some minority on the planning board or the town meeting who don't want the thing built at all. Even if they do a good job with the site plan and do everything responsibly, people will vote it down, they treated as discretionary and they have the option of just voting no because they don't like it. And so the law under consideration would clarify that the state intends site plan review to be an objective determination that the site plan is being done correctly. That it isn't some kind of shadow zoning where the town after the fact gets to come in and say oh you know we said you1329 could build shopping centres there apartments here but we1331 don't actually mean and then the majority vote aspect is just1334 kind of giving current power to current elected officials to do what the citizens chose them to do instead of leaving the power in the hands of whoever wrote the original rules um 50 or 60 years ago. Does that make sense?
[SCANLON:] Yeah. Yeah it does. I was just wondering if you had ever like experienced a specific example in a in a city or town where that has happened in.
[SALIM:] That's a great I wish I had one off the top of my head but I don't I can get back1364 to you on that.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Okay thank you I appreciate it
Thank you. Um anyone else have any questions on or testimony on H298 before we let1380 um1380 mr Farago
seeing none, we're going to move on to our next speaker. Thank you so much for your testimony today to buy the we should. Our next speaker is Ben Fierro from the Home builders and Remodelers Association of massachusetts and Ben is here to speak on behalf of Senate bills Senate, So it S 157, S 158 and 159
Little Ben.
[BENJAMIN FIERRO (HOMEBUILDERS AND REMODLERS ASSOC OF MASS):] [SB157] [SB158] [SB159] Good morning mr Chairman, Pleasure to see you. Nice to see you again. Uh It's a pleasure to address senator Collins And the members of this committee and I look forward to the day when we can meet again in the state House and discuss these issues in prison. So again for the record, my name is Benjamin Fierro. I am an attorney and lobbyist with the firm of lynching fierro here in boston and I represent again the home builders and Remodelers Association of massachusetts. Uh and mr Chairman, let me just begin by saying, I think it was instructive to hear the last speaker. But one thing I think that we've come to appreciate more than ever from this pandemic is that housing is both a social justice and public health imperative we need more housing for those reasons, we need housing for growth, for jobs, for economic opportunity and most importantly,1460 so that young people will stay1462 here in massachusetts, we have a real crisis in housing affordability, both rental housing, but particularly for homeownership.
First time home virus of median income1474 cannot afford a new home in massachusetts. And1478 importantly, first generation homebuyers cannot afford a home here in massachusetts. That's why we're concerned about any legislation that will make it more difficult, more expensive1490 to build new residential units. Uh And that's why I'm testifying in opposition to send a bill 1 57 A Senate Bill 1 58 and Senate Bill 1 59. And let me begin With Senate Bill 1 57 And mention that in addition to representing the home builders association, I've been involved in these issues locally for really my entire career for the past 18 years,1515 I've served as the vice chair of the Zoning Board of Appeals in the town of Ipswich. I also share the master plan commission in the town of Ipswich. So I do see these issues from a local perspective and with the difficulties that arise within the community. Ah Senate Bill 157 would amend the subdivision control law and it would require planning boards to send notice through the mail to every butter who had originally been notified of a hearing on a subdivision plan.
So, under the subdivision control law section uh 81 T requires planning boards to hold a public hearing when a plan to subdivide land is submitted before them for review and approval. It also requires the planning board to uh to mandate that the applicant pay for legal advertisement in a local newspaper for to at least two successive weeks prior to1576 the public hearing. As well as sending written notice to every butter to that property has found on the local tax list so that our butters are given plenty of opportunity and notice of a subdivision plan, an opportunity to come and speak to their concerns or support for that plan. Uh The law also requires or provides under section 81 uh uh 81 BB. Excuse me, that any party who is aggrieved by a decision by the planning board has the right to file an appeal in superior or land court. They must do so within 20 days1613 of the filing of1614 the decision by the Planning Board With the town clerk, as well as giving notice of that appeal to the town clerk within 20 days.
So there's plenty of opportunity for uh neighborhood of butter participation in the process. What this bill would do, however, is after the board1631 has made its decision and if they have approved the plan, they must then send notice to all those butters again. So first of all this legislation, which is a local option bill will create sort of patchwork around the state on how these things are handled by local planning boards. Secondly, it would mandate essentially an unfunded mandate to cities and towns to send such a notice out. And lastly, and this is a particular problem, I guess that we're concerned about is that developing housing of any sort, whether it's a subdivision, rental apartment, frankly, even a two family home is met with objection1670 by unfortunately so many of our citizens and neighbors. And the way that these projects can be stopped or the cost increased is frankly, by the Butter appeals. And butter appeals are one of the greatest problems that we have in terms of production of housing in a timely fashion. And their cost.
And these appeals, by the way, aren't necessarily frivolous because courts, yes, they can deny or reject and appealed as frivolous, but they are often brought what1699 I would call is a strategic or tactical that is in the hopes of delaying the project. So that circumstances change financing, change market changes. So the project doesn't go forward or to uh uh negotiate concessions from the developer. All that adds cost time and delay to these projects. Let me just give you an example in the land court today. If you were to file an appeal in the land court, it would be over a year Over a year before there would even be a trial in that case. And then you'd be looking at well over another year, 18 months before you would get a decision that 2, 2.5 years of delay and cost and expense has resulted in many units of housing not being built. So That is the reason for our objections to Senate Bill 157.
I know I've used a lot of my time already. Mr Chairman, so I'll try to move very quickly between the other two bills, Senate Bill 158 Senate Bill 159 Are two very ambitious pieces of legislation that have been filed for at least the past 10 years by Senator Pacheco. They're very similar. Um in many ways, both bills would attempt to create more coordination in terms of regional planning. By these bills, it would establish a State Council for Sustainable for a sustainable commonwealth. It would require mandate that local planning boards develop sustainable development plans. Again, an unfunded mandate, it would grant increased powers to regional planning authorities. Now the Merrimack Valley Regional Planning Authority or M. A. P. C. For example, they're incredibly important organizations which assist our cities and towns. But what they can't do is they can't mandate, they can't override home rule and local decisions in local planning. As I've mentioned, I served as the chairman of the Master plan Commission in our town. It took us many years to develop a1821 master plan. Quite frankly, we've had many master plans over the years.
Unfortunately, I think what you see in many towns are these plans end up sitting on a shelf gathering dust. Why is that? Because it's difficult in a community to come to consensus as to what our community should look like, where housing should be built, where there should be commercial or industrial development. And then trying to take that plan and actually passed local zoning to implement that plan often runs up against objections by neighbors and butters at town meeting. So, although well intended, Senate Bill 158, I think is overly ambitious is an overreach on local control and quite frankly, isn't practicable and workable. Senate Bill Warm 59 has all of those same provisions, but half of the bill1869 is an ambitious effort to rewrite the state zoning Act, essentially a radical rewriting of the state zoning act. And while many of those provisions are helpful, many of those would run into the same kind of difficulties, political difficulties, both locally and in the Legislature that we saw for the two years that the Governor's housing choice bill ran into and trying to be enacted.
Um So for those reasons, we are opposed to that legislation, we'd1899 like to see the housing choices bill have an opportunity to work. Your last speaker was asked about that, I have to say, I am not aware of any community who has yet taken advantage of the housing choice law to pass meaningful zoning reform that will enhance housing opportunities. But of course, the law was only signed by the governor earlier this year. These actions have to be taken in a town at annual town meeting, of course, in the city of City council can act on that. So we would like to see more opportunity for that. A lot of work before we take on greater zoning reform again in the legislature. Thank you Mr Chairman, I appreciate your patience in giving me the opportunity to speak with you and a happy to answer any questions.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thank you, Ben. Um I don't have any questions, do any members of the committee have any questions?
Seeing none, we'll move on, thank you very much, thank you1959 for your testimony today. Um we have been joined by committee members rep McKenna and Senator Rausch and I also see that our colleagues
[COPPINGER:] rep Duffy has jumped on um To speak on behalf of H 285 an act to help developers revitalized underutilized buildings
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
and with that Duffy I'll let you all for your testimony.
[REP DUFFY:] [HB285] Thank you so much. Thank you. Of course my well laid plan was that I would be here with erin vega and you know, that didn't quite work out. So thank you so much1993 for allowing me to testify. Hopefully I'll just be reiterating a lot of the points that Aaron vega made. Uh this is in some ways a very simple bill just looking to set up a fund to help developers most particularly in cities like Holyoke, a gateway city where our potential and um also our challenges are, you know, we're uh no longer used manufacturing hubs and you know, we're building back different kinds of manufacturing um different kinds of housing and some of our best assets and challenges are these beautiful old mill buildings and warehouses. Our promise also lies in local developers, local businesses that are going to be hiring uh local folks, taking advantage of of our people and our resources here and in our Depressed real estate markets, these developers, they're ready to take on these buildings, you know, support historic redevelopment and um they hit that magic line of 30% of the real estate value so much earlier than even just in a community right next door and certainly much earlier than in the boston area.
Um we support these these codes and safety, so we want to help these developers uh you know, be able to come up to code and protect these buildings. Um you know, we were also, we have larger developed developers like wind development coming in and helping us with these buildings. That's fantastic and I certainly want to encourage that to, but in many ways it's the smaller local developers that we want to help support. So um yeah, we were just, we um this bill was filed uh for a few sessions under my predecessor, my current uh planning and Economic Development Director and my former boss Aaron vega, I worked for it as his worked on it as his staffer, Mass Development helped us develop this idea and uh I think it's pretty straightforward, simple idea and we hope that the committee can give it a favorable report so with that I'd be happy to answer any questions.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Thanks for Duffy Um There was a couple of questions earlier erin I don't know if any members have any questions for Duffy at this time.
Yeah if you ask me a question I couldn't answer it. I'd probably go to Aaron anyway so
I get it. Thank you so much. Thanks for the time. All right thanks so much.
We do not have any other speakers signed up at this time. Um So I just want to throw it out there one last time before we adjourned today's hearing. Um Any people that are on the call, want to speak any members of the committee. I want to speak on any bills or offer any testimony today?
No. Alright seeing none. We will adjourn today's hearing. I want to thank everybody for attending today's hearing. Um We will have one more in early december. A final one. but I want to wish everybody a happy and healthy thanksgiving to you and your families and and thank you again for joining today's here. You too. Mr Chairman. Thank you thanksgiving. Okay thank you guys by
© InstaTrac 2025