2024-01-22 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses
2024-01-22 00:00:00 - Joint Committee on Community Development and Small Businesses
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Alright. Thank you. A little echo there. Thank you everyone for joining us, both virtually and in person to this hearing, for for the joint committee on community development and small businesses. My name is senator Pavel Pallano, and joining me is my house cochair, representative Paul McMurphy. We will, I know I224 have a few senators, that are gonna be joining us,226 as well, but, for senator McMurphy, if you would like to introduce, the reps in your side.
SPEAKER2 - Thank you, senator. Good morning, everyone. We have joining us here in person is representative Mortuary, and virtually, I believe we have, Representative,
Irina Rosa will be joining us and also representative, Fluker Oakley. So Appreciate, members of of the committee from the house, joining us today and, welcome this opportunity.
SEN PAYANO - COMMITTEE CHAIR - Great. So today, we're going to be hearing, testimony today on one Bill, House Bill 4065 an Act to improve and modernize planning and community development city of Boston. The270 committee will be calling on those who signed up to272 testify first, and then we will transition to those who have signed up, today in person. If you are here and have not yet signed up to testify, please do so now, with the committee staff just outside the hearing room. For those who have signed up to testify virtually, you should have received the link from legislative information services to participate on Teams, via Teams.
If you could please mute your microphone until you are called on, it would be very much appreciated. Testimony will be limited to three minutes per person. If you feel as if three minutes are not enough, the committee is accepting written testimony, up until action is taken on the Bill. I would also like to ask that that testimony be limited to just the merits of the315 bill before the committee today and not specifically about any current or future redevelopment or other projects by the city of Boston. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
And with that, we will begin today's hearing. If327 we could have first to testify, mayor Michelle Woop.
Thank you, madam mayor.
SPEAKER3 - Good morning, everyone.
SPEAKER1 - Good morning.
MICHELLE WU - CITY OF BOSTON - HB 4065 - Thank you so much. Chair Payano, Chair McMurtry, and honorable members of the committee, I'm here very grateful to be sitting with our chief of planning, Arthur Jemison. We have several members of our team here in the audience As well as I see city councilor Sharon Durkin in addition. It's a great day. I got a new Josh Sachem pen from showing up here, so it's already a wonderful hearing. I want to thank so many people whose feedback has been critical to this Home Rule Petition that we have sent up to you all and the larger vision that it fits into. I want to thank the other Boston state delegation members who are on the committee, Vice Chair Senator Collins, Senator Miranda, and representatives Fluker, Oakley, Montano, and McGregor. We are here today to testify in support of the city of Boston's home rule petition, House Bill 4065, an Act to improve and modernize planning and community development in the city of Boston.
Thank you to Representative Danny Ryan who sponsored this Bill on behalf of the city. I won't go into the full history of the Boston Redevelopment Authority, but it was part of a national wave, and in Boston, it was created nearly 70 years411 ago when the primary purpose in many413 cities was to try to clear away415 blight and make way for417 new development. But in doing so, as we know too well in the city's own stories of the West End and so many other largely immigrant, working class, poor, and very diverse communities that were displaced. Tens of thousands of residents were torn apart in communities, as a legacy of generational trauma then accumulated with many being promised that they could come back to new, developed housing and not ever having that that opportunity.
There are many, many differences between the city today and the city then, and we're not here to litigate the past or to talk at a different point in Boston's history, but to recognize how our needs today around development and planning for our growth are different. The challenges that we face today from climate change and a464 housing crisis to post-pandemic revitalization of our economy demand a very different approach, one that formally ends the era of urban renewal and rededicates our resources for affordability, resiliency, and equity across the city. The homeworld petition before you is designed in service of these goals. Under the leadership of Chief Jemison, we are restoring planning as a core function of city government to guide healthy sustainable growth in ways that share the benefits across all of our communities.
Outside of this homeworld petition, Chief Jemison and his team, many of whom are here today, have already taken significant steps to improve the predictability and transparency of the development approval process to better match community needs for both508 our community members and developers alike.510 Next week, I will512 file an ordinance with the Boston City Council to codify other pieces of this that fit into the bigger vision. That ordinance, for example, will codify the staff transition from the BPDA to the city of Boston than for full accountability and coordination in our planning efforts. This home rule is the other half of that. It does four things that I'll quickly run through. One,535 as mentioned, seeks to537 end urban renewal formally in a way that only the state legislature can formally approve.
At the city level, we have filed to extend the city's, urban renewal petition, powers only549 to give space for this petition to move through. Secondly, it protects the requirements and restrictions that some of the documents that had been related to urban renewal, codified in terms of open space and affordability and preserving certain uses. So we want to retain the important pieces but move away from that larger philosophy. Thirdly, it condenses the legal entities. Right now, even though you hear everyone describe it as the BPDA, the Boston Planning Development Agency, technically, the legal entities are two separate organizations called the Boston Redevelopment Authority and EDIC, Economic Development Industrial Corporation.
So even the board, for example, technically has to have two board meetings. Each session they meet, they gavel in, they gavel out. Property ownership is divided in a quite complex way. So condensing that, and simplifying that will allow our city-side transition to move through with more, predictability as well. Finally, as mentioned, it moves away from the focus on blight as the reason for taking action for development to resilience, affordability, and equity. For example, allowing the BPDA or allowing the entities that the city will be moving forward on, to take action when we might need support for a seawall in certain locations or for greater affordability in locations rather than focusing on how to uproot blight, which often had displaced residents along630 the way.
Through these, actions, we are trying to make sure that Boston can be served well into the future. This is an important piece of codifying this transformation that goes along with all the work already happening at the city level. With the support of this home rule, we will be able to preserve more than 11,000 units of income-restricted affordable housing and 1.8,000,000 square feet of open space. The new law will also establish clear processes for Boston to acquire and dispose of land to advance the affordability and livability of our city for generations to come. This will include public-private partnerships, to create equitable, opportunities for local businesses, and enter into vital tax agreements to make important housing projects viable for affordability.
It will also include the acquisition of property for affordable housing and the construction of climate-resilient infrastructure like those seawalls I mentioned. This Act will help usher in a new era of inclusive planning, design, and development for the city of Boston. We need a modern, transparent, predictable some that's accountable to our residents and communities that development is supposed to serve. It will also ensure our ability to take bold decisive action to address our housing and climate crises while more equitably sharing the benefits of our growth across all neighborhoods. So I respectfully ask this committee to report Boston's homel petition out favorably and provide the city with an opportunity to better serve our residents for generations to come.714 I'll pass it over to Chief Jemison.
JAMES ARTHUR JEMISON - BOSTON PLANNING & DEVELOPMENT AGENCY - HB 4065 - I wouldn't add much to what the mayor said, with permission from the panel. I would only highlight that, over the last, 18 months, we've already done the process of changing the way this agency works, everything from Article 80 reform, which is underway to, our recent work, on zoning. We're pleased that, we're going to be able, to begin delivering on the change that, it is stated in part by this, home rule petition. I'm here to answer questions with the group, that you might have, along with the mayor. Make sure that there's anything you're curious about. You have a chance to get your questions answered.
PAYANO - Thank you, Madam Mayor, Chair Jemison, for, your testimony. Just a couple of questions, before I, do want to get a better sense of, you know, if there's anything specific that you think that, you know, why would this, proposal lead to more equitable development than the predecessor? But before I get into that, I'm interested in knowing how, your office is going to be assisting, the staff of, you know, the current makeup, transition, to the BPDA.790 Specifically, you know, we're talking about salary benefits, and, in particular, understanding that folks are you know, somebody's been working there for 10,801 15 years. They have certain retirement plans. So transitioning over, you know, how are things going to look for them?
811 JEMISON811 -811 So,811 this home rule petition is actually essential to our ability to deliver, to deliver that. So, as the mayor was describing, the BRA was created under one framework, and EDIC. It's created under a different one. So one of the things that this home, rule petition would allow us to do, is as we are moving, staff members out of, working from for a different836 entity into the city, would have the chance if the home rule petition's approved, to buy into the retirement system. Otherwise, they'd have a much different, option where they would have to start at zero as if they were sort of starting a different job. We'd like to make sure that, all of our staff, as we make the transition to the city have a chance to, participate, in the retirement system.
It's important to mention, you know, that our agency was created at a specific time, but it's not in some respects, it has a lot of the components of other, other, municipal entities that you might have in your community, where there's a redevelopment authority, there's a planning board that approves projects, and there's a staff, usually planning, who work in, work for the city. At the time that the agency was created, all those things were put together in a separate agency. The agency had different different, as I've described, retirement and other, benefits associated with it.
So, one of our, key aspects of this, or the package of actions of which this is a part, is to bring the staff, under the jurisdiction of of the council like a regular city department, much the same way that many of your communities have organized their development. That way when the staff, including myself, are involved in922 managing and leading the planning process. We're doing so in a framework that is responsible to the928 elected officials of the city. So930 that's a key change that, that's kind of part and parcel of what we're doing. But to answer the question very directly. We do have a chance to move, our staff over and make sure that they have a chance to participate in the system, and this this Home Rule petition possible?
WU - I could ask, Mr. Chair. I just want to thank the chief and his team because this has been over a year now of really having one-on-one conversations with all the staff members to understand their specific situations, and in doing so, we'll see you'll see this next week with the city ordinance. There are categories where, for example, if you've been with the agency for a certain number of years or if you are, close to a close a certain number of years away from retirement eligibility, then there will be a different consideration in the city ordinance. But, as the chief said, in this home rule petition, the ability to then have folks transfer their years of service over into the city's pension system is really important.
I remember my first year on the city council during budget season, you get this thick budget book and each department has its own page. When it came to the then it was so-called the BRA page, it was just blank. It said, you998 know, it doesn't apply, not on the city budget. That's one key piece that I think we, over the history of the city, had been siphoned off separately1006 from all the other city operations, which meant it wasn't as coordinated, and also wasn't as accountable. So to get to your larger question on how this facilitates equitable development, sunsetting urban renewal is a big piece of that as well. Urban renewal in Boston focused on 14 maps where the BRA had the power to take action based on blight.
Those maps are all in and around the downtown area, a little into the Charleston, and Roxbury. So when you think about where the city is seeking equitable development today, all of those maps, by and large, have been pretty developed out ready. It's in neighborhoods like the rest of Dorchester, like Mattapan, Roslindale, and Hyde Park, where we want to facilitate the ability to have climate-responsive, more housing-focused, and equity-focused development, and even the fact that geographic limitations had been there is a reason to move away from that, and then also to have the greater focus on affordability baked right in rather than just on blight.
PAYANO - Great. Thank you. I see that I'm joined by, Senator Miranda. Thank you, senator, for joining. I'm going to give the mic to, the co-chairs. Questions, and he can introduce, our other reps that just came in.
REP MCMURTRY - Yes. Thank you, Senator. Just want to welcome Representative McGregor, Representative Scanlon, and Representative Scarsdale who's joining us virtually. Just want to take a moment to, thank you Madam Mayor and Chief for your testimony. I know there are challenges with all of the decisions, that you're making, but, the actions that you take here in the city of Boston, our capital city have a ripple effect across the Commonwealth. So we appreciate your intention and your effort, and we appreciate you taking the time to be here today for your testimony.
WU- Thank you. I will say on that point, Mr. Chair, in some ways, this is actually Boston seeking to become more like our surrounding communities. We have had a very unique, unusual, Really nationally, different development model where everything is collapsed together1124 and off the city books. In most of the communities around us, the planning arm of the city is the one that supports all of the efforts. The development follows that, and then the legal entities are much more streamlined and condensed, but it is city staff who are staffing and organizing them. So here, we're actually seeking to become more like everyone else in a model that works very well. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Members of the committee. Go ahead, sir.
REP MURATORE - Thank you so much. Thank you for coming out. So this is really about consolidating, making it more efficient, making it more modern. Is that correct?
WU- Yes.
MURATORE- Yes. Okay. And so how many employees are we talking about approximately?
JEMISON - Approximately, 200 -210 employees at the organization.
MURATORE - Great. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER8 - Any questions? Any questions?
SEN MIRANDA - Hi, everyone. Good morning. So I'm representing the city of Boston, born and raised, and I just had a couple of questions because I think it's really fascinating. I live in a community, the Dudley Triangle, that probably had, one the dubious relationship most1190 dubious relationships with the BPDA, at the turn of1194 the '80s, and 90s when we were at the heart of urban renewal, and, we fought and got eminent domain power over our land. Today, Dudley Street looks a lot different than when it did, when it was being pushed around, really, by a city agency, a city quasi-agency. So I have a couple of questions about the why. Why was this so important to you, to get this done and and hire this amazing chief to come back home to think about how we redevelop our city and change this?
And then I'd love to ask you a question about the naysayers. You know, in our city, there's no one project that everybody loves or one decision, that you would think that as a leader, you could put out there that folks are like, you know, this is a great idea. What are the naysayers saying? And how much validity do their comments have in this debate this great debate and dialogue around changing something that's going to totally transform I know when you said codify the transformation, that's the line that stuck out for me. So why, and then a little bit about what the other side may be saying that you might be thinking about as a Boston delegation member.
WU - For me, the why are many, many years of documentation of, in my time, eight years serving on the city council, I think probably six of them, I chaired the planning, development, and transportation committee and saw how broken the system was, that in fact the stories of your neighbors and those families in all the neighborhoods that have been touched by urban renewal and by the kind of previous actions of, development as the driving1299 force on1301 above and beyond planning, that really, translated into people feeling like we had a piecemeal approach all across the city. That if you knew someone who knew someone, you could get approvals for X number of stories more than otherwise.
If you went to a neighborhood where it felt like there were less, kind of resources and privileges to organize and fight against, then you could sort of push your way through more likely. It didn't there wasn't a clear set of rules that speaks to the need for us to have a modernized zoning code as well, which we're also working on, under the chief's leadership. But most of all, it's the fact that we have been focused since the creation of the BRA, have been focused on building buildings and having development drive all of the other, needs1347 of the city. The development brings a lot of benefits. Don't get me wrong. Right? It is the resources that fuel our tax base, that create the mitigation and ways to smooth transportation and and knit open space together.
But when all of that happens because a developer has come to you with one proposal, rather than the city has worked with community members and neighborhoods Say this is what we want in our community. Who wants to build it? It's a little bit of a flip that we are trying to, implement across the entire board. Here's a case where the legal structures actually are, the barrier to this moving in the right way rather than the vehicle for us to be able to do it. So we're doing that by asking for your support the state level to move that forward, but also working from1392 several different fronts at the local level, to bring about those changes. Then in terms of, you know, certainly you and I have had a lot of conversations about the intensity of sort of this moment in our political process, on this issue, I would count myself as one of the naysayers, right, going way back of a system that hadn't been working.
You know, I documented that a number of years ago in a very long report of all the changes that we needed, and it's been exciting to now feel like we can start to move ahead in bite-sized chunks and move forward. We're not there yet. We won't be there. Even with the passage of this, it's going to take a number of years to get through zoning, to get all the pieces together. But I think there are probably a couple of different sources right now of people feeling anxious. One is that we are still just in the middle of a transition. Right? Some projects have been in the pipeline before Arthur and I got here it wouldn't be right for us to say, you know, too bad.
You're starting over after multiple three, four, five years of process, So we have had to wrap up some of the things that were handed to us, like the neighborhood planning processes, four of the neighborhood plans in East Boston, Mattapan, Downtown, and that are not the approach that we would have, like to have kicked off, but we're finishing those and then shifting to our new approach, which is much more focused on transit-rich areas, where we see small businesses needing support with more density as well in our squares and streets program. Then I think there is still a sense of, you know, it's because we're trying to build the future while managing the pipeline that's ongoing to keep the jobs going to keep the processes going.
There's a little bit of1494 it can't be like we've gotten some requests. Why don't we stop everything until we can build the perfect system and then pick it back up and go? And that's you know, we've had the decision to make a major moratorium or a pause, I mean, it would be devastating for so many parts of keeping our housing pipeline going and, keeping the various approvals going that we are working to align the approvals and process now with the vision that we are aiming for, and I think we're almost there in terms of getting all the structures set, getting all the staffing set, and getting all the principles set.
We built new teams around planning long term planning around zoning compliance for the very first time, a design team that has studied each neighborhood to come up with, you know, so it's not just how tall a building is that matters, but what materials they use, whether they're reflecting back the unique cultures and character of that particular area that really signal who belongs there and what history they're reflecting. So, it's happening in a lot of different ways, and it's not perfect because everything in government is not perfect. But, we need to keep growing as a city, one way or another, we need to keep building housing, and that is also a very difficult conversation because it can feel like so much is changing all at once, but we are doing so in a way to stabilize our residents, bring good jobs, bring affordable housing, while also creating more opportunity.
JEMISON - Thanks, Mayor. With the permission of the chair, I might add a couple of things. I guess the first thing that I think is important to say is, are these naysayers is a way of saying it, but I think the first thing to learn from that particular time that the agency came from is that we're all citizens of the same city, and we need to try to extend the level of grace and, and sort of the ability to listen and absorb. So I perceive it a little more as a dialogue. I'm not certain that I have the best idea about everything, but I definitely and I want to hear other people's ideas. So I try to bring that approach to the work, because I think that's as important as as the work is to say, Jose, in the word the dialogue between the citizens and their, elected government is what this is all about.
I think that there's probably, you're probably hearing people very concerned about zoning. I know that in the squares and streets, initiative that we've launched, there's a sort of broad misunderstanding, I think about the fact that no one's, neighborhood is going to have new zoning until there's a neighborhood plan. I think that adding new categories to the zoning code is a way of simplifying it. I think that's been somewhat misunderstood as an immediate implementation of zoning, which won't happen until there's a real community process. So that may be a thing you're hearing.
I think the mayor very carefully and appropriately described what we've been doing with existing plans that had been with community members, it's been five and four years working on them, and then not so the idea of not continuing or finishing them, and taking them to zone, didn't seem like the right approach. So we have had to manage through a series of plans that wouldn't be what we would have initially designed. I also think that there's just a there's changing the way that we manage and have oversight over development is different, than not having development. Development and growth that's the right kind of growth is critical to our city and many financial and other ways. We will have to make sure that we're in a dialogue to shape the way our city looks feels and grows. But it's a dialogue.
But it does need to result in it often needs to result in, in development. So I think that's a little bit of maybe what you're hearing. I think we, we remain, open and listening, and that's the approach we're going to take in all these cases. But the key issue is that we do need to update our zoning code if we're going to have the kind of growth that this city needs. There's an article in the paper every day about, how hard it is to grow and produce housing and produce housing supply in particular. You know, zoning is part of it. If we've actually been able to show, I think, in places like East Boston recently and other neighborhoods that we can come together and create a predictable system, that helps get the development that the community wants. So we're excited, to keep doing that, and appreciate the chance to answer the question. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER10 - Thank you. Rick McGladden.
SPEAKER6 - Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Shealy.
REP MCGRGOR - Thank you, Mayor and Chief, for coming in. I appreciate it. I always appreciate the opportunity to, work with you, mayor. As many of you might know, I worked with her when she was on, when she was a city councilor for the EES along with Councilor Zakim. So, thank you again for coming in to testify. You've talked a little bit about, some of the history behind why this is important. Can you just walk us through how you think it will help the Bostonians?
WU - Okay. I'm trying to decide how far down the rabbit hole to take everyone here. The big picture is that, in the 50s or so, there was a movement nationally where there was a perceived sort of urban blight where people were moving away from cities and it felt that the national that point consensus through federal legislation was that they would try to get economic revitalization into cities however1849 possible. They pass laws at1851 the federal level that would reimburse cities Basically, 95% of the cost for the demolition of major areas and then the building of new buildings. And so cities hopped in and in Boston, that's how the West End came to be where it is today. You know, again, there are many folks, and I don't want to discredit their view, who believe that that is really what saved some cities.
Right? People will say that Boston's population had been, you know, headed a certain direction, and it was through urban renewal that we got prudential that we got some of the first large skyscrapers in the building, and that brought commerce1883 and this and that. We're in a different moment1885 in our history where it's not just if you1887 build tall office buildings, people will move in because they want to be in the jobs that are going to be in those buildings. It's the opposite. We can't even get people into tall office buildings because you can work from home and anywhere. So we really have to focus on making cities a place where people want to live and to be and to raise their families, and then the jobs will follow that. That's how we got Lego in Boston.
That's how we're going after a lot of different companies as we want to be the city where every generation of a family can thrive, and we know that's what companies are going to look to as they make their decisions because they're finding it hard to they need to find follow the talent. So kind of in between all of that was, as most other cities backed away from that model, Boston went in the other direction and actually consolidated more power into this agency and then took it off the city books and made its separate entity with its budget that was self-financing. So, basically,1938 the entity was owning certain properties, generating rents from that, and then using it to fund their activities, related to and connected to some vision around the city, but not integrated in the way that we're seeking to do1951 today.
MCGREGOR - Awesome. Thank you.
1955 PAYANO1955 -1955 Madam Mayor, thank you for your testimony. I have one question. You know, throughout the testimony, there's been mention of community input as being a strength of this new model. We've received testimony and feedback, that calls for more community feedback, in, the BPDAs planning process. I'm interested, to hear your thoughts on, you know, why you think or how you think that the newly constructed BPDA has increased transparency, and calls for more community input.
JEMISON - So I think there are lots of ways to start out. I might just use one example and then open it up. So, the Article 80 process, which is the process through which the City reviews development proposals of a certain size, is something that we are currently, being evaluated for, for change. So, we formed a panel of people who are giving us, some advice about the sort of, the rules and regulations there. We've also formed, we've had to have a consultant and a group of people who are helping us engage with people who served on what we call impact advisory groups who give input about individual developments. The reason we're doing these two things is that we need to understand the sort of what's going to make it easier for both citizens and the development interest to achieve the same goals in a, simpler, and easier process.
There's also in the, in the zoning process, we've got, as we've described, squares and streets where we're going to start small area plans in neighborhoods, after identifying some new, zoning options for people to actually select among, and then as a result of that, you know, implement, some kind of zoning, change in those areas that makes it easier for people to, for developers and, again, citizens to know what to expect and develop an interest to know what, what the expectations are going to be of them. I think these are ways in which we're trying to put more community input into the process. Now I do think that there's a, I do think that there's a conversation that needs to be had about, where we just say to people that the sort of commonly understood and recognized point that not everybody can get everything they want in converse in a debate about development.
There are going to be projects that people don't want. There are going to be features and heights or widths or windows that people don't agree on. I think one of the tough parts, of the job is that there's Boston does not have a large number of people who feel strongly and have a lot of background and experience and bring all that, background experience to the debate about development. That's as it should be. But I also think there's there's got to be a moment where you say, we have to find some consensus to have the growth that the city needs to have. So I think often when you hear people talk about community engagement, they're talking about the exact kind of, improved, access to the dialogue that needs to happen.
It's not just long-time property owners, but it's also people who may rent, people in different, who may speak different languages or meet in different, ways and need to meet at different times. But that isn't but getting all that conversation and dialogue in the same place, may not lead to more consensus. So one of our jobs is to try to bring that consensus forward. Often people say, well, I didn't like the way that I didn't want that to happen, or I wanted something different to happen. That's just unfortunately part of the process. We have to listen, absorb, and then try to find a way and path through that makes sense. So I think when you hear people come up and talk about community engagement, I know you will and I hope you do, you're going to hear people say, there needs to be more, and I think that's true. It's what we are baking into the process we're doing.
But I also think there has to be a recognition that for our state to grow, for our city to grow, we have to try to find make sure that that input and that engagement is leading to, a smart decision about growth. Often, that's a decision that, that is in the that that the person in, my chair has to, take responsibility for building that consensus or, making that, or making decisions that lead to, difficult decisions about development. I accept that challenge. Again, I'm here. I'm a servant of the people, and so I'm here to hear them and try to find a consensus that makes sense. So, I think engagement is something we're baking into our process. It's something we're open to hearing more about how we should bake into the process, but it also has to be balanced against, the the role of the folks at this table and our staff, which is to try to find a way to, to make a smart development decision around which there can be consensus.
WU - I'll just double down on, what the chief is saying in emphasizing that we are seeking and building the processes for more community engagement, but it's it's not the quantity that matters. In fact, I feel It would be almost impossible for us to have, even more meetings around projects with the butters and I mean, you can ask residents. People have been scheduling sometimes two meetings a night in their own neighborhood that they have to go about this project or the other one. So, it's really about building meaningful community engagement because of the way that2310 it's worked historically and, under the sort of system that we're trying to move away from 95% plus of all projects happen because they got a variance from the zoning code.
They got some special approvals from the zoning board of appeals or through the BPDA where they got an exception. To get the exception, you have to have the meeting with the Butters, you have to have the meetings on the ground, and then you have to have a hearing where people can testify again and show a voice or opposition or support, But ultimately, the ZBA or some other entity takes the vote, gives the variance, and then they move forward. I can't tell you how many times, It has been the neighborhood wants one thing. They say it at the meeting. They say it at the hearing, and it still goes the other way as if it didn't matter. That's because it is not the most appropriate place for community feedback to even matter in the process.
So we're trying to, one, change how we're interacting with the community even about. Not2368 just here's a proposal. It's basically done. We have to try to find a way so that you're not as mad. So we'll do meetings and meetings and meetings until you get tired and then approve it anyway. That has been the historic sort of model. Instead, we are focusing on, the the tangibles that matter in each community. Neighborhood or streets and squares, meaning neighborhood corridor-based zoning that's more, specific to that particular area, form-based zoning, which is moving away just from floor area ratio calculations and height into shapes Because that's what we hear really matters to residents. Neighborhoods look a certain way and whether something is six units in, you know, six floors up or if it's three side by side really makes a difference to how a neighborhood feels, even though it's the same square footage in terms of living area.
We're shifting to accommodate those shapes and designs and have had a lot of processes around that. Then the idea is that community engagement happens before we set the rules. Planning precedes development precedes zoning, which then sets the rules for development. So we won't have 95% of projects go through the ZBA to get the exception, because the zoning code will be real. We also have to be clear about what's on and off the table. I don't know if I should bring up Senator Street, Rep. But this is not a development example, but a transportation example where there was one corridor where people had been getting killed.
People were constantly getting hit by cars, kindergartners, seniors, everyone, and, we had a very intense and difficult process of being real with residents about certain things that could not be on the table and safety could not be what we, compromise on. So those are tough discussions, and we're continuing to2469 stay engaged and monitor how that's going. But we've made changes in several different areas because we need to focus on, in this case, it's resiliency, affordability, equity as what's on the table and how we're moving forward. My last ask anyone here if they enjoy how many community meetings on average they have to go to per week, and whether it feels like those actually matter. We're trying to change the system so that, it is the community feedback that guides the form-based zoning that then sets the real rules for development. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. I know virtually we have rep representative Fluker Oakley that has a question.
REP FLUKER-OAKLEY - Thank you very much, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Madam Mayor and Chief Jemison, for being here this morning. The question I have is related to your comment regarding the fact that surrounding municipalities in the city of Boston have a very similar structure. With my lawyerly hat on and always trying to see both sides of the issue, I'd imagine some would say, yes. That may be true, but they are not the city of Boston and the development we have here is quite different than our surrounding municipalities. Madam Mayor, Chief Jemison, what would you say to that?
JEMISON - Thank you for thank you for the question. So, just to be very specific, you know, there may be a woodst or a wall redevelopment authority, that has the power to do some of the things that, ours does for some of the same reasons. That community may also have a planning board that approves projects and deems them, appropriate for construction. Some communities also have land banks and things like that that are, separate. So our city has, all of those things wrapped up into one set of authorities in one board, pardon, two boards, including the zoning commission.
Then it has all the staff who manage and support those boards and commissions working for itself. Right? So it the revenue from those from, its land, holdings and its, and it's the property it owns basically, funds the activities of that thing. When you think about it, although those are all things that may exist in other parts of the community, they're all put together and they have their own, all put together and they have their own, staff, Leading them in their own separate director. I think we took steps here, in this case to to change that. So to answer your question very directly, why is that, just to make sure I'm understanding, why isn't it appropriate for there to be a different system in Boston versus the other places?
FLUKER-OAKLEY - Yes. So people would say that some of the municipalities you just named are not like the city of Boston. Of course, we know we have the largest population here within the Commonwealth and, some would argue even less land than a Worcester to to develop upon. So the argument I'd imagine folks on the other side of your homeroom petition would say is, listen. I understand that other municipalities have this structure. However, we in the city of Boston have a2652 very different, land market and size, we have a different volume of developments than other parts across the state. I'm curious to know what your response would be to the folks who have that, mindset and belief.
JEMISON - So I guess what I'd say is that2666 every major American city has a combination of the things that, we have in Boston. Sometimes they're clustered in one way or they're clustered in another or they're all separate. I think we can meet the challenge of, the role of oversight and supervision that the council will have over our staff as a budget matter, and use all those powers that we've described, in a new way that's appropriate for the future. Not for the2700 not for the past and the urban renewal that the mayor can meet the challenge. It's, really a challenge of accountability and a challenge of, in in engaging, frankly, a community in a very fundamental way. We believe we can do it. I know that there are people who will say, well, we haven't done it for 50 years.
You know, I think we can do it, and it's appropriate to do it now. I hope we've also been able to show that while we're doing it, we have begun modernizing Article 80 and begun changing zoning. We've also been able to enable development to go forward and approve very significant numbers of housing units affordable and otherwise. So we can execute the reform, and we can also, We can also continue to encourage, good development in our city. So to those who say, you know, well, you have to have something different because you're a different city, I'd say. We've seen, where some of the pitfalls of the old system. Not only can we, thrive in a new system, but we can also bring it the kind of democratic supervision that it needs.
WU- I was trying to keep in my Boston is special and the best vibe given the chairs and everyone else here, but since the Rep asked, I will dive in on it. I totally agree, you know, as the center city, as the space where most of the development is happening and we want to continue, generating housing production in very muscular, healthy numbers. This Home Rule Petition and, and shifting the structure won't inhibit our ability to keep doing what we need to be doing at scale. It is what, you know, Rep Muratore's question about, the size of the agency. We do have a larger, size of our planning and and development review staff than other locations, we will maintain that. In fact, under Chief Jemison's leadership, we've been growing even during this transition because we need even more resources around zoning and planning.
I will say that we are now taking best This is from other locations, and I've spent a lot of years studying this all around the country and in Massachusetts, but also taking the cues from our history, where if you look back in Boston's history, we are trying to address some of the lessons that we've learned along the way. This is a particular mission that we are asking for that would be for our, entity around resilience, equity, and affordability that is unique and, I think uniquely captures Boston's needs when it comes to our coast and, climate protections as well as the housing crisis and how much that affects the entire Commonwealth.
So I believe we're preserving what we need to make sure are still able to have the special tools to move forward, but rejecting the false, choice between either having accountability or being able to do things effectively. It was in the past a decision to have less direct accountability to the public in order to move as quickly as possible to override community use to have the agency write its zoning instead of having to go through public processes. So we are looking to sunset that urban renewal era and move to one where we have both accountability and effectiveness connected to the community. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER11 - Thank you both.
SPEAKER1 - Any Any other questions? And there, chief, thank you so much for your test. You
SPEAKER7 - Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - And we have we have next to test to testify, Victor Bruckner.
Sorry.
Thank you, mister Bronas. You you you have a
SPEAKER12 - address you Standing up.
SPEAKER1 - Of course. Sure.
VICTOR BROGNA - NEWRA - HB 4065 - Well, thank you, Chair Payano and Chairman McMurtry, and the rest of the committee for allowing me to testify. First, I should identify myself. My name is Victor Brogna. I have been a citizen of Boston for all my adult life, resident for 31 years, chair, associated with the North End Widefront Residents Association, as president, vice president, and chair of the zoning, licensing, and construction committee for approximately present years. I'm here to comment, on the Bill filed that I have of my friend, the mayor of Boston, a Bill that I oppose, I oppose it because I feel that it is not in the best interest of our city, and, the mayor has left, but I hope that my opposition can be taken, with that understanding that, we are all interested3006 in the best interest city and, my, objections are to that. The issues, too that I want to address.
General issues, Bill was packaged and sent to the city council by letter of January 30, a year ago. There was no prior, community, engagement. We did not get the opportunity to ask, why are you doing this? Why are you doing that? Why don't you do this? And that moves me to the substantive issues. That's that and this I. After the Boston Redevelopment Redevelopment Authority is being abolished, which the Bill, thankfully, does. It creates another public body. It's being called an agency in the Bill, But it is a public body politic and corporate under Section Seven of the Bill. That is the very same language that created the redevelopment authority 67 years ago. Why are we doing that?
There is already in the city a public Facilities Commission and a department that operates under it, which is capable of building affordable housing. It is embarking on doing it, the Public Facilities Commission is advertising is preparing advertising for bids to rebuild the West End Library and install 119 income-restricted apartments above Why do we need a new public authority created just like the Department of Economic Development Authority that everybody's happy to see when they go. The problem I see is that this new authority, although created for the noble purposes of the mayor, a subsequent mayor may look at it and say, great, we have the old BRA back, and then we are off in the wrong direction. Unfortunately, we have only three minutes. I have much more to say, but that's,
PAYANO - Well, Mr. Brogna, you can you can always include, if there are, more things that you'd like, more, insight inputs that you'd like to give to the committee, you could always submit written testimony. I would like to allow you to see if any of the committee members have any questions. None? Well, no questions. Thank you. Thank you very much.
BROGNA - I did email something to you over the weekend. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Great. Thank you, sir. Thank you. Next we have former city councilor, Josh Sachem.
JOSH ZAKIM - HOUSING FORWARD MA - HB 4065 - Thank you, Mr. Chair. I feel a little awkward going in front of one of my successors as District Eight City Councilor, but I appreciate this. I want to say, good morning. It's still morning. Chairs Payano, and Mc Murtry, members of the committee, see a lot of familiar faces here and appreciate your interest in this very important issue. Well, I am a former Boston city councilor. My name is Josh Zakim. I'm currently the executive director of Housing Forward Massachusetts, a nonprofit nonpartisan research and education organization dedicated to providing data back policies that will lead to the creation of more affordable workforce housing across the Commonwealth. As a former city councilor, a past chair of the council's committee on housing, and community development, and I think important to this conversation, a former, representative of the West End neighborhood.
A neighborhood I had the privilege of representing during my time, on the Boston City Council. A neighborhood that, as you heard earlier from Mayor Wu, was a textbook victim of some of the urban renewal practices, that the original Boston redevelopment authority employed. That entire higher community, mostly immigrant, mostly low income was swept away without recourse in the name of reform and renewal. Thankfully, those days are past us. Boston now takes a much different approach to urban planning, but that doesn't mean we should continue with the same 1957 entity and infrastructure that Boston is planning for Boston's planning in the year 2024. When the BRA was created in 1957, the city was in trouble. We face the scary urban challenges of blight and decay, and declining population.
But now, nearly 70 years later, Boston faces the very different challenges of affordability and sustainability. Today's Boston needs the tools to address today's problems, not those of the 1950s. For those reasons, I am here to speak in support of H 4065 and act to improve and modernize planning and commute development in the city of Boston. During my time in office, I often heard from residents and civic leaders, some of whom are here today, I believe, possibly in opposition to this bill. But that the city, wanted to see a comprehensive plan for thoughtful development and affordable growth in the city of Boston.
The Wu administration has taken on that monumental task, and passing this bill will help that work to continue by preserving powers that directly protect affordable housing and long-term sustainability while also curtailing some of the agencies that misused urban renewal powers of the past and creating more3330 accountability and transparency. Similarly to the mayor, when I served3334 on the Boston City Council, I was regularly disappointed with the levels of transparency and accountability that the elected representatives, like all of you are for the city of Boston had over such an important and powerful agency.
This Bill would3346 change that. As we face a daunting3348 shortage of available housing in Boston and quite frankly, across the Commonwealth, Housing Forward believes that this Bill is an important step that will make it easier to create new homes for all those who need them while preserving and expanding our stock of affordable and workforce housing. I thank you for your time and consideration. I urge you to act favorably on this important legislation, and I am so impressed. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Thank you, Councillor. Any questions? Thanks so much for your testimony.
We have next, Martin Roeder from the Neighborhood Association of the Back Bay.
MARTIN ROETTER - NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION OF BACK BAY - Yes. My name is Martin Roetter. I'm currently chair of the neighborhood association of the Back Bay. I'd like to thank the chairs and all members of this committee for the opportunity to testify. I've lived in the Back Bay for about 19 years now, but my connections with Boston go back much longer than that. Some of my forebears of the British Army were asked not very politely to leave some 250 years ago, but I came back. I'd like to focus on four related reasons to support my request to return this HRP to the city to be thought through much more carefully seriously and comprehensively than it has been.
I agree that change is imperative, But not this change that the BRA is now obsolete created in the mid-20th century When Boston had been a declining city for several decades to meet demands that were not being addressed and we're in a very different place today, and the BRA has not been able to deliver what we now need, more widely affordable housing, and also at the same time, allowing the proliferation of bio labs like Kudzu's without proper oversight and without any evidence of strategic planning for them or other building units, But most mostly project by project evaluations. My first reason of concern is that the current BRA is distrusted by Boston residents throughout the city, all the neighborhoods that I deal with quite often as chair of the neighborhood associate of the Back Bay.
Furthermore, the BRA itself clearly does not trust community members. Regrettably, over the past almost two years now, The level of distrust has been increasing. Constructive suggestions and critiques from community members, not only Back Bay condo owners, have been dismissed as unworthy of consideration in multiple forums that I have attended. We have heard conflicting assurances from BPDA staff about the consequences of a zoning amendment affecting affordable housing projects. Also, we are very concerned about the asymmetrically skewed ongoing program for reforming the PPDA Article 8 development view process, which involves a steering committee, eight of whose nine members are directly involved in or strongly financially connected to developers in the real estate industry.
I'd emphasize the point that this HRP has been developed and approved without any effective community input. It will in fact, as others will show, increase capacity, reduce oversight, and augment the new PPDA's authoritarian powers, which they will be able to interpret at their sole discretion, which is not encouraging given its record. My final point is that residents and neighborhood civic associations are among Boston's greatest assets. Some of the examples I can quote are our3567 contributions to the establishment of the city's3569 short-term rental ordinance and3571 the creation of the Boston Groundwater Trust.3573 We are indeed NIMBYs. New ideas for my backyard. To this our due, no more, but also no less. This HRP will give us less. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions from the members? Thank you so much, sir, for your testimony.
SPEAKER8 - Thank you, sir.
SPEAKER1 - We next have, counselor, Sharon Durkin from, City of Boston.
SPEAKER14 - Thank you so much.
SHARON DURKAN - BOSTON CITY COUNCIL - HB 4065 - Hi. I'm Sharon Durkan, city councilor for District Eight in Boston, representing the West End, Beacon Hill, Back Bay, Fenway, and Mission Hill. Thank you so much for having this hearing today. I'd like to express my support for Mayor Wu's planning-centered vision for Boston's planning and development agency via House Bill 4065, an act to improve and modernize planning and community development in the city of Boston. Special thanks to Rep Danny Ryan for sponsoring the chair, Rep Payano, Chair Mertrey, and the members of the committee, including Senator Liz Miranda, Billy McGregor, and, Brandy Fluker Oakley from Boston.
At the time of the Boston Redevelopment Agency's creation in the mid-20th century, our city was in a very different moment with very different challenges in the moment and challenges we find ourselves in today. Our city agencies should reflect our current needs. Critically, under this Act, an agency responsible for reviewing and approving so much of our built environment will no longer be situated outside of city bureaucracy. This planning part department will be overseen by the administration and the city council. Moreover, this act will allow the city to be part to part from the harmful urban renewal practices of the past, which were responsible for the complete demolition of one of the neighborhoods In my district, as noted by former Councilor Josh Zakim.
The historic and beloved West End neighborhood, while3691 retaining the helpful authorities granted via urban renewal powers. The West End Museum and I brought this book with me because I like to be rooted in history. But the West End Museum stands to tell the story of a neighborhood that could be forgotten3708 but is not. To be clear, this will allow Boston to wave goodbye to the urban renewal of the past that cleared diverse and beautiful neighborhoods on account of being blighted while allowing the city to use real estate tools for resilience, affordability, and equity. These are the charges of today and the tools we need to accomplish the challenges of today, and I'm happy to support this act and Mary Lou's vision for sustainable growth under a shared vision with Chief Arthur Jemison, to bring planning as a core function of city government.
This move would further modernize and make for a more transparent and predictable system, more accountable to residents and communities of Boston. But I see residents of my district here today, and I hope that through city processes and hearings, we'll be able to explain more to them what this would mean. I support the mayor's bold vision to address housing, and the climate crisis rooted in equitably sharing the growth, and I think that this will, this will give us a chance for this agency to be more accountable, moving it underneath the city. I hope the committee report for Boston's home rule petition is reported favorably and gives us the tools that need to serve our residents. Thank you so much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any of the members have any questions? Go ahead.
REP ARENA-DEROSA - Yes. I have a quick one, Councilor. First of all, thanks for mentioning the Westin. My dad's an old Westin guy who grew up there. Court in history. You mentioned this a little bit in your testimony, but, gentlemen, before you said there was limited community input, which to me is always really important. Can you just characterize the nature of what it has been to date? And does the city need more time to do that before we go later?3804 I mean, I just would like to get a better3806 sense of that.
DURKAN - Absolutely. You'll3808 hear from many members of the public today about, their feelings, about whether, you know, their voices are being included in the community process. I do believe that this Home Rule Petition will give us the tools and actually give the city council more of a role in ensuring that community meetings and processes like the mayor spoke about today, can be more rooted in the community.
However, I do believe under Chief Jemison's vision that, we're moving towards a better place. But like the mayor, was quoted saying earlier in3842 this hearing, It's incredibly important, to note that some of the processes that have been going through the process are, you know, remnants of past, you know, past people and, and the city's responsibility to continue the work of predecessors. This Home Rule Petition would give, the mayor and chief Jemison the ability to actually complete their vision for what the city planning and development process should look like. So that's why I'm urging, you know, my colleagues in government to approve it. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Are there any other questions? Thank you so much for your testimony.
SPEAKER14 - Thank you. Thank you so much.
SPEAKER1 - Next, we have Ford Cavallari from the Alliance of Downtown Civic Organizations.
FORD CAVALLARI - ADCO - Thank you, Mr. Chairman and our honorable members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to testify. I want to be very clear that there is the language in the Home Rule Petition and then there are a whole bunch of great stories that we've heard visions, Mayor's or Chief Jemison's vision of how this should work, what Councilor Durkan said about, how there's a vision that will have more input. I challenge any of the folks who've talked about these visions to point out to me in the home rule petition where the community input is codified and where the city3940 council oversight is codified, where anything but a continuation of the authoritarian rule of a state quasi-private authority that can sort of do what it wants if it's board and its zoning commission votes to do so. I would say you won't find it. I would offer to the committee if you're interested.
We did a, very detailed comparison at ADCO, Which is what I represent, by the way. Fort Cavalieri is my name and Alliance of Downtown Civic Associations, the nine largest associations, in downtown Boston, we looked at this, home rule petition language and compared it with Mayor Wu's White paper in 2019, interestingly entitled Abolish the BRA, we were shocked that there was almost no crossover between the two. This, this piece actually this Home Rule Petition doubles down on the authority powers. It actually bulks up, the authority creating the new BPDA, which is no longer tethered to any city council oversight. The new BPDA, and the old, BRA used to need urban renewal zone reauthorization regularly from the Boston City Council. This new one doesn't. Instead, there's a one-page description of equity, affordability, and resiliency.
No real definitions are provided, but there's a hand wave that basically says, well, if by some process, which has not been defined, We determine that there's a need under any of these three words. We can short-circuit all of the oversight that we used to have, and we'll just declare it. Part of the issue that we've had in, urban renewal has been the invocation of 121 powers. Chapter 121 powers under Commonwealth law. Those at least have had some guardrails around them. There would be far fewer guardrails in this new, harm roll petition. So I hope that you folks decide not to, Past this, if you want to see, the materials that we've put together to do the comparison, we'd be happy to provide them. I also, want to urge you, to make sure that there's more work that the city does and codifies before You let this thing through and go to the next step because it's just not ready for prime time. Thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, sir. I see, Our vice chair, senator Collins is, here with us, today. Members, any questions? Thank you, sir, for your testimony. If there's other information you'd like to4109 provide, please, send it to us through email.
Next we have Steven Fox from the South End Forum
and he is with us virtually.
Steven, you are on mute.
SPEAKER12 - Folks.
SPEAKER1 - There we go.
STEPHEN FOX - SOUTH END FORUM BOSTON - Great. Thank thank you very much, to the committee. I really appreciate the opportunity to speak to you. I'm Steve Fox. I chair the South End Forum, which is the umbrella organization for all the neighborhood associations of the South End. We have some 15 independent neighborhood associations. Been working on this issue for a very, very long time. I'm here to speak in opposition to this specific home rule petition. I think what's important for the committee to understand because I don't want to repeat some of the other comments that had been made or two things. One is the issue of community engagement. The other is the example that the mayor and Chief Jemison used, to exemplify the kind of community engagement that they have that they have said occurs.
Article 80 is an important element in the development review process. It is the cornerstone. The review process that the BPDA is currently, undergoing involves one community member. The rest of the people involved in that review are all either developers or developer-related, and the meetings are held in private. They're not even public. So if we take just the Article 80 review process as an example of how review is occurring for the development in general of the city of Boston, it is left lacking. I can tell you honestly, that people are upset from Highland Park to Charlestown about that Article 80 review process. That's first. Second, in terms of community engagement, we all want to see a zoning code that is more reasonable and rational.
We all want to see a process for review, and development review that doesn't rely on the ZBA for variances for every single project. But we do need to take a look at this home rule petition in terms of How it strengthens the city's hand rather than the hand of communities in terms of being able to say what's important or not important. I vote that it strengthens the ninth floor of city hall, the BPDA home, and it does very, very little for communities. It's the BPDA on steroids as we see it. So we urge you to reconsider any forward momentum on this Bill. We think it needs a lot more work back at city hall. Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, mister Fox. Any questions? Senator Collins?
SEN COLLINS - This is actually, maybe more for us. Is the, thank you. This is my constituent right there, Steve Fox. Always bringing, I'll bring in some candor and, if you mind, I'll just give you an I have a question about whether or not this home rule is amendable. Sometimes they come up sometimes they don't. It is? Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, mister Fox, for your testimony.
Next, we have Miss Kate Dineen from A Better City.
KATE DINEEN - A BETTER CITY - Hi, everybody. Chair Peano and members of the committee, thank you so much for the opportunity to provide testimony regarding H 4065. My name is Kate Deneen, and I'm the president and CEO of the Boston-based nonprofit, A Better City, Which represents a multisector group of nearly 130 business leaders united around a common goal to enhance our region's economic health, competitiveness, equitable growth, sustainability, and quality of life. I want to start by thanking, Mayor Wu, Chief Jemison, and members of the BPDA who are here today for their ongoing efforts to improve what is an unpredictable and often protracted development approval process, that has hindered efforts to date to realize what is a shared vision of equitable and necessary growth within the city of Boston.
The petition before you today reflects that reforms are needed to enable important changes that can optimize our planning and development processes to enable projects to swiftly move from proposed to promoted to constructed. We hope that some of these changes will ultimately allow for more predictability and more efficiency to fast-track the projects needed to address affordability, resiliency, and equity, and also contribute to the fiscal health of the city and the vibrancy of our4421 economy. The petition formally establishes the PPA as the entity responsible for undertaking plans to promote affordability, and equitable growth, manage the Article 80 process and other zoning decisions, and also to execute 121 hours.
The proposed petition also preserves publicly beneficial agreements through existing urban renewal plants and urban renewal plans. It empowers the agency to take targeted real estate actions that will protect important community benefits from affordable housing to open space to seawalls. These are new tools for a new time to ensure that our great city continues to grow and thrive in the face of unprecedented threats from our housing crisis to our climate4469 crisis, to the changing nature and character of our business districts in the wake of the pandemic.
To be clear, we don't believe that the measures included in H 4065 represent every action,4483 that's needed to fully modernize4485 the development review process. We're mindful that there are important4489 details still to be determined concerning the implications of the changes that are sought in this Bill. Moreover, the proposed legislation does not address the work necessary to improve the Article 80 process, for example. To implement thoughtful zoning reforms that were referenced by the mayor and chief Jemison. To create potential development incentives that are necessary to meet the moment. A better city looks forward to continuing to work with the Wu Administration to advance these improvements and to create the more resilient, affordable, equitable, and vibrant Boston that we all seek. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions from the members? Senator Collins.
COLLINS - Thank you for your testimony. Given the area of the city that you, work on, what's the position of ABC on the bus lanes and the bike lanes on Summer Street, which is the which is international well, I mean, if we're talking about business, we're talking about the economic the international port of New England. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER17 - Yes.
COLLINS - And, you know, to his credit, the director of the BPDA who's been very transparent along with the mayor about the vision and plans. We kind of know what that is, but they have separately the transportation division that unilaterally came in and instituted these without any I mean, this happened on the parts of the city too, but this one really has put, I believe your members in a position. I'm not sure what the official position is of ABC, but there's a concern there. Because if, You know, unilateral planning that's already prezones getting done by an entity in you know, I want just to be clear, the historical, you know, a timeline of this, the Boston Redemption Authority was created in4586 the aftermath of James Michael Curley.
It was4588 not, you know, because they needed to take parts of the city and, you know, all that that happened after under the Collins administration late not no relation, by the way. As far as I know. But that you know? So there was some independence and, you know, and like I said, there's a a clear vision laid out. It's been articulated earlier with the mayor and the BPA director. But long term, You know, if we find ourselves in situations like this I mean, we have every civic and business group that has expressed, you know, serious opposition about this, and that's a modest unilateral authority they have right now to do that. It's created all sorts of choices in, the truck industry. It's under review.
We had to create a special commission, thanks to the legislature, there's going to be a meeting over the next six months to discuss the impacts of that. That's not something we should necessarily have to waste our time in a reactionary fashion. So is there a position that ABCD has on I mean, that ABC has on the unilateral by the way, they want to take a bus from the city point in Boston to Sullivan4650 Square in Charlestown in the morning4652 during Russia. That's that's incredible. Impossible to do but incredible to the concept. So is there a position ABC has on the the Summer Street bike lanes and bus lanes?
DINEEN - Does it well, thank you for the softball, Senator. So we haven't taken an official position on the particular proposal, but I will say that a better city as an organization has, a lot of dialogue with various parts of the Wu administration in the city of Boston, you know, from the BPDA folks who are today to talk about the Home Rule position to, to Chief Franklin Hodge and his team within the Transportation Department. You know, I think, we are always trying to emphasize the importance of proactive engagement with the business community. Not once a plan has been finalized and proposed, but from the beginning4700 to try and really get a sense of the unique needs of the area when it comes to commerce, Curb management, commuter needs, you know, different types of multimodal considerations.
So that's something that we really continue to hammer home with with our various points of contact within the administration and, to try and keep that dialogue open. That is not just a unique challenge for the Seaport, obviously. Right? We see that throughout the city. As the administration really tries to lean in on diversifying our transportation options from bus lanes4733 and bike lanes to car traffic to optimizing, transit service with the. You know, I think in general, all of our members are appreciative of the reality that we're going to need multiple transportation options to support equitable growth across the city, and we are going to need really robust engagement with both residential and commercial stakeholders at the table very early and often to understand really what the needs are and how we can collaborate to address those.
I think with the seaport example, we have4767 seen, you know, a4769 proposal for a pilot that was once going to be, you know, there was some confusion around center lane, bus running pilot as opposed to right running, right lane running pilot and, you know, what kind of data is going to be gathered, what the time duration, you know, the start and end time for for the bus and bike lane pilot, in particular, is. So, you know, I think just to emphasize your point that you know, collaboration and communication earlier in the process is always something that we as an organization are trying to emphasize, whether it's anywhere else.
COLLINS - I know. But this is not anywhere else. This is the international port of New England. You have DHL Yep. FedEx, UPS Yep. The Marine Park. Conley Terminal goes to Vietnam. We have trucks that are coming together all across the state. This isn't, you know, to Washington Street in Rosendale or Roxbury. So there's no opinion of the I mean, your members are sharing so I just this is an example to me. If we're going to go do things unilaterally on faith, you know, and I appreciate the fact that you know, the director was clear that he'll you know, in the aftermath, this would be weighing in that if he sees them, concerns continue, which are clear. It's a disaster. Have you taken Summer Street anytime soon?
DINEEN - Yes.
COLLINS - We have 18 wheels slaloming because it's being told to go in places that they just can't. So it's very, very dangerous, and I have a serious concern about that as it relates to planning and the consolidation of where that may land. So, you know, I hope that your organization weighs in.
DINEEN - Okay. Well, I'm happy to have a follow-up conversation with you, Senator too, with our members. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Any other questions from the members? Thank thank you so much for your testimony.
Next, we have Joan Seamster.
Looks it could be virtual.
If you see me squint at the names is that, on this piece of paper, the names are, like, size 4 font. So I have to use my special powers, first, to read them through. Is is Joan here virtually?
SPEAKER5 - You guys do a tour
SPEAKER1 - for No? Alright. Well, Oh, thank you, mister cochair. Dolores Bugdanian.
She's virtual.
Dolores, can can, you put yourself on video?
And you're also on mute.
DOLORES BOOGDANIAN - FENWAY CDC - Okay. I didn't I wasn't aware that I could unmute myself. Good morning or good afternoon. Thank you very much for this opportunity to participate. My name is Dolores4953 Boogdanian. I4955 live in the Fenway. I've lived in the Fenway for about 40-odd years, and consider myself a long-term resident of the city of Boston. I am here to express absolutely for abolishing the BRA. I don't think anyone who's testified so far is against that, but I cannot support this Bill. There are many reasons. Some have been expressed earlier, but the key points I would make, it is not clear that, again, the planning function of the agency will supersede the agency's development function. That is not clear in this Bill.
It is not clear what the city council's role in oversight of the agency will be, and I think that's critical. As others have said, and I would agree, it gives even greater authority and discretion, in this new agency that's described in the Bill. Then is held by the existing iteration of this agency. All of whom, as you've heard, think, need to be modified significantly. You've also heard that this mayor has selected a steering committee to help her over, over review, and modify the way the public article AD review process is done in this city. That's overseen by the Boston Planning and Development Agency, and she selected eight of the nine who are members of the development community with one sole community organization support.
I understand that development in the city is important. I am not opposed to development. I am just opposed to development that does not take the special character of our city into account and does not listen to the people who live here and care about their city and who are not just saying we don't like it. We're actually offering suggestions and ways to make the development better. When when those comments and those suggestions are ignored, we start to wonder why and how, those who are currently, overseeing the actions of the agency will be any better at hearing our words than they are now.
So I would just say that, in terms of public safety, when we've got over 10,000,000 square feet of lab space being built in this city and under and not one a public meeting about the risks associated with this concentration of use in a densely populated area and, which is congested. I would say that there's a missing piece here. And when the ARC, the community has said, well, what about those risks? Shouldn't we have some public discussion about that? Not one meeting has been scheduled, and we're told, don't worry. It's all very heavily regulated, but then regulated by whom. So I, you know, I just want to say the words sound great, but the way that things are happening under this administration and Chief Jemison has left a lot to be desired. I'll stop there. Thank you very much for the opportunity to comment. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions from the from the members? None. Ma'am, if there are other things that you'd like to, add to your testimony, you can always submit a written testimony. Thank you so much. Next we have, Tony5153 DeSodoro? DeSodoro. There we go. Thank you, sir. From Alston Civic Association.
ANTHONY D'ISIDORO - ACA - Mr. Chairman, Thank you. To the members of the committee, my name is Anthony D’Isidoro. I am president of the Allston Civic Association. For over 60 years, the Allston Civic Association has been the civic voice for the residents of Allston and North Brighton. In the early 1960s, as a young boy of working-class parents, I witnessed firsthand the community, environmental, and social destructiveness that took place from two simultaneous events that forever see in my brain. The injustice imposed on those who are voiceless and incapable of pushing back against the indiscriminate use of governmental power helped drive my passion for public service and social justice.
The extension of the Massachusetts Turnpike From Newton to Boston cut our community in half. Homes, businesses, our commuter rail stations, and cultural landmarks were taken. Back then, environmental impacts were never considered, and still to this day, they are profound. For families who came to America seeking a better life. They were targeted for who they were and the American dream was shattered right in front of them. Barry's Corner in Lower Austin was a tight-knit working neighborhood of stand-alone houses that the Boston Redevelopment Authority determined were to be taken down in an effort to, quote, redevelop the area, and end quote. Residents put up a good fight and those who left to avoid eviction got pennies on the dollars on the dollar for their homes.
Those that stayed to the bitter end and left their homes unoccupied to go to work or to run errands Found when they got back, their locks had been changed and their personal belongings dumped out in front. Proud,5280 hardworking people who loved their neighborhood called Barry's Conner home were told to leave. They were in the way of an initial vision that was never realized. These traumatic events not only displaced our people, it displaced our trust in institutions created to promote the common good. It is for these reasons and many others that I come before you today in strong support of H 4065, an Act to improve and modernize planning and community development in the city of Boston.
Under the leadership of Mayor Michelle Wu, the city of Boston has embarked on an aggressive effort To steady the shift, to right the wrongs of the past, and more importantly, to position our city and the Commonwealth for sustained smart growth While addressing future needs such as climate change, resilient infrastructure and protecting community assets such as affordable housing and open space. The proposed act would add to the detrimental effects of urban renewal and allow for more creative and equitable approaches. Critical to all this is the statutory changes being sought allowing for the establishment of a new charter for the Boston Planning and Development Agency for advancing resilience, affordability, and equity. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Could I just have another
SPEAKER1 - Yep.
D'ISIDORO - Coupled with transferring current workers over to the government under the mayor will allow for greater transparency and accountability. Your prompt consideration of H 4065 is but one piece of a total effort to elevate the planning and development process, which includes reforming the city zoning code and the development review process as well as master planning, ensuring good transportation, health care, urban design, and sustaining a sustainable development. I urge you to support our shared vision for one Boston that will create boundless opportunities for all who live, work, and visit our city, and most importantly, have a city serve as a beacon of hope for our young people to see the very best in all of us. Mr. Chairman, I also want to, in full disclosure, identify myself as this shadowy figure on the article lady steering committee that has been mentioned by numerous people in this testimony.
SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
I was just wondering if I could just make one comment.
Go go ahead, sir.
D'ISIDORO - Thank you, Mr. Chair. I very much appreciate my colleagues, who I have worked with. I've worked with Go on several issues such as billboards and what have you. I respect their opinions and what have you. I just want to let you know that as the sole member representing the civic environment on the Article 80 steering committee, I have done everything I can to reach out to my colleagues. We have a stakeholders that has over 100 members on the listserv. We have regular meetings to try try to, keep them informed as to how the steering committee meetings are going. We have consulting groups working with us that have conducted numerous focus groups and interviews with residents throughout the city, and I hope my colleagues have taken advantage of that opportunity. Whatever recommendations come out of the steering committee will be, out there for public comment and ventilated to the community as well.
So although I respect, their opinions. The impression that I get when they keep mentioning that I'm the lone person on this steering committee is that I'm going to have one vote and they're going to have eight. That's not how the steering committee is set up. The steering committee is simply working with the consulting group to do our due diligence, to come up with some big ideas that can from that, we can have some solid is that can from that, we can have some solid recommendations to present to the people of the city of Boston for their consideration. So it's a much more, I think, open process. I didn't get to pick the steering committee. I didn't get to decide on the format. That was mayor, but we're trying to do the best we can under the circumstances to engage as many of my colleagues in the civic space as possible to get their views, to make sure they're represented, and that I am well informed when I stand5539 and represent them in the steering committee5541 meeting. Thank you, Mr. Chair. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, mister Desidoro. I was I've been wondering who that who that member is. So, I'm glad that you've come up and identified yourself. The situation. Are5553 there any other questions from the members? Senator Collins?
COLLINS - Thank you for your thank you for your testimony. You have a unique position.
D'ISIDORO - Yes.
COLLINS - So in your assessment. What happens to what will happen to the articulating process? Which I think most people say is not perfect, But at least it's sort of there and can be, you know, understood even if it's, you know, not perfect. What are your thoughts on what the impact of this will be on the articulated process and what that may mean?
D'ISIDORO - Senator, where we're at right now is after numerous meetings and5588 months of, together and working with the consulting group and all the data that has come in, all the information, and what have you. We have kind of put together 10, what we call big ideas that encapsulate the5604 vast majority of the concerns expressed by the people who have been interviewed. From those 10 big we'll merge very specific recommendations. So as a matter of fact, as we speak over the next few weeks, we will start to entertain, specific recommendations on how the out-of-the-league process can be changed, not only from an operation standpoint but from a community engagement piece as well. I believe you're going to see significant change because one thing I agree with my colleagues is that the process isn't working well. It is not standardized.
Every project has a different outcome in terms of how it was managed, and how the project manager handled it. The BPDA is well aware of that. So as the mayor spoke about earlier, what we're trying to do is come up with a more consistent process, standardized process across the board where we treat every project the same way. We conduct our due diligence in the same way, and we allow for significant community engagement in the process as5673 well. But it is a broken system. We are not going to tweak the outside, the boundaries, we're going to go for some significant, recommendations that hopefully will improve the process based on due diligence looking at other cities and municipalities around the country and some of the successes that they've realized.
COLLINS - Well, we are an old City, most of which wasn't Boston for a very long time. Was Roxbury wasn't Roxbury was its own. Reedville was its own town next to Denham. So we have a very5707 small city. I think some of5709 your colleagues' concerns, like downtown, are different than Austin, obviously. But one of the things that we're looking at in a different committee up here is the management of open meetings and how these have moved away from largely in-person and Zoom is flipping the burden on public comment.
Because right now, you know, you need the approval of the managers to allow for public comment. But a lot of people feel like, you know, particularly in the aftermath of COVID, a lot of folks were kind of shut out of that communication, although emails were received and that, so the public records there, but, as it relates to Arc Lady and those meetings, do5748 you have any opinion on how those should be managed either differently, whether they should go back to in person, whether they should be hybrid. You know, obviously, language access is a big part of that, something we're considering up here. What are your thoughts on the public meeting process?
D'ISIDORO - Senator, I'm a hybrid fan, but the problem with that is, that it's evolving and it's getting better. The infrastructure isn't in place around the city to accomplish that. So little by little, we're seeing more community space, people are making those investments, and it's not cheap to put in the equipment necessary to do an efficient hybrid meeting. I think the concern from BPDA is that there are many locations where the possibility of the meetings getting interrupted, not going very well.
COLLINS - Sure.
D'ISIDORO - So, yes, we can do what they're currently doing all virtual. We can, to some degree, do some workshops personally. We can do more in person. But if we can Invest in community space and upgrade those facilities to conduct state-of-the-art hybrid meetings that would be a significant improvement over the current environment that we have.
COLLINS - Yes. We're taking a look at that with the trust fund that's been set up for that. But in terms of the space, I mean, I don't know what the community centers have.
D'ISIDORO - Some location, Senator, the investment has been about 30, $40,000. To do the amplification, to do the lighting, to do the camera work, and what have you to allow people to come in virtually as well. But I think that's a place where public investment should be looked at because the quicker we can get the infrastructure in place, the quicker we can have a hybrid meeting, which a lot of people love The in-person aspects of it, but a lot of very busy people,
COLLINS - Yes.
D'ISIDORO - Love to be home.
COLLINS - Yes
D'ISIDORO - You got a lot more people participating. Right? Well yes.
COLLINS - Yes. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER4 - Thank you.
SPEAKER19 - Thank you, sir.
SPEAKER1 - Any other questions? Thank you, sir, for your testimony. Thank you.
SPEAKER19 - Thank you, mister chair.
SPEAKER1 - We have5871 next, virtually, Tess Cunard.
SPEAKER4 - Thing in JP? This is the district.
SPEAKER1 - We don't see, so we'll move on. I I see that, representative Vaughn is is, with us virtually. Hello, representative. Next, virtually as well, Thomas Meehan.
Mister Meehan,
we will be moving on. But if you're there and you would like to testify, comment on chat and, we'll move you next. We have in person, Ruth Whitney.
Thank you, ma'am.
RUTH WHITNEY - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 4065 - Thank you so much, for letting me speak today. I have not done this before. Thank you. I'm speaking as a lifelong resident of Massachusetts, I'm a resident of Dorchester Center. I have two young kids in BPS. I'm an environmental justice advocate. I am here to oppose House Bill 4065. I wish I were here to say yes. I like saying yes to things. I heard you mentioned you did not want to hear about specific developments. I've been brought into these chambers. Because of a specific civic development, I will try to respect, that request. Just to mention that, in my neighborhood, Members and a non-profit that serves economically disadvantaged families invested really heavily in a plan to develop the school's adjacent lot.
Expand their mission and provide affordable homeownership to families that are being pushed out before learning a developer had filed an LOI. Despite there being a fully funded alternative that would meet a lot of needs of our community and provide affordable housing. Residents have been told by Chief Jemison, the BPDA that we are in Boston's way, and the school is being vilified in the press. My neighborhood is a part6006 of Boston. We find values and vision in the example in my neighborhood, that have very small rental units. Questions not answered about where families might fit. Affordability doesn't meet the definitions of affordable for people who live in my community. Property, profits for developers, tax abatements.
In this case, it means the loss of an actually viable funded alternative creative community-based solution. This is not equity resilience or affordability. I have grown up believing that Boston's values should be reflected in our squares, in our streets, in our neighborhoods, and in communities. I've watched trees go down by my parents' house in Brookline, and I've watched things that my kids love go by the wayside blocked by huge developments. Meru ran on abolishing the BPDA and these practices, and we supported and elected her based on that ideal of neighborhood building, and we really want to engage with that. I've been a part of the stakeholder's route group. We've written multiple letters and have yet to hear a response that I'm aware of.
Maybe there has been one given since. I cannot think of a successful venture where equity was really a priority, where power was held in the hands of the few, and affected communities were shut out of decision-making processes. I really tried to read through all of the documents that you're considering, but I could not find protections for communities to speak in cases like this one. It's because of my lived experience and after reading this Bill and because of my aware privilege in being here that I'm trying to say this to you. I've been told6110 by other members of the BPDA that I am here on privilege and don't know what I'm talking about. I have no job. I have two little kids. I should be home looking for work. My husband wishes I would. I think you guys should really read through this and make sure it protects communities. Thank you.
PAYANO - Thank you. Are there any other questions? Well, ma'am, I would like to say, that for the first time doing this, you did an amazing job. You know, the so, I want to, say thank you for being part of the civic process, being a former city council member. You know, I've seen, like, lines of people for, against certain things. You know, one of the great things is knowing, that there are people that care so deeply about their community that they're willing to kind of, speak up, and voice their concerns. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
Looking at the members, mister co-chair.
MCMURTRY - Senator, I just want to echo the same sentiments. It takes courage to come in and to testify. As you indicated your first time, you did an exceptional job, and it's leave here today feeling good about being a part of the process, Thank you for your time. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Thank you. Alright. Moving to our next person, Claudia Francis,
virtually.
Alright. Moving on to Jared Johnson.
SPEAKER10 - Hello. Can folks hear me?
SPEAKER1 - We can hear. We can't oh, now we can see you.
SPEAKER10 - Okay. Great.
SPEAKER1 - Go ahead, mister Johnson.
JARRED JOHNSON - TRANSITMATTERS - Great. Thank you. Chair Payano, Chair McMurtry, and members of the committee thank you for the opportunity to testify. Also thank you to the Bill authors and or sorry. To the co-sponsors here. I want to say that I Jared Johnson, I'm the executive director of TransitMatters and also a board member at Abundant Housing, a statewide pro-housing group that is focused on building housing at all levels, including affordable housing across the Commonwealth. I support this effort to bring the BPDA fully into city government and make it more accountable. Having the regulatory requirement attached to the mission, and urban renewal powers, to only serve, affordability and equity, again, will strengthen the accountability.
The mayor has already let urban renewal powers expire in a number of neighborhoods. Something that would have been unthinkable a few years ago. This will bring more direct accountability, something that black and brown communities have been asking for for years. The legacy of renewal still looms large in those communities. To this point, Boston has seen its black population decline, especially in neighborhoods like the and then back then closer neighborhoods closer into the core. So we need to align planning. It makes no sense to have two sets of planners for transportation and housing and so on. So to be able to bring these functions further together is really important. To the point that I'm here, the best transportation plan is a good land use plan.
In order to save the t and cut down on traffic, we need to be building housing and mixed-use development, in and around transit, and we need to make planning and development more accountable and predictable. Again, you know, to echo, the previous point about not talking about projects specifically. But, you know, In generality, you know, we've had projects that have taken, 10 or more years to come to fruition On top of a subway station, on top of the least used subway station on the red6314 line, a housing project that would bring 78 affordable homes is now being two, for a cobbled together project with fewer units. So we need we need less process, not more.
We need that process to be transparent and predictable, but we cannot continue doing the same things that made Boston into one of the most expensive places to live in the country. Endless processes and duplicated efforts favor higher-income residents. What we need is real engagement and not just process for process sake. This petition does not cover every single, area of I mean,6345 and planning review, that needs to be reformed. But Mayor Wu and Director Jemison have already convened6351 representative groups to review Article 80 and the new planning effort overall, zoning will have more than a year of the process. So, again, I support this effort, and I appreciate the opportunity to testify. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, mister Johnson. Any questions, senator Collins?
COLLINS - Hello, Jared. Good afternoon.
JOHNSON - Hi, senator. Good to see you.
COLLINS - Likewise. I know you did a lot of work on the MBCA Communities Act around affordable housing. You know, do you see what role you see in helping us get to the affordable housing numbers? And then secondly, I think I know your answer, but how on Summer Street, how do you get buses in the morning? From City Point in South Boston to Sullivan Square and back, I got to I know you might have an opinion on this. You've done a lot of transportation. So forward was a question I mean, that's an if you want. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER4 - Yeah. If you want,
JOHNSON - The city right now is in the planning process to have, to have, bus lanes, through downtown Boston and around sort of Congress Street. So there would be a bus way, that would connect and would would make sure that those travel times would be predictable. Then looking at bus lanes and enough workplaces including on Rutherford Ave, you know, looking at, you know, turning what was an ugly highway scar and making that into a complete street. So there will be there will be, separate facilities for the majority of that right of way. You know, and I think, you know, I definitely understand your point about, you know, the importance of the port, Boston. I think that I think that there is a way to ensure that, that there is still, access for freight, and access for the buses.
My thought would be the trained, and skilled professionals at the MBTA, that it would be far easier for, the freight to coexist with, MBTA bus drivers than with the average Boston driver who is probably more likely than not, looking at their cell phone, having a giant iPad like, a touch screen in their vehicle. And so I think6469 that there is a way to absolutely do that. I think the6471 biggest threat, to go to freight, to business deliveries in and around Boston, you know, is not buses or bikes. It is car traffic, and it is car traffic from, other cities, driving through Boston. So the more that we can strengthen the MBTA, and, you know, make things like commuter rail, more affordable and more accessible. We get folks, you know, not driving into the city, and the more that we're able to separate those uses and have the buses in their own space, have the bikes in their own space and really look at, you know, what look at where we need deliveries and for freight, and where folks are just, you know, leaving their car for sometimes days on end, I think that's when we can have a much more balanced transportation system.
COLLINS - So if we have, you know, logically, the need is seven to nine in the morning. But for 24 hours a day, you have empty bus lanes. I mean, on the zipper lane well, then in the highway then with the highway think about the highway?
JOHNSON - Mhmm.
COLLINS - The highway will go from six lanes to four on one side, and two on the other. In the morning, you see that in the city. People aren't coming in from downtown. You get on a bus from South Station. Zero people are on it heading back into, like, Princess on Summer Street. So no one's on the other side of the road. Yet we're going to take a lane from Charlestown, it would take us an hour and a half to get there during rush hour. So the notion we're going to get right. You know, a bus from one side of town over there to another means I think more congestion because you're just jamming more cars in fewer lanes, but the conversation is for another day. Thank you for your testimony. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER10 - No worries. No worries. Thank you.
SPEAKER1 - I see no other questions. Thank you so much, sir, for your testimony.
SPEAKER10 - Thank you. Appreciate6587 you all.
SPEAKER1 - Moving on to Diane Vowell, in person.
DIANE VOWELL - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 4065 - Thank you very much. I really appreciate the opportunity to be here. I am a long-term resident of Charlestown. I moved there in 1982 as a young mother, and I am still there as a grandmother. I'm a proud Bostonian. I have done a lot in my community. I run the Halloween parade. I invite all of you to come visit. We have the largest of the city of Boston, and we transformed the evening from a night of,6622 you know, crime and a little uneasiness to a night of joy. I love the joy in the city of Boston. I am here today to oppose the, H 4065 that Dan Ryan presented to you. I also am in support of hybrid meetings. We can all do hybrid. There's no excuse for it. I am also here to tell you that I'm a stakeholder of the Article 80 group. We have written a letter in September.
We wrote a letter in July, and we have had no responses from that committee at all. There is no transparency and the 126 members have no access to that committee at all. We have a group That is merely on a Google group and we have absolutely no role in that process, which brings me to, collaborate on Senator Collins' comments of bewilderment about why are we blaming the people of Boston. It is not our fault that we have no affordable housing. We built luxury housing. It is not our fault we don't have resiliency. The BPD approved buildings in the seaport and intends to do it again in Charlestown where there's a FEMA flood zone. It is not our fault that we don't have equity. It's because we don't have a voice and it's time that we have a voice. The6708 people of Boston want what's best for Boston. We don't want the worst traffic in the country.
We don't want the second most expensive real estate in the country, so our children and grandchildren cannot live here, and we want to be heard. I live in the Battle of Bunker Hill. I truly believe that democracy can6730 exist and that people have a role in this process. We supported Merrule. Please do not support this Home Rule Petition. It does not define what we thought we were getting. This does coagulate all of the power of the BPDA without any community engagement and without any oversight, it is an authority. There is no authority that I can think of in our Commonwealth that works as the best process. Democracy is very difficult. It is very messy, but I don't know of any other better process. So I really ask all of you to please listen to Senator Collins. Completely bewildered about why we are doing all of these things. It's all top-down. Please listen to people. Thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions for the members? None. Thank you so much, ma'am, for your testimony. Next we have in person, Mela Bush6795 from Action For Equity.
PAMELA BUSH - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 4065 - Good afternoon. My name is Mela Bush. Thank you for allowing me to speaker and members of the committee. I am here actually to oppose, Bill H 4065. There are several reasons, some of with my colleagues who serve with me, on, working committees in my community. I am a Boston resident. I am the descendant of, my my family's been here for seven generations since 1901, So I6846 am a long-term Boston resident, but most of them have been displaced6852 or have had to move into a part of what I call now the Boston Diaspora. Because of some of the ways that development is done and rising rents. I have a granddaughter who just had to move out of Roxbury because she could not afford to live here, and she has two children. So I am opposing this for several reasons.
One of the things that is, telling, is things like the definition of butters being within 350 feet of, a development project. That kind of thing, the community process is not properly heard. I work on a lot of, projects around affordable housing, and I'm more well-known for my transportation work because I've headed up, things like the T Riders Union and on the Move and several other things and currently serving as a co-chair of the Fairmont Indigo Transit Coalition coming back into that space. Community input is not built in so that we, are better considered. Affordability plans around how we can make better affordability plans for the housing that, is being, sight sighted in our communities and also building generational wealth in our communities is hampered by some of the things like deed restrictions that go on for 50 years.
Some of these, things that are decided by the BPDA, are deed restrictions in our housing as well as, creating more waste for our housing to be more affordable, Like, lease to own. My mom bought a house back in the seventies that she leased or rented to own. She leased that home. She had eight, or nine children ultimately. One was born in the house that she bought through this program back in the seventies. When we come up with more innovation In ways for our communities to be able to stay put and not be displaced to places, far-flung from here. My son now lives in New York. I don't know how, you know, but he won't come back to Boston because it's so unaffordable. Some of my other other children live outside the city of Boston. When had to move out and tried to come back, there was, she was told that she couldn't come back because she stayed a year and a day over, and she was no longer on a priority list for Boston Housing.
So we need to see how to keep our people here. They're building. Housing should not be a luxury. It is a human right, and we need to look at ways for, this plan to, take more into consideration community input in how we listen to, how we are heard, and how our needs are met. I know my time ran out. I thank you for allowing me to go over a couple of a few seconds or a minute or however long because you're not counting anymore. Thank you very much. I am in opposition and, also we did not know about this hearing until Saturday, so I could not sign online, so I've been sitting here since the beginning and had to come here and actually put off other work that I needed to get done7073 to be here today and be on a list that I signed up outside of the door. So I've been sitting here all this time waiting7079 to be heard, and I thank you for hearing me. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Any questions from the from the members, senator Collins?
COLLINS - Not so much a question, but, just a comment and thank you for your testimony. One of the things I think this committee should be looking at, and it's something that we've seen happen a lot in the city, and it's built into the powers of, I think the BPDA, but also, DND. It's a limitation if someone buys affordable housing, particularly as we're trying to create wealth opportunities and homeownership opportunities where they're held down on the value over time. You know, properties around them, if they rise in value, the affordable housing, that has a covenant and really a cap, as mentioned, was pushed by the city, makes it very difficult. You need approval for the city to refinance. If you don't get that administratively, you know, you're really in trouble. That's really unfair, particularly what others were able to do. Then long term, the ability to value capture.
You've invested in your community. You've been there a7145 long time. You bought your, home at an affordable rate, and here you are, you know, 30 years later and you're still, you know, at a cap. I just think that's something that the committees take a look at and whether that, should be full over time. You know, if there's a period, 10 years, you want to make sure there's a commitment, for people to, get access to get on their feet. But over time, particularly if we're looking to, you know, allow people to hand it over to the next generation or, capture the value of it and the value of the sweat equity they put in. I think there's a better way to do that. So thank you very much for your testimony. I hope we can get rid of that.
BUSH - So that cap, that deed restriction that I referenced, it started, as there it was up to 30, Then it was 20 more attitude. It's 50. Going for a lifelong deed restriction where people cannot even use the equity in their home to finance their children's education, they and their children end up with, you know, like, crazy debts to the government that they have to pay back. So this is what we're talking about, building, you know, generational wealth within our communities. So it's very important, and that needs to be taken up and considered so that that is no longer an issue. We have and most of the people who are under those those levels of deed restrictions are people of color who fought and were able to, save up and7230 purchase that home, and now they're they're stuck in this. They're hamstrung. It can't even get out of such a thing. So thank you so much for allowing me to speak. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you. Thank you so much for your testimony. Before before we close, I just wanted to make sure that, everyone who want an opportunity to testify Has been able to testify. Is is there anybody center Collins?
COLLINS - Yes. I just like to say as a wrapping up that I think we heard yet, today,7259 and we've received some letters, that I'd like to see if the7263 committee could, find a way to get some further conversations with the administration, the BPA director's team, and the community voices that are here. You know, there's a vision laid out, and, you know, this, piece of legislation that, was authored by the city council the previous city council. The previous city council also voted to block anti-terrorism grants for the whole Greater Boston area, which is now very new. So they get an opportunity to weigh in, and that, you know, if this is amendable, if there's a way to have some further conversations to get some of these issues resolved because I don't think they're terribly fire pot, but there are some intricate details.
So getting, you know, that community input, which it seems like today was really helpful because during the council process, not the city's process where they brought people in, the administration's process, but the council process where the legislation was generated that that wasn't an opportunity. So, you know it wouldn't be the first bill we've amended, and I think maybe there's an opportunity to have a few more conversations with people, gather feedback here today, and what was the initial intent, if that could be met with the community's concerns, in its current form is what we heard Mwazi say about people's, challenges. So thank you. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thanks, senator Collins. I I saw that there was Someone you'd like to give testimony? If you can, come before the mic, please say your name, organization you're with, if you're with any. And also before you leave, if you can just write your that information on that paper so we have it for our records.
SPEAKER22 - Thank you very much.
SPEAKER1 - Thank you.
KATE PHELPS - CONCERNED CITIZEN - HB 4065 - Joan Seamster from my neighborhood, Highland Park in Roxbury, was unable to be here. She had a place. So my name is Kate Phelps, and I'm electing to speak on behalf of our area of Roxbury in strong opposition to this motion as it currently appears. In general, we agree with the principles of affordability and equity and the need for housing and opportunities in Boston. But this, as other speakers have said, flies in the face of what we won 30, 50 years ago in Article 80. Roxbury was the first neighborhood to have the right to, inform the city of what it needed because Roxbury had been so abused by the BRA. So much of the affordable housing and the redlining and all of that was dumped into Roxbury.
Giving the new BPDA powers with no community involvement only exacerbates that historic injustice and does it to other neighborhoods too. One of the things that I would like to, as much as I respect what Tony said, our sole representative on Article 80, the steering committee, does not represent all the neighborhoods of Boston by a long shot. He's done a magnificent job involving us all, informing us all. But what we've seen is meeting after meeting, after meeting with these consultants from the BPDA who intently listen and do what they've intended to do since they first started this proposal back in January of 2023, unbeknownst to anybody. So our feeling is that takes some time, to allow neighborhoods to represent themselves. Some of the longest-term residents of these neighborhoods are some of the most active political people in the city.
They're the people who elect you. They're the people who bother to come to hearings. They're the people who bother to vote. We're not here as NIMBYs. We're here saying we must find an answer to displacement. We must find an answer to equitable housing. We need to change the racial wealth gap by building genuinely affordable housing and housing that addresses the people who currently live in Boston and not just the many graduate students who are pouring into Northeastern, taking up all the rental space in Roxbury and not all the many foreign investors who are buying up the seaport. We need you to represent the people of Boston and change this so that we have a chance as many of us who supported Mayor Wu at the outset to determine how this helps the city of Boston and not just the developers the realtors and the businesses that so want to use our wonderful city. So thank you very much. SHOW NON-ESSENTIAL DIALOGUE
SPEAKER1 - Thank you, ma'am. Are there any questions from the committee? None. Well, thank you7572 so much, ma'am, for for your testimony.7574 I, seeing that there's nobody else that's, interested in testifying, this closes, this Thank you so much for attending. And thank you to my colleagues.
© InstaTrac 2025