05.11.2022

The dirty little secret about Massachusetts politics | Down to the wire on ‘rent control lite’ | Globe gets new ed page editor | About Contrarian Boston |

Kendall Square on the harbor? Developer moves to add labs, nix housing

WS Development must really, really want more high-paying lab space in its giant, Seaport Square project.

So much so, that the developer is willing to expand a park and add affordable housing, while canceling plans for several hundred units of luxury housing.

That appears to be the upshot of WS Development’s big shift in plans as it pushes forward with the final phase of its buildout of the 23-acre site, just across the road from Fan Pier and the harbor.

As it tries to sell the plan publicly, WS is leaning hard on the green space angle, which would expand Seaport Common to 1.4 acres. The Chestnut Hill-based developer is also touting its decision to cut the amount of luxury housing - everybody’s favorite punching bag these days - arguing the Seaport already has enough of that.

The end result, though, would be 700 fewer residential units than planned.

And here’s the problem: adding who knows how much new lab space, while subtracting several hundred apartments or condos, will make the Seaport, already a pretty dull place, duller still.

Kendall Square on the harbor would surely be a winner for WS Development’s bottom line, but it would be a big loss for Boston.

Power, not party: The real dividing line in Bay State politics

A new book hits the nail on the head in its assessment of the true nature of Massachusetts politics.

Battles between “insiders and outsiders,” rather than ideology, is the true dividing line in state politics, writes Michael Jonas, executive editor of CommonWealth Magazine, in a piece on “The Politics of Massachusetts Exceptionalism: Reputation Meets Reality.” 

 In fact, the one party rule we are experiencing right now – in the 19th century it was Republicans who ruled the roost - is not only just par for the course in Massachusetts history. Rather, it has also reinforced the emphasis on proximity to power over party as the dividing line, according to the book, the product of a collaboration between several local academics.

While we’ve had less ideological rancor, the “insider orientation of our political order has often made us a laggard when it comes to government transparency as well as political participation and representation,” Jonas writes, citing the authors.

Lack of transparency, depressed levels of political participation, and insider wheeling and dealing are a high price to pay for political stability, if you can really call it that.

Bid to resurrect the old-fashioned starter home picks up support

A trio of industry groups are lining up behind Gov. Charlie Baker’s plan to revive construction of modestly sized and priced starter homes.

The Greater Boston Real Estate Board and the Massachusetts Association of Realtors have issued a joint letter endorsing the proposal for special zoning districts in which homes capped at 1,850 square feet could be built on lots as small as a quarter acre.

The two groups join the Home Builders and Remodelers Association of Massachusetts, which has long championed the starter home proposal, the aim of which is to spur construction of a 21st century version of the capes, ranches and colonials that marked the post-war housing boom.

The proposal is actually a revamp of an earlier initiative the Baker administration rolled out in 2016. That effort fell flat, with no suburbs taking part, thanks to a rather mystifying requirement that starter homes be built near T stations.

That provision has been removed, allowing communities to place the districts in parts of town better suited for suburban-style single-family housing and where typically luxury homes on one or two acres would otherwise be built.

“The administration recognized the inherent contradiction,” said Benjamin Fierro III, general counsel for the home builders’ association. “It was a round peg in a square hole.”

Globe gets new editorial page chief

James Dao, a senior editor at The New York Times, will be leaving to take charge of the Globe’s editorial page, Dan Kennedy at Media Nation reports.

Kennedy offers an interesting take on the hire, noting that while Dao is hardly all that old at 64, he nevertheless isn’t someone with decades of running room ahead.

“He's at an age where he probably wouldn't be seeking to settle in for a lengthy stint,” Kennedy writes. “Perhaps Henry is hoping that he'll identify and mentor a possible replacement,”

There has clearly been a lot of great work going on - the Globe is a Pulitzer finalist this year in editorial writing.

But there has also been a lot of experimentation with different formats and lineups, especially under Bina Venkataraman, who stepped down several months ago as editorial page editor.

At times it has felt like the section has been overrun by policy wonks, a jarring experience for political junkies seeking their daily fix.

Less long-winded pieces on policy, and more columns on politics and thought-provoking ideas, would suit us just fine.

Decision on ‘rent control lite’ pushed off again

Looks like a decision on one of the most controversial real estate bills on Beacon Hill will go down to the wire this year.

The Legislature’s Joint Committee on Housing has punted again on whether to favorably report out - or send off to a study committee to die - the rather sleeping sounding TOPA, or Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act.

The committee has postponed a decision on the bill until the end of June, after which it may very well be out of extensions, three being the limit. The legislative session wraps up at the end of July.

While, yes, tenants would get a chance to buy their buildings when they hit the market, they would also be able to team up with nonprofit housing developers, which, arguably, is the real play here.

Community development corporations or other nonprofit groups would then buy the buildings in order to stabilize the rents and keep tenants in place. The proposal has been even dubbed ‘rent control lite’.

The bill, though, has attracted fierce opposition from landlord groups, who have argued the proposal would tie up transactions for months and scuttle sales to other interested buyers who can’t or won’t wait.

The Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations has been a major backer of the bill.

Joe Kriesberg, the MACDC’s president and CEO, said his group and other supporters have made efforts to address concerns about the bill. For example, a developer would be allowed to sell a newly constructed building, say a year or two or even three years after it opens, without having to negotiate with tenants.

The aim is not to interfere or deter new construction, but to protect vulnerable tenants in already existing rental properties, Kriesberg said. There’s also the possibility of an exemption for transactions within families, such as a father selling to a daughter.

“If it is a new building, there are no existing tenants to protect,” Kriesberg said. “It is a modest regulatory tool to reduce displacement.”

All steamed up and nowhere to vent

That, anyway, is the situation irate landlords found themselves in Tuesday night after the abrupt cancellation of a planned “listening session” by Mayor Michelle Wu’s newly formed panel on “rent stabilization,” aka rent control.

The city panel had been slated to hold a virtual session, but officials opted to cancel the event after they learned a translator would not be able to attend.

The Small Property Owners Association was ready and loaded for bear, so who knows how much listening there would have been.

The panel will try again on May 24th.

What is Contrarian Boston?

I have fielded emails over the past couple weeks asking what Contrarian Boston is about.

Here’s a link to our mission statement – you can find it in the “about” section.

For a more prosaic, nuts-and-bolts description, read on.

An online newsletter, Contrarian Boston publishes every Monday, Wednesday and Friday. In Contrarian Boston you’ll find analysis of the day’s news, and original reporting as well.

Our focus is:

·      Politics and all levels of governance, good and bad, with an emphasis on state and local, with some national mixed in;

·      Economic growth and business, especially real estate, housing and new development projects;

·      The media and why it does what it does;

·      Education, from school board spats to the doings of multibillion-dollar university endowments;

·      And whatever else catches our fancy.