An Appropriation from Free Cash (account 01-324001) in the amount of $150,000 to the Affordable Housing Trust (#8270).

Transcript (~17 min @ 43:57)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 43:55 Bradley Freeman: That motion passes, and that item is not approved.

▶ 43:59 Speaker 1: Sorry, ID number 2026-1170, an appropriation from free cash, account 01-324001, in the amount of 150,000 to the Affordable Housing Trust number 8270.

▶ 44:15 Devin Romanul: Mr. President, this comes to us from the Appropriations and Oversight Committee with a recommendation for passage, and at this time I will make a motion for passage. Second.

▶ 44:22 Bradley Freeman: Motion for passage made by Councilor Romanul, seconded by Councilor Williams. On discussion, I have Councilor Williams.

▶ 44:28 Ryan Williams: Thank you, President Freeman. This was an order that had a ton of great discussion, a lot of differing viewpoints, and we heard a lot of public comment on it. It's sort of unusual in the experience that we've had as councilors. In particular, I wanted to offer up to the newer folks in the room that sometimes on these orders, as you go through the weeks between the meetings, you can have a change of heart. I've done it before, and sometimes people love me for it and sometimes people hate me for it. Mm-hmm. But in this order in particular, the story that stuck with me the most was the story of the school teacher who was looking for assistance. I think there's so few things that we do in this body that can directly help people in a meaningful way, and I hope that we can get this to pass tonight. Thank you.

▶ 45:24 Bradley Freeman: Thank you. Next I have Councilor Kowal, then followed by Councilor Chen.

▶ 45:27 Elizabeth Kowal: I wanted to just thank everybody who's come to speak tonight, who's written to us. I have had a lot of conversations over the past week. I was one of the no votes. I believe deeply in what this trust is purporting to do. My concerns revolve around the lack of strategy that has been presented, even though, again, I've tried to get that information, and so my overall concern was not about what this trust is trying to do. I think it is attempting to do things for the right reasons. My concern is that there's not been a lot of forward progress made or forward progress shown in what they want to do. And I take very seriously my job to look at the finances of the city. I take that as something, again, maybe because I'm newer, that I take really to heart. And I just continue to have concerns about whether or not there is the... I don't want to use the word dedication because the people are very dedicated to this, but the ability to overcome some obstacles with this group in order to get this trust to do what it really, really needs to do.

▶ 46:51 Bradley Freeman: Thank you, Councilor Kowal. Next I have Councilor Chen, followed by Councilor Park.

▶ 46:55 Jason Chen: We need more affordable housing, and I fully support what the trust is, and I'm glad that it's funded. I'm glad that it has $513,000, and also a continuing mechanism to keep it funded through inclusionary zoning. And yes, if we gave it $150,000 or $1.5 million, definitely good would come from it. We have so many other funding priorities and free cash requests in the coming years, which are going to get squeezed because we have less free cash, that don't have these mechanisms and don't have funding in place. I would really like to say yes to all the requests that have come up. I've said no to a bunch of things or tried to cut them back because I'm concerned that until we see the numbers of how our recent negotiations play out, and we saw what happened with fire overtime, we're going to be squeezed next year, and the things that don't have funding, we need to save our free cash for that. The things that there already are mechanisms for, let them do the good that they can. The things that I want to see us do for more housing, to lower or to arrest the rate of just housing price increase everywhere, is to build more housing, change zoning to include more multifamily units. Some cities like Salem have rental caps on if you build an accessory dwelling unit. We could actually build hundreds, if not 700, 800, maybe 1,000 units in the next few years. I know it's not a popular position, but that would really help affordability for all Melrose people. A lot of demographics that are struggling with this. So I really want to say yes to this, but because there's already a mechanism and it's already funded,

▶ 48:36 Speaker 1: I'm going to vote no for this.

▶ 48:38 Bradley Freeman: Next I have Councilor Park, followed by Councilor Finocchiaro and Romanul.

▶ 48:44 Speaker 4: Thank you, Mr. Chair. First, I want to make abundantly clear that I strongly support affordable housing. Melrose needs more homes that working families, seniors, people with disabilities, and residents on fixed incomes can actually afford. The city's own documents make that need clear. Second, I want to acknowledge and respect the work of the Affordable Housing Trust. The trust has adopted goals and a five-year plan, and as was mentioned, it has already supported a project that helped preserve three affordable rental units in Melrose. This is real progress, and it matters. At the same time, supporting affordable housing as a principle does not mean we can or should support every proposed funding transfer without due diligence or without asking questions such as, "How did we arrive at 150,000? How will this money be used? Will this have a meaningful impact six months from now? A year from now? Is this the best use of 150,000 from free cash?" During my time canvassing for the override, or shall I say overrides, one of the most common concerns I heard from residents was that the city needs to be more accountable about where money is going and the impact it will have. Tangible impact. While I do not think that critique applies exactly in this case, I think it is fair to say we cannot clearly articulate what meaningful advancement this additional 150,000 will produce for affordable housing in Melrose. Right now, this feels like a leap of good faith and good-hearted intentions from some wonderful people than a strategic investment with defined goals, expected outcomes, and a clear explanation of how that money will be used.

▶ 50:45 Speaker 4: That said, I am going to support this funding because I believe affordable housing is a serious and growing need in Melrose and across Massachusetts. Not funding the Affordable Housing Trust for consecutive years is not the best interest, in my opinion, for our city, and I do not want my concerns about the current process of funding to prevent resources from reaching current or future residents who may need them. However, my support should not be viewed as a carte blanche. Melrose voters approved a 13.5 million override in November after extensive public engagement and the mayor's budget message repeatedly emphasizing careful stewardship, planning, and spending on clearly identified needs. I remain concerned that we have not been given a clear enough roadmap for how this additional money will be used, what outcomes it is intended to achieve, or how we intend to reach our five-year goal. But I do have faith in the trust to develop a more detailed plan, clear priorities, and regular reporting so we can ensure these funds are being spent wisely and making the most meaningful impact for Melrose. Thank you. Thank you. I have Councilor Pinchiaro, followed by Councilors Romanul, Vandiver, and Carm Shady.

▶ 52:07 Cal Finocchiaro: Thank you. I don't have a statement prepared, but I just wanted to say I was a no- ... at our last meeting, and I've given it some thought. I've met with people that work on the trust and in the planning department in Melrose, and I was a no on this last year, appropriation. I mean, it was a different time fiscally. And I do agree with a lot of the comments that have been made tonight, and those are sort of the things that I was struggling with when I was making my decision. But ultimately, I know the trust is new, and that's what I'm kind of coming back to, and I want to give them a chance. So, sort of bolstering their account and seeing what they can do in the coming year and maybe coming back to revisit if there is another free cash request. I'm interested in seeing what they're able to do with this money in the coming year and give them an opportunity because we haven't given that to them in the past. So, I will be supporting this this evening.

▶ 53:08 Devin Romanul: Councilor Romanul. Thank you, Mr. President. Appreciate all the comments of my colleagues, truly. And for our colleagues who are-- I stand in support of this appropriation. For those who don't support it, I absolutely hear where you're coming from, and I really respect the budgetary stewarding that you have front of mind. And you're 100% right that especially when we have spent so many fiscal years hacking away at our city government, cutting huge percentages of our civic workforce, it can be hard to look elsewhere. And that's one of the reasons that I'm supporting this, is that we do have some flexibility in this moment to do it. But I really genuinely appreciate you keeping that front of mind because that is one of the most important things that we do here around this horseshoe. I also want to note that the federal government is neck deep in negotiating federal legislation to increase housing supply across the United States. And so the rules of the game, if the House and the Senate can come together on a version, are about to change in some really meaningful ways in terms of how our communities interact with CDBG funding in particular, creating incentives and in some cases disincentives for development in communities, every single community in our country. So that's something that we are going to need to keep an eye on because of the rules of the game if, again, that's a big if, if the House and Senate can see eye to eye, but I think they're pretty close. From my vantage point, the rules are about to change. So we should bear that in mind as we proceed. I'll say that Additional units help for sure in terms of creating supply. A quarter million or so short we're across our commonwealth. But access to capital to build wealth in our society is pretty limited to a couple of mechanisms, and homeownership is one of them. And if we can, just through the chair to Councilor Williams' point, make an impact on a few people, I think that's really special. I think that when I campaigned across this city, I found so many people concerned mostly about the override, about affordability, about being able to stay in their home, about being able to afford to live here. And this is a tool that we have in our arsenal that I'm excited to expand. And I think that the nascence of the trust's work should be an opportunity and not necessarily seen as a fear. But really excited to dig on this with you all and excited to support this. So thank you all for the thoughtful conversation.

▶ 55:41 Speaker 4: Councilor Van De Berg?

▶ 55:42 Kimberly Vandiver: Thank you. I really appreciate the consideration of my fellow councilors and all the discussion that we had in the previous meeting as well as in the time since then. We've talked this up and down, left and right, all of the points, and I'm not going to repeat five hours of conversation. But I think one thing that stood out to me in thinking about this issue is that we spend money in our budget all the time to make the community better in different ways. Like for example, we spend money on the parks department and the recreation department, and we do that because we think it's valuable to be able to have those programs out there and have them be affordably within reach of children and adults, and to get that type of experience that makes our community better. And I think providing any additional amount of affordable housing really makes our community better. It allows people, it allows teachers, it allows the people who work in the businesses in Melrose to all potentially live here or live here more affordably. And I think to other people's points, we need a lot more housing. We can't solve all that with this appropriation, but that's going to take a long time, and we should work on all fronts towards that. But that's going to take a long time to bring the cost of housing down and to make it affordable to certain groups. And I think when we can do things like the trust has done with the one funding that they've done so far with the three units that are deeded affordable, I think if we can do that again or if we can find another strategy and we can keep building on it, seek additional funding, that makes a difference to a few families right now, and that makes our community better to support them and have a more socioeconomically diverse community here. So I thank everyone for their consideration and support.

▶ 57:32 Speaker 4: Councilor Karamcheti?

▶ 57:36 Manjula Karamcheti: Thank you, everyone, for all your comments. I want to say that I appreciate the thoughtfulness that everyone has exemplified from our previous meeting to our full city council meeting. I was in support of it in appropriations. I continue to be in support of the Affordable Housing Trust. I see this as a very important tool in a variety of tools to improve our housing situation in Melrose. Housing is one of the best tools to accumulate wealth in our society. It always has been, it continues to be, and I appreciate the conversation around thinking about who has access and who does not, and I believe this Affordable Housing Trust offers that opportunity. And our investment in it is really important to current Melrosians and future Melrosians. And I also recognize that in terms of our stewardship of the budget and the finances that we have available, it's important to think about the strategic plan for the Affordable Housing Trust, and to be thinking about how we might move forward in that, and backward design what it is that we want the Affordable Housing Trust to be able to do. And so I would be interested in bringing back the Affordable Housing Trust board to share with us in the future, what are the plans? What is the strategy? How is this investment being used? How is it being positioned to signal to nonprofit housing agencies that we are a community that is serious about building a variety of housing? And I think I will just say there have been recent sales of property in which I believe the Affordable Housing Trust could have helped us proactively be more in control of what was developed and who it served. So I look to the Affordable Housing Trust to be able to do that for us in the future, and I think the investment now, and a continued investment long term, will position us to be proactive in terms of making sure that Melrose continues to be diverse and accessible for a variety of people and a variety of families. So I continue to be in support. Thank you.

▶ 1:00:22 Bradley Freeman: Thank you, Councilor. Is there any further discussion on this matter?

▶ 1:00:26 Speaker 4: Seeing none, Madam Clerk?

▶ 1:00:28 Speaker 1: Councilor Chen? No. Councilor Finocchiaro? Yes. Councilor Jamaleddine? Yes. Councilor Karamcheti? Yes. Councilor Kowal? Yes. Councilor Bremsky? Yes. Councilor Park? Yes. Councilor Romanul? Yes. Councilor Vandiver? Yes. Councilor Williams? Yes. President Freeman? Yes. That motion passes.