Glen Mohr's blog

Link to map on Google of Watertown Townwide Yard Sales, May 5, 2007

Link to Download

I read this article a month ago

State identifies two of Watertown's five schools as in need of improvement or corrective action

and I am wondering if there's been any more news. I haven't seen anything on h2otown or in the TAB. The Watertown Public Schools web site is hopelessly un-maintained. (The only district news posted is from last March: ). Are Hosmer students being allowed to switch to the Cuniff or Lowell? Is this simply not as big a deal as it sounds?

Yesterday there were two lightning hits near the corner of Commonwealth Road and Belmont Street. The first one hit a transformer on Belmont Street and some lines came down (right in front of Ilyse's car as she wass driving home) and the second one sent sparks along the power lines. We didn't lose power but we did lose phone service. It's now more than 24 hours later and we're still waiting for RCN to restore service. Had to wait on hold for half an hour last night trying to report the outage to RCN.

Deborah Juusela, Principal of the Hosmer School, has resigned. She announced it to her staff this week.

This is no surprise to me. I talked to many people including parents, Town officials, School Committee members, teachers and administrators as my wife and I were making the decision whether to send my daughter to the Hosmer or to private school next year. Not one person I talked to had a single positive thing to say about the current principal. The best thing people could say was that her predecessor left her big shoes to fill and very high expectations from parents.

Let's hope that Superintendent Hiersche and the search committee he convenes can learn from this mistake and figure out who is going to best serve the Hosmer community.

There are many parents like us who have made the decision against the Hosmer largely because of the trend since Juusela took over. That is, parents told me they were happy with Hosmer, but what they liked seemed to be going or gone.

They loved the principal, Steve Griffin, who had a termendous presence, was very responsive and who knew all the students (and parents and even siblings not yet attending Hosmer) by name, knew about them and could recommend teachers who would be the best matches for each student, but he is now at the Zervas School in Newton.

Many of them highly recommended Derry Donovan who taught a K-2 class, but she is now principal of the Lowell School.

They liked the way parents were encouraged to bring enrichment to the classrooms, but they said that has been in significant decline this year because the principal hasn't been supporting it

They liked all the after-school and evening events that brought the school community together, but they say this was largely curtailed since the principal took over.

The teachers reported that their hands were largely tied with respect to curriculum as everything had to focus on preparing students for the MCAS. This meant art, music, science, foreign languages, and of course play, all got pushed aside.

A principal can make a huge difference to a school and a school can make a huge difference to a community, so it is in everyone's interest in East Watertown to make sure the next hire is a good one.

Here are my notes on the consideration of the Kounelis resolution to reduce the amount of affordable housing at the Coolidge School at Tuesday's Town Council meeting.

Kounelis submits her resolution to reduce the percentage of affordable housing from 40% to 29% and to require adequate parking and to restore the auditorium for community use. This resolution would eliminate four affordable 1br apartments for seniors. The Councilor gives no other reason for this than that 419 people supported fewer units a couple of years ago. She makes no case for the effect of the affordable units on rental prices. She says nothing about its effect on the neighborhood. She only talks about the fact that the previous Council did not vote the way her petitioners expected.

Devaney seconds the Kounelis resolution

Jonathan Hecht makes a motion to separate the Kounelis resolution into two parts to take up separately – 1) the number of affordable units and 2) the parking and auditorium. Kounelis accepts this motion

Devaney says it should not be separated since adequate parking is a value judgment and the developer does plan to restore the auditorium for community use. Devaney then goes on to speak about her unsuccessful efforts to get affordable housing over the many years since she was the youngest member of the Council.

Devaney makes a motion to amend the Kounelis resolution to change the age restriction from 55+ to 65+ and to give preference to Watertown residents.

After much confusion over which motion is being voted on and who seconded whose, all Councilors except for Devaney vote to separate the Kounelis resolution into two parts.

Younger starts discussion on the parking and auditorium issue. There is discussion about what the Planning Board recommended to the Zoning Board. It is unclear what this part of the Kounelis resolution would require, whether the Council can direct the Planning Board, whether the Council can legislate a number of parking spaces, etc. After repeated requests for clarification from Hecht, Younger explains that the Council would be “reaffirming what the board said…we are recommending at least 76 spaces.

Peter wrote:

I often see the disparity between the Watertown spend per pupil statistic and its performance rankings brought up. I have to believe that at least a portion of this is due to the relatively small size of the town. This is basic accounting - a broader base (student population) over which you can spread your fixed costs results in a lower total cost per unit (student). Has anyone ever seen educational spending statistics adjusted in this way?

Here's the data:

BEDFORD
BERKSHIRE HILLS
CAMBRIDGE
CHATHAM
HULL
NANTUCKET
PROVINCETOWN
WALTHAM
WESTON

H2otown has focused her comments on the impact of affordable housing at the Coolidge School on rental prices in the neighborhood. But Tuesday night's meeting made it clear that this is not the main issue for a very vocal minority whom Angie Kounelis represents as head of the EWBA. Unfortunately for the rest of Watertown, Councilor Kounelis continues to represent this minority even though she is now supposed to be representing the entire East End. What's most troubling is that she is making no effort to distance herself from the very ugly and transparent language of her supporters. Consider these remarks from the meeting:

"Where are these people going to come from? Are you going to take somebody off the street?"
"A drug problem in this building would be impossible to control."
"Someone 55 might rent it and then bring in a brood with them."
"Can you show us a model of a successful building with 40% affordable and so few amenities that has remained at that ratio?"
"Everything is relative...My mother worked in sweatshops, my father worked in a kitchen. They rented in Belmont and moved out of Belmont and bought a three-decker...[so that they could move back to Watertown]"
"If she's a younger group she should be taking 2 or 3 jobs to keep herself in housing."
"I don't believe affordability is any different now. My father built my house, people can do it today...with sweat."
"Is there any research on the effect of affordable housing on real estate values?"
"East Watertown has been the dropping off of all the ill wills of Watertown - dumps, etc. The neighborhood is fragile. What keeps it together are the people..."
"There is potential for dangers that could disrupt the fabric of the neighborhood."
"People will wind up paying way more than others and the market rate people will be furious. I don't care who goes in. It's the number of units - when you get up to 40% you are dooming the project."

It's clear what is on these people's minds: Affordable housing means bringing in people we don't want here. and Why should we help them? They should just work harder.

I hope the rest of the Town Council can see through the specious rent-impact argument and address what these people and Councilor Kounelis are really saying. When Councilor Kounelis presents her resolution to undo the previous Council's 7-0 vote and delay for another six months a project we've been waiting for for more than five years, I hope the Council votes for what they know is right.

And by the way, I also own a 2-family near the Coolidge School and I'm not concerned about its impact on my rental income because I've never had anyone over 55 ever ask to see my first floor unit in seven years. Nor am I concerned about its proximity to Sullivan Playground where my children frequently play. I am much more concerned about that building continuing to sit vacant and about what this battle over four affordable 1-bedroom units says about our Town.

Here are my notes from tonight's Coolidge School Reuse Community Meeting. I've only included the parts that focused on the issue of how many affordable units there should be.

Overview from Bart Mitchell

• We are planning to do full gut rehab of building, not add anything. We will develop housing for 55+ (at least one person in household must be 55+).
• if we develop all the classroom spaces then we believe that could add up to 38 housing units
• We plan to restore the auditorium and hallways.
• We have recently developed two schools of this era, they lay out fantastically as housing, tall ceilings, large windows.
• What should the mix [of affordable and market rate] be? 2003 proposal was for 30%/70%. Town asked for 60% reduced/40% market. We said we were comfortable up to 40% affordable/60% market
• We have been trying to match the bedroom mix to the affordability mix
• Watertown Housing Partnership has allocated money to pay for affordable units conditioned on 40% affordability
• We are comfortable that the market rate will work well at 30% and 40% affordable. We are taking the risk and we believe it won't impact the market rate units and we'll still be able to offer housing to a large percentage of Watertown seniors. But it's a public policy choice not a developer choice. We don't pretend to be the policy making group.

When we talk about different income tiers here are the projections:
1BR market rate $1250 + utilities
1BR at 60% $1136
1BR at 50% $946
1BR at 30% $436
all affordable unit rates include utilities

In what follows the questions are from various audience members and the answers except as noted are from Bart Mitchell.

Q. Where are these people going to come from? Are you going to take somebody off the street? I wish I could get it.
A. We have to write a tenant selection plan. Watertown Housing has to approve that it's fair.
We plan to work with neighborhood associations and Elder Services to make sure there is broad awareness of when the renting will start. We'll take applications for a several day period. We could do it then by a lottery or by first come first served. Then we would review applicants to make sure they meet eligibility (good credit history, good references from previous landlord).
There's been a lot of interest, pride and hope that the local community will be the party that gets a lot of chance for the units. Need to get the word out and get people to apply so many people apply and apply early. This has worked well in practice.

Q. Is there a regulation that controls whether it has to be advertised outside of Watertown?
A. Very frequently, yes. Usually there is a review of the tenant selection plan to make sure that it;s broadly known that it exists - at least one paper with broad circulation and if there are minority groups then you need to advertise in newspapers read by those ethnic groups. For example, in the South End we needed to seek out white applicants because the zip code is mostly minority. So if the zip code if primarily white, we would need to advertise in the Globe and possibly El Mundo and the Chinese newspaper. With age restricted housing, people tend not to move far from where they currently live.

Q. When does application process start?
A. If we are able to get zoning approvals this spring and close on financing by beginning of next year then we would finish construction in 1Q08. So 3 or 4 months before that we would have the lease-up (end of 2007 or early 2008)

Q. Is it accessible?
A. Building will have an elevator, 5% of units will be accessible, the rest will be adaptable, the common areas will be accessible
5% = 1 2BR and 1 1BR

Q. That's not enough.

Q. Does affordability based on income or income and assets?
A. Based on income but there is an attributed annual income as a fraction of your assets but it's a small fraction. If you get social security and have $100k in a CD then they would take 2.8% of the $100k and consider that annual income.
With the 60% AMI units it could be the case that people will be eligible who have $100-200k of assets.

Q. Boston recently had some embarrassing situations...
A. Yes, where they were selling condos. There aren't as many Federal and State rules on affordable for-sale housing. In the example that was in the news, people were buying a condo for $250k that was market rate at $650k when they had a business and $750k in assets. In rental housing there are more established State rules and compliance is much stricter. I know of one age-restricted housing development where there was a woman who met eligibility but a couple years later she had pensions that weren't there initially.

Q. You mentioned 55+ but Mass Housing keeps changing the rules. I have built a housing project...there have been drug problems. I hope same problems don't happen here. A drug problem in this building would be impossible to control. [My project] started out at 25% low income and it's now 80%. I'm not welcome in that community anymore. You say 55 but Mass Housing could change their rules. Could it be restricted at an older age?

A. On this issue the rules won't change after the fact because this won't be a situation with just a lender and a developer. The Town owns the property. So we're entering into a lease to create 55+ housing and that will survive through the 50-year leasehold.

Q. Is there a restriction on people per unit? Someone 55 might rent it and then bring in a brood with them.
A. Yes, in affordable units - 1BR must have 1 person or couple, 2Br must have max 2 in a bedroom who are part of the household. You can't have adults with children in a bedroom so you can't pack a unit. You are not allowed to have a 2br unit and have 1 br [shared by] your 50-yr-old cousin and 8-yr old cousin. As management we will regulate and evict noncompliance.

Q. Could a grandparent have a child?
A. Possible, but would probably have to be one child in a br and one or two adults in the other br. So not in a 1br.

Public agencies that provide funds like to require the same mix of units for affordable as for market rate. But we are not proposing that here. And we've been clear with State officials and they will have to approve this. We have proposed that 12 of 15 affordable are 1br. Target population in Coolidge School Reuse Study and subsequent meetings were individuals and couples living in the area who want to switch to an elevator building. In that case, they would only be allowed to live in 1br unit under the affordable rules. State won't allow building a 2br unit for one person or couple. We included some 2brs, so a grandparent and grandchild could be in 3 of the units. If we had matched the mix then we would have had to have mostly 1brs at market rate. But we think there will be more demand for 2br at market rate. We think these will be people will be needing a full dining room, more space.

Q. You've been quoted about MCAD allowing up to 70% going to town residents.
A. I said I know that there are locations where the town has allowed up to 70% local. I don't know that that would be the case here.
[This was a reference to what I posted here. I apologize for my error.]

Q. Is it unlikely that there will be a preference for local?
A. Still working on it
A. From Greg Watson: WCH is doing marketing for Beacon development on Pleasant St and part of that is a 70% preference for affordable units.

Q. What's the diff between affordability and Section 8?
A. Section 8 required 30% of a renters income to go to rent. Since 1986, the Federal Government has assisted with affordable housing by having developers build it and not guaranteeing the loans so developers take the risk. And there's not any ongoing rental assistance to the household. [Instead there is] simply a tax-credit the developer gets when housing is built. There is a market for those credits where you sell them to get money to build the development. The household has to pay the set rate.

Section 8 does have program that gives people vouchers through WHA and lets them live anywhere. If someone had a voucher and was over 55 they would have the right to rent these units. They wouldn't be able to use the voucher for the market rate units. There are not new vouchers being handed out so most people who have a voucher already have a place to live.

Q. Petition signed by 400 residents calling for eldrly housing with lower affordabiulity %. Why are you not adhering to people's will?

John Bartley: You changed because one of the Town Council members who lives near the Waltham line shoved it down the throats of the community. He wanted it, not us.

A. We don't make the decision, the Town does. We just tell you what could work. When asked about 60% affordability instead of 30%, we said we were comfortable at 30% or 40%. We were not as comfortable at higher percentage of meeting goals for market rate units.

Q. We can all agree that we want this to be successful. Can you show us a model of a successful building with 40% affordable and so few amenities that has remained at that ratio? And have you studied density regarding how many people at market rate will inhabit a building with affordable units. How many people are really going to live in the household and differences between market rate and affordable?
A. So we'll put together a list, we know of properties and will provide contact info. We have good info from owners and managers. It is quite different if it's family versus age-restricted. When it's family, the younger renter is uaully a single person or couple for market rate and affordables would be for a family with a couple in one br and one or two kids in the other br. So there can be significant dfference in density in a family affordable development. We think in 1BR units at 55+ there's not much diff between market and affordable - there will be 1 or 2 people [in either]. And we also think the larger units will be 1 or 2 people.

Angie Kounelis then took the floor to read [in its enturety including all the boilerplate legal jargon] the resolution she will present at the next Town Council meeting, which will require the Town Council to amend the notion to accept the Mitchell proposal to accept 29% affordable with a stipulation that 1.5 parking spaces will be available and auditorium will be renovated.

Q [to Angie]: Why 29% when a majority of elders would not be able to afford the market rate units?
Angie: Many people reside in 2-family homes because they need to, it's important to retain the market rate rents. People are using the rental income to pay their mortage and to supplement their income....Affordability starts at home...There has to be a give and take. At the last moment one Councilor made a recommendation and another Councilor seconded the motion. [Susan Falkoff rose to say she was proud of that motion to second and Angie then addressed Susan Falkoff] you came to us and told us you would support the proposal on the table and then [you changed].

Susan Falkoff read a statement which I did not transcribe - hope she will post it. I remember it for this line:
I could never afford my house now and I don't believe that my living there is bringing down the value of my neighbors' homes.

There were a number of comments denying that people need affordable housing - here are a couple examples:

• Everything is relative...My mother worked in sweatshops, my father worked in a kitchen. They rented in Belmont and moved out of Belmont and bought a three-decker...[so that they could move back to Watertown] - Kounelis
• If she's a younger group she should be taking 2 or 3 jobs to keep herself in housing. - an audience member responding to Deborah Peterson's description of East End Neighbors as "a younger group"
• I don't believe affordability is any different now. My father built my house, people can do it today...with sweat.

Q. Is there any research on the effect of affordable housing on real estate values?
A. I don't have anything off the top of my head. My experience is that the overwhelming issue is quality. For example, corner of Berkeley and Tremont - Castle Square. Owners let it run down for 35 years to point of where people weren't comfortable and nobody wanted to develop the parcel across the street. The new owners fixed it up and now they've bult new market rate housing across the street. If it's pretty and attractive and well run then it will [be successful.]

Q. I think all of us have more in common than separates us. The neighbors support [Angie] totally. We should debate the issues. East Watertown has been the dropping off of all the ill wills of Watertown - dumps, etc. The neighborhood is fragile. What keeps it together are the people in the front row [of this meeting].

At the Town Council we were informed that it would be 10%. Then it went up to 29%. Then we were muzzled, the audience wasn't allowed to participate. A friend of mine on the Arsenal Committee then persuaded the Town Council to reverse themselves totally.
We have cultural divisions here because we haven't had enough discussion. Owners of 2-families are fighting a tremendous battle - $6000 taxes, $1000 water bill, I subsidize two units....There is potential for dangers that could disrupt the fabric of the neighborhood....I hope people will come to the Town Council meeting.

Q. I represent East End Neighbors...we're a younger group...50-75 people in the neighborhood. These statements should be made to the Town Council. Mitchell shouldn't be involved. I asked John Portz to give me the history. I was at meeting and everyone had the chance to speak. The Town Council gave general approval - then in a 7-0 vote the Town Council voted to ask Mitchell to pursue a higher percentage of affordable housing. Only 35% of population 55+ could afford those rents. So the Council pushed for more units.

There was general disagreement about whether people were allowed to speak in the Town Council meeting after the % changed.

Q. 4 apartments is 10%. You need to be careful how many you have. The neighborhood group ratified 29% and then it went up to 40% and Portz said that that was the highest that was reasonably attainable. The purpose was not to have affordable housing but instead to [generate revenue for the Town]. People will wind up paying way more than others and the market rate people will be furious. I don't care who goes in. It's the number of units - when you get up to 40% you are dooming the project. There will be people in town subsidizing those units with our taxes.
A. There's no right answer. Our professional opinon, we are taking a $12 million bet. We believe it will be extraordinarilyy successful at 40%. We're in the busness. There will be people who choose not to live in the building because it's mixed income. But we're only looking for 23. People want a good value more than they care if someone next to them is paying $1100 or $926. If they think they are paying a fair rate then they won't care who is living next door. Except for 3 units, people will be paying $900+ or $1000+. There are many Watertown people who can afford the market rate but the majority of Watertown 55+ cannot afford the market rate units.
I respect how hard Angie and EWBA have worked for years to see that this building has an important future. They have shown how much they care. We've been involved since early 2003 and it will be 2008 until we see benefit. In last 6 months we've invested more than $100k to get the Town Council to give us direction. If you think that 40% is too much affordabililty then we'll [have to go through the application process again] and it will delay the development 6 months.

Q. The figure about affordability of seniors is based on income and not net worth. So it's not clean analysis to say they can't afford it without knowing their net worth. So you can't arbitrarily say that x-percentage can't aford to live there.
A. Yes, there may be lots of people who have assets that make them ineligible. We hope that some of those people will rent the market rate units. Newton Street has lots of seniors who have sold their house.

Q. The purpose of this lease is for the Town to receive revenue. What's the difference between 30% and 40% affordable units on revenue to the Town?
A. It is surprisingly similar because of the up-front construction financing available from the State for affordable units. So we don't carry debt on affordable units. Market rate rent covers a lot of debt that the affordable rent doesn't have to. In 2003 we projected over 50 yrs it would bring $12.8 milion to the Town. In 2005 and 40% affordable and much higher construction prices we projected $12 million. If we updated it to 30% affordable it would be similar becuase most of the difference was in construction costs.

Lisa Williams made a statement that was roughly what's posted here.

The Coolidge School is still empty and that's a shame. It's been three years since the Town issued an RFP. It's been two years since the reuse committee decided on the Mitchell proposal. We had hoped for Watertown seniors to be moving into new apartments by now. Instead we have Councilor Kounelis trying to undo the work of the previous Council that requested an increase in affordable units.

Arguments against more affordable units and why they are unfounded and ugly:

1) Afraid rental prices in the East End will decrease because of too many lower priced units

This has been refuted here and here. But what's important is not what economic forces are acting on rental prices but rather why we would choose to deprive Watertown seniors of the opportunity to move into newer, more desirable housing in order to protect their current landlords. (Do they even have current landlords or are they likely to be selling a house?)

2) Afraid that affordable units won't go to Watertown residents

Mitchell has explained that up to 70% of the units can be reserved for Watertown residents based on Mass. Commission Against Discrimination guidelines.

3) Afraid that no one will want to rent at market rate in a building with more than 30% affordable units causing all the units to be rented as affordable

Kounelis claims that there is a significant difference between 30% and 40% of the units being affordable. That is, five more one-bedroom units would "tip" the project. This argument invites some harsh criticism but let's just assume it comes from a misconception about who would be renting these affordable units. The fact is that 80% of the seniors in Watertown have household incomes less than 60% of the median. So 80% of the seniors in the Town would be eligible to rent affordable units in the Coolidge School. Surely the Councillor couldn't be suggesting that 80% of the seniors in Watertown would be undesirable neighbors.

Here is more background on affordable housing in Massachusetts.