As the clock ticks down to what is expected to be a historic midterm election on Tuesday, Nov. 3, Islanders will have plenty to consider in this election cycle, from candidates running for federal and state office to a total of nine statewide ballot questions.
The large number of ballot questions make it the busiest slate the state has seen in more than a generation, and include important proposals on everything from expanding the state’s public records laws to whether the state should repeal the existing cannabis laws.
But the question on the ballot that we feel deserves particularly careful attention for Islanders is Question 7.
This ballot question proposes a law that would become a much-needed ratchet set in the Island’s toolkit that could help address the housing crisis by lowering barriers to the construction of smaller, more affordable homes.
Ballot Question 7 is worthy of consideration because it is pointed directly at addressing perhaps the greatest challenge for the Island and communities across the Commonwealth: how to solve the housing crisis that is severely impacting young families who are first-time buyers, as well as older homeowners looking to downsize.
Specifically, Question 7 proposes a law that would allow single-family homes to be built in residential zones if the lot is at least 5,000 square feet, has at least 50 feet of land bordering the street, and has public sewer and water services. It also allows cities and towns to regulate some aspects of the homes, like the dimensions of the building, open space, parking, and, perhaps most important to the Island, whether it can be used as a short-term rental.
According to the secretary of state’s information for voters, “The proposed law would allow cities and towns to reasonably regulate certain aspects of those single-family homes, including their height, distance from neighboring buildings, open space, parking requirements, and whether they can be rented out on a short-term basis. The proposed law would also allow the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities to issue guidance or regulations to administer the proposed law.”
The arguments in favor of this ballot question are clear on our Island: Allowing smaller homes to be built on smaller lots than before means there will be more affordable homes, and that will help us to dissuade our younger Islanders from leaving and allow our seniors to find a way to stay by downsizing more easily.
The arguments against this question also have merit, as the proposed law goes against local zoning, and doesn’t necessarily consider local conditions like environmental protection, the condition of existing infrastructure, and the extraordinary surge in the population during our summers. Removing local decisionmaking can create unintended consequences. Considering around 43 percent of the Island is permanently reserved for conservation, it raises practical concerns about how much land we really have to allow for more construction, and it raises questions about the balance between sustainability and development. It overlooks concerns about the need to expand wastewater infrastructure with a more comprehensive wastewater management plan.
But, on balance, we believe the benefits represented in Question 7 outweigh the concerns and would allow the Island to establish a commonsense pathway toward more affordable housing. And right now, this Island needs to do everything it can to be sure that happens.
