See How to Stop the Affluent From Rigging the Housing Market. NY Times editorial. Excerpt:
"The median house [in Massachusetts] costs almost $700,000, the third highest among states."
"The main reason is that Massachusetts has not built enough to keep up
with its growing population and economy. Its municipalities tightly
limit new home construction through a combination of onerous zoning and
permitting rules."
"When it comes to housing policy, the state of Massachusetts is often a
bystander, allowing town governments to impose classic “not in my
backyard” policies."
"Many of the country’s strongest job markets are in coastal regions that have refused to build enough new housing."
"The initiative [a ballot initiative to override stifling local housing rules] would prevent many towns from setting needlessly large
minimums for lot sizes and effectively blocking the construction of
middle-class homes."
"many Massachusetts towns
require house lots to be at least 20,000 square feet, which is larger
than most midsize supermarkets, like Trader Joe’s. Nationwide, only
about one-fifth of homes are built on such large plots."
"The initiative would create a statewide minimum of 5,000 square feet,
which is about the size of a basketball court, and bar towns from
setting their own standards."
"The initiative would create a statewide minimum of 5,000 square feet,
which is about the size of a basketball court, and bar towns from
setting their own standards."
"Yet if the United States has any chance to reduce wealth inequality,
increase economic mobility and help more people achieve the American
dream, it needs significantly more housing. Blue states like
Massachusetts need to be part of the solution."
"Andrew Mikula, the leader of the initiative, estimates that it would allow the construction
of a few thousand new homes each year. That is far from enough new
housing to meet demand, but it is a meaningful step. It should be
accompanied by other changes, including allowing the construction of
more multifamily homes, such as duplexes, and apartments. Other places,
including Austin, Texas; Minneapolis; and Raleigh, N.C., have kept home
prices down by allowing more multifamily homes than Massachusetts does."
"Unfortunately, the anger
over high housing prices has also raised the possibility that
Massachusetts voters will approve a different ballot proposal this fall
that would be counterproductive: statewide rent control. It might sound
like a solution, but it would discourage construction and renovations.
Artificially low rents make it harder for developers to recoup the costs
of building. Rent control has not solved
the housing problems in New York City, and it will not solve them in
Massachusetts. The national pattern is clear. The way to bring down
housing costs is to increase housing supply. The initiative to create a
statewide lot-size minimum would help accomplish this."
"Democrats . . . should address the largest cost for
many families and stay true to the long progressive tradition that
prioritizes upward mobility. They must bring down the high price of
housing in the states they govern."