Exaggerations and overstatements are normal parts of political debate and are aimed at energizing the base supporters of a position.
The multifamily housing ordinance that was aimed at overcoming our housing crisis has generated controversy, fear and claims that proponents are young disciples of abundance philosophy led by promoters who are in the pocket of greedy developers. Those seeking changes to the ordinance are depicted as old fogies pining for returning Cambridge to 30 years ago and protecting their valuable homes. Neither claim is true. There are broad groups of concerned citizens in both camps, and they voice their concerns through a variety of organizations representing people of different ages, wealth, racial and ethnic identities. As Cambridge’s City Council considers modifications to the law, changes should be evaluated based on accurate depictions and analysis of the housing projects proposed under this remarkable ordinance.
At the Sept. 16 meeting of the council’s Neighborhood & Long Term Planning and Housing committees, claims were made about whether the goal of the law was to add affordable and middle-income housing or to add market-rate housing. In supporting adding market-rate housing, a prominent promoter of the ordinance suggested the example of a site of a $4 million single-family house that could be redeveloped as four $1.8 million condominium units to serve the housing needs of middle-class households in Cambridge. Does a $1.8 million condominium unit fit the budget of middle-income or even upper-middle-income Cambridge residents?
Some residents or future residents might be able to buy a $1.8 million home outright. Others would seek to use a mortgage to pay for part, and standard requirements apply. Given the purchase price, let’s imagine a mortgage for 80 percent of the total after a down payment of $360,000; current jumbo mortgage interest rate of 7.25 percent.; and property taxes, insurance and homeowner association fees that lenders use to calculate total monthly housing expenses. Typical lending standards limit total housing costs to 35 percent to 43 percent of gross monthly household income. Using these criteria, the annual household income for this condominium would be $310,000 to $320,000.
Cambridge census figures show an average 2024 household income of $177,763, and half of resident households earn less than $143,108. Only 33 percent of households had income of more than $200,000, and less than 17 percent showed income of more than $300,000. Are those earning more than $300,00 a year the middle class in Cambridge, or are they the elites?
As they consider necessary amendments to the multifamily housing ordinance, let’s urge city councilors to evaluate carefully its impacts on tenant displacement, prices and rates of replacement housing, physical and social environmental impacts and opportunities for existing middle-class residents to secure stable housing.
