Can they coexist?
In 2000, the Massachusetts legislature introduced the Community Preservation Act (CPA) to preserve open spaces, protect historic sites, and promote affordable housing. One hundred ninety-five of Massachusetts’ 351 municipalities have adopted the measure thus far, with Amesbury being the only municipality with CPA adoption on the 2023 ballot.i Despite its noble goals, concerns regarding its unintended consequences on housing affordability have emerged. With Massachusetts facing a housing crisis, this article explores the adverse effects of the CPA on affordable housing in the state.
The Genesis of the CPA
Enacted to allow municipalities to impose a surcharge of 1-3% on local property taxes, the CPA law allocates generated funds to three key areas: open space preservation, historic preservation, and affordable housing, with additional variable matching funds (depending on yearly revenue) coming from the state’s Community Preservation Trust Fund.ii
However, a report by the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts University found that more than a third of CPA communities are not meeting an existing requirement around spending on housing initiatives.
“About one in five CPA projects is dedicated to affordable housing, the report found, and fewer than one in 20 CPA projects involves the creation of new homes. Meanwhile, the preservation of historic structures has accounted for more than 40% of CPA projects, and together open space and recreation initiatives have also accounted for about 40% of CPA projects.”iii
Unintended Negative Effects
Tax Burden on Residents
A primary criticism of the CPA is its additional financial burden on residents. Though the surcharge might appear modest, ranging from 1% to 3% of property taxes, the cumulative effect over time can be significant. In the current high-inflation economy, this extra financial load is particularly challenging for low-income homeowners, adding strain to their efforts to meet mortgage payments and potentially exacerbating the housing affordability crisis.
Regulatory Hurdles and Project Delays
Affordable housing projects funded by the CPA frequently encounter increased regulatory hurdles and project delays. The stringent criteria and regulations attached to CPA funding can slow development, leading to higher costs and delayed delivery of affordable housing units. These bureaucratic intricacies can discourage developers, ultimately reducing the overall supply of affordable housing.
Impact on Small Businesses
The CPA’s emphasis on open space and historic preservation may inadvertently affect small businesses. Increased property taxes can strain local businesses, particularly those with slim profit margins. Rising property values may challenge the sustainability of local enterprises, leading to closures and a loss of community character.
Limited Flexibility in Fund Allocation
The rigid allocation of funds under the CPA limits municipalities’ flexibility in responding to changing community needs. Once funds are designated for a specific purpose, redirecting them becomes challenging. This lack of flexibility may hinder municipalities from addressing more urgent issues, such as emergency housing needs or the adaptive reuse of existing structures for affordable housing.
Inequitable Distribution of Benefits
The benefits of the CPA are not always distributed equitably. Larger, wealthier municipalities may possess more resources to navigate the complexities of CPA-funded projects, leaving smaller communities at a disadvantage. This can exacerbate existing socioeconomic disparities and further marginalize economically disadvantaged communities.
Good Intentions Meet Reality
While the Massachusetts Community Preservation Act was enacted with good intentions, its unintended adverse effects on affordable housing have become increasingly apparent. The tax burden on residents, regulatory hurdles, impact on small businesses, inflexible fund allocation, and inequitable distribution of benefits collectively contribute to a complex set of challenges. As the state grapples with a housing affordability crisis, it becomes imperative to reassess the CPA’s impact and consider adjustments that ensure its goals align with the broader aim of creating truly affordable and accessible housing for all residents.
by Citizens for Truth Contributor
Sources:
[i] https://www.communitypreservation.org/home/news/cpa-adoption-update-amesbury-voting-cpa-adoption-november
[ii] https://www.communitypreservation.org/funding
[iii] https://spectrumnews1.com/ma/worcester/news/2023/06/07/report–many-mass–towns-flouting-cpa-s-housing-requirements
List of municipalities and CPA surcharge rates:
Local Option CPA
Massachusetts First 
Leave a comment