Dear Cambridge and Somerville Constituents —

Last week I reached out to ask for your help in my re-election campaign — and so many of you responded with pledges to vote, sign requests, donations, and commitments to volunteer—thank you!

If you still want to get involved, you can visit my volunteer page to sign up to contact voters or request a sign, and you can make a contribution here.

On Thursday, I participated in a forum with my opponent, Neil Miller, and he continued to present a distorted case for why he would be a better leader on the issue of housing.

He once again criticized a vote I cast in 2023, and I want to take a moment to talk about it, because I think it's actually a good example of the kind of leadership I provide on housing, and some of the differences in this race.

My vote was in opposition to a major expansion of the state's Housing Development Incentive Program, also known as HDIP. 

Housing development incentives sound good, right?

The problem with HDIP, as I explained in my speech on the House floor, is that every year it gives tens of millions of dollars to for-profit, market-rate housing developers, but it has no affordability requirements whatsoever.

Moreover, the program offers no direct benefit to Cambridge or Somerville, because the funding only goes to designated Gateway Cities. And even the term "gateway city" can be problematic, because the needs of Salem and Quincy are different from those of Pittsfield or Chelsea.

Many noted leaders in Gateway Cities, such as Chelsea's Gladys Vega, have called for affordability reforms to HDIP. So have the leaders of Progressive Massachusetts and the Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations.

A report from the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute (MLRI) documented some of the results of the HDIP program: a state-subsidized studio in Malden renting for $3,438/mo.; a one-bedroom in Lowell renting for $3,467/mo.; and literally the first-ever million-dollar condo sold in Salem.

According to the latest data compiled by MLRI, the state has provided some $146 million in HDIP credits to 88 residential developments, and the results have been stark: 97% of the units are market-rate or above; just 3% of the units are affordable.

To be sure, we all understand it is very difficult to build housing right now. And I support doing everything possible to do so. But as I explained at this week's forum, even when it comes to getting market-rate housing off the ground, there are much better ways to make it happen.

One example of a better way is a program I helped advance in the Affordable Homes Act called the Momentum Fund. The Momentum Fund is a revolving investment fund, administered by MassHousing, that helps market-rate projects get off the ground in this very difficult fiscal environment. The Momentum Fund requires that at least 20% of the new units be set aside as affordable.

And best of all, the fund is designed to revolve, so the Commonwealth's investment can be returned and reinvested in additional housing over time — unlike HDIP, which basically hands no-strings-attached state dollars to high-end housing developers. The Momentum Fund is one of the ideas that emerged, in part, out of my advocacy on Beacon Hill to advance the concept of social housing.

Even when I voted No on HDIP, I said that I would be willing to come to the table and work with those who support HDIP if we can build some equity into the program. But as I said in my floor speech, when my constituents are begging the state legislature to pass a local option for rent stabilization, when we've been working for years to pass a local option real estate transfer fee to tax high-end transactions and fund local affordable housing efforts — I could not in good conscience vote for HDIP.

This is important, so I invite you to watch my five-minute speech on this topic from the House floor. I posted it to my YouTube.

Right now, my opponent is going door-to-door, telling voters I have opposed housing. But that is a ridiculous claim. At our forum, I had to remind him that leading pro-housing groups like Abundant Housing MA and Somerville YIMBY have endorsed my campaign.

Mr. Miller keep telling voters that I “voted against funding for gateway cities to add new homes to their downtown” and “voted against funding for housing in working-class cities.” I hope my explanation helps put this vote in context. I believe the residents of our community want a State Representative who will look at how state dollars are spent through an equity lens, and work to ensure that state programs are designed to have the greatest public benefit.

I could spend all day writing to you about some of the other dishonest claims that have been made in this race, or why I have every major organizational endorsement in my campaign. But I should probably get out there and keep knocking doors myself. 

If you value the kind of leadership I bring to the State House, on housing and on so many other issues, I respectfully ask for your support in whatever ways are possible right now and over the next two weeks.

Thank you, once again, for being an informed constituent. 

Yours in service,

Mike