2021 Candidate Questionnaire Responses

John Falco: Money to fund the Affordable Housing Trust can come from a variety of sources including Community Preservation Act funds, federal grants, linkage payments (from developers), PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes from Non-Profits), and inclusionary zoning fees (from developers).

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: To fund the Trust, I propose using a combination of Community Preservation Act funds, negotiated fees from new development (similar to linkage), negotiated contributions from PILOT payers, and any other applicable sources allowed. This will be critical once to get the program off the ground and doing the meaningful work of the Trust.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: I believe in an “every tool in the toolbox” approach. I think CPA funds, federal CDBG and HOME funds, other city funds such as linkage fees, short-term rental fees, etc., as well as creating new sources like a real estate transfer fee on high-value and speculative transactions are the place to start.

Kelly Catallo: I am interested in exploring several funding sources including grants, donations, and Community Preservation Act funds. Another strong option is to permit “in-lieu fees” that increase flexibility for developers and can provide a significant funding source.

Kit Collins: I would support creating dedicated funding streams to fund the Trust, including: transfer fees from the sale of market-rate existing housing, and linkage fees from developers who create new market-rate housing. We can also look to other local affordable housing trusts as examples for how to fund our AHT: For example, the Cambridge AHT is funded by appropriations from the City budget – something Medford leadership should work/lobby towards – as well as CPA funds; and incentive zoning policies require contributions to the AHT from large-scale non-residential development.

Abigail Dickson: Creating the Affordable Housing Trust will require a discussion of the best way for our community to fund it. Possible options are Community Preservation Act funds, federal and state funds/grants, transfer/linkage fees, and taxing short-term rentals like AirBnB.

Jim Halloran: I would propose funding the trust via required contributions from developers who propose housing units with greater than four units.

Nicole Morell: CPA funding as allowed, linkage fees

Jean Nuzzo: CPA Funds, Inclusionary Zoning Payments, Developer/Construction fees, HOME Funds, Private Donations

David Todisco: Accessible, safe, healthy, and affordable housing is a human right and as a City Councilor, I will always hold that belief. While I believe we could access grants and CPA funds to support a trust like this, I would like to discuss with our experts at City Hall what they envision would be applicable for funding a program like this. Additionally, we have $51 million in American Rescue Plan (ARP) dollars coming to Medford. These funds must be spent by 2025. We can use a portion of these funds to go towards programs that will stop displacement of families, support an Affordable Housing Trust, and build new affordable and energy efficient housing.

Justin Tseng: Ideally, the Trust would be at least partially funded by a reallocation of resources within the existing municipal budget. We do, however, have to face the realities of our budget, which has suffered from years of funding shortages as politicians have kicked the can down the road. I would be supportive of creating additional streams of funding dedicated to solving the housing crisis here in Medford, such as with transfer fees and linkage fees.

John Falco: As a member of the Medford City Council, I offered a resolution that the City Council enact a “housing stability notification ordinance.” The purpose of an ordinance of this nature is to require property owners who service residential tenants with an eviction notice also serve upon the tenant a document called a “Notice of Tenants’ Rights and Resources.”

In general, a “Notice of Tenants, Rights and Resources” contains a description of basic housing rights and resources, including a list of contact information or organizations available to assist tenants.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: The most important action we can take to support renters in Medford is to ensure that they know their rights and that they are not able to be taken advantage of. A key achievement of my administration was to increase communication and transparency so that people know their rights and landlords know their responsibilities. When federal funding became available to support local communities through the pandemic, we allocated significant funding to expand outreach efforts, including the creation of a Multilingual Resource Line to support residents in languages other than English on all issues including housing, we hired staff dedicated to outreach efforts related to the COVID-19 pandemic to reach as many residents as possible, and we commissioned two citywide mailers – one dedicated to all COVID-19 related support and one dedicated solely to housing issues. While the pandemic gave a new sense of urgency to this need, we will continue to make sure that renters know what is available in terms of resources and information.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: I believe we need to focus on expanding tenants’ rights, ensuring that health and safety inspections are prompt and accurate, and request significant local control on items such as rent stabilization, right to counsel, right of first refusal, condo conversion and more to be delegated back to Medford by the State Legislature.

Kelly Catallo: I would support renters in Medford by expanding outreach and education, in multiple languages, on existing programs and how to access them. I would also continue to support rental assistance programs and using the unprecedented amount of new federal funding to support property owners and renters.

Finally, I would unlock a significant funding source for renters in affordable housing. Medford residents pay a 1.5% real estate surcharge because of the Community Preservation Act. 10% of those funds are required by law to be spent on affordable housing. However, based on the 2021 Medford Community Preservation Commission report, only 4% of CPA funds were spent on affordable housing in FY2020. From FY17-FY2020 CPA affordable housing expenditures were only 22%. This number could be up to 80%, so I strongly believe Medford can do more to assist affordable housing tenants with the funding it already has access to.

Kit Collins: I would like to establish an annual or biannual distribution of information about renters’ rights and resources (perhaps in mid-September and mid-June, a couple of weeks after the most popular move-in periods) to every renter-occupied property in Medford. This action could be undertaken by the Office of Housing Stability once we have one, or perhaps the OCD in the meantime. Renters who are encountering any kind of housing instability or anxiety (i.e. “how to I apply for help with utility bills,” “what are my rights,” “I think my landlord is planning to evict me”) should not have to do their own individual research in every case: the City should at least start the conversation, preemptively, by presenting information, resources, and City contacts for future discussion to renters in a way that does not require computer access, and is available in every language spoken in Medford households.

Abigail Dickson: As a Medford renter myself, I am deeply committed to advocating for renter rights and resources for renters. An Office of Housing Stability, continuing to offer rental assistance programs (for assistance with move-in costs and beyond), and supporting tenant unions are all options for supporting renters. Additionally, more broad measures like zoning updates and an affordable housing trust will support renters by opening up more housing options, both designated affordable and market rate.

Jim Halloran: Renters in Medford are a vital part of our community. We need to ensure that there are policies in place that enable renters to stay in the community long term.

Nicole Morell: Establishing an Office of Housing Stability would support renters in need of affordable, stable options and provide a centralized place for renters to go to address any number of rental related problems from issues of renters paying rent to landlords who are having trouble making their own bills. Novel pilot programs like the move-in assistance program can also help identify what programs can best assist renters in the community. Last, the city could explore establishing a renters commission which could provide valuable insight for decision makers.

Jean Nuzzo:

• Educating landlords on programs such as section 8 to increase these renting opportunities
• Increasing HUD rental opportunities by requiring SHI units to be in perpetuity
• Encouraging Tufts to develop student housing planning as vigorously and diligently as they do their student growth plans; and sharing those plans with our community
• Create downsizing opportunities for the “overhoused” to open opportunities for the “underhoused”
• Work to balance corporate rental with homeowner rentals to keep rent affordable
• Analyze the impact of our Air BnB policies and absentee landlords on the rental market

David Todisco: Renters make up nearly half of our population in Medford, yet it often feels like renters are woefully disconnected from the community. I would like to work with the Mayor’s office and other councilors to launch an outreach effort welcoming renters in the City of Medford and letting them know resources that are available here in the community. Additionally, I do think a program like the Move-In Assistance was a key step in the direction we should go to providing support, resources, and assistance to those who are struggling as well as welcoming new individuals to our community.

Justin Tseng: One major shortfall in our current approach to renter assistance which I’ve alluded to earlier is that of communication. I support the City of Medford explicitly publishing a guide of renters’ rights online and in paper form, something that many other Massachusetts municipalities do. I also believe that we should pass legislation along the lines of a “Housing Stability Notification Act,” which aims to inform tenants who are facing displacement of their rights and of resources available to them by requiring landlords and foreclosing owners to give tenants a rights document and a resource document (with necessary translations) when serving an eviction notice. Another measure we should take is by passing a “Tenant’s Bill of Rights,” a suite of policies which uphold existing renters’ rights and guarantee renters the right to Organize, Right of First Refusal, and Right to Counsel.

Another shortfall in our current approach is in enforcement of health and safety codes. We need to fund an Office of Housing Stability and to give it teeth to make sure that health and safety codes are enforced. This would offer protections and safeguards from neglect experienced on the part of landlords. To do this, the Office of Housing Stability should also be tasked with communicating with tenant unions and renters here in Medford.

John Falco: As a member of the Medford City Council, we are working to recodify the existing Zoning Ordinance. Once the recodification is complete we need to look at the various elements of the Zoning Ordinance that need to be upgraded and set the table to address housing needs. We will have to look at Medford Square to modernize our zoning to allow for a diversity of housing choices. We need to include affordable housing that is responsive to community and business needs and market conditions to allow for flexible smart growth.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Since I was a City Councilor and now as Mayor, my top priority for land use policies is that it is community-driven. Zoning should be a reflection of a community’s goals and values, not something changed in a vacuum. It is why I started the process to create a Comprehensive Master Plan making sure that when we make changes they work together for every neighborhood in Medford – good planning and community visioning should always come first.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: We need to update zoning laws across the board. I am encouraged by the Council’s push for a Zoning Recodification which will update our zoning bylaws, permit ADUs, and make some minor but important changes to commercial and industrial zoning. The updated bylaws will make future amendment much easier.

I also support many elements included in the Mayor’s Housing Production Plan and would like to see that passed quickly.

Kelly Catallo: My top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws is to balance the need for housing development with preserving our community. I want to take a hard look at areas where it makes sense to increase development, especially mixed-use development combining housing with retail and other uses. I also want to examine new construction cost drivers, such as parking space requirements, and determine if they should be amended where it makes sense to do, for example in areas with ready access to public transit.

Kit Collins: My priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws is to create more mixed-used zoning to promote accessible and connected neighborhoods; to reconsider rezoning from the standpoint of investigating and ameliorating the racist and classist impacts of Medford’s current zoning (i.e. the placement of industrial/commercial zones exclusively adjacent to lower-income neighborhoods; long-term effects of redlining and exclusionary zoning); to prioritize high-density residential development in neighborhoods with transit access; to prioritize high-density residential housing near Tufts University, so as to address housing scarcity that is intensified by students’ need for off-campus housing; and to allow for higher-density housing in more areas of the city, where currently only two- or one-unit buildings are allowed.

Abigail Dickson: My top priority is to make our zoning more friendly to affordable housing development, and overall housing development that works for the community and doesn’t perpetuate barriers related to race, class, and ability. This will include many of the policies outlined in the next few questions — reducing parking minimums, accessory dwelling units, and allowing for more multi-family and mixed-use development (particularly in transit oriented areas).

Jim Halloran: Medford has many different and unique neighborhoods and our zoning needs to reflect that. Our zoning code needs to encourage transit-oriented development in areas close to the new green line. Building usage also needs to be evaluated and

Nicole Morell: I’m in favor of a full zoning review and overhaul to have our zoning reflect the current Medford and the Medford we want to build in the future. I think this should be a collaborative process with great community involvement, so I am wary to be too prescriptive in my ideas, but some things I would like to see are transit oriented development overlays, green density zoning, affordable housing overlay, and mixed use zoning to revitalize Medford Square and other commercial districts.

Jean Nuzzo:

• Close Zoning loopholes
• Draft a zoning primer to make our zoning laws accessible to all residents
• Author zoning ordinances that encourage incremental development that keeps local developers involved and homeownership opportunities in reach for Medfordians
• Encourage sustainable development and development patterns
• Require proper lot coverage ratios and calculations to protect our environment
• Investigate opportunity and impact to renovate existing oversized, non-historically significant structures to more modest sized workforce/missing middle units.

David Todisco: An option would be to exempt affordable housing and all public housing projects from the parking requirements in Medford and intentionally place them near public transportation options as well as close proximity to major transit ways. This would encourage less car use for affordable housing options and promote a city that is better connected.

Justin Tseng: My top priority for modernizing our zoning laws is ensuring that we have inclusionary zoning, which would ensure that new developments in the area are affordable to those with low and moderate incomes.

At the core of our housing crisis is a shortage of housing supply. To alleviate this problem, I would support zoning that increases density and which allows for more multifamily houses and denser forms of living, supported by increased access to public transit. The science is clear that such zoning is crucial to solving the housing crunch and is beneficial to the environment as well.

Another top priority is to reverse zoning laws which have been harmful to communities who have been historically marginalized and excluded, such as BIPOC. Single family zoning, in particular, has traditionally been wielded as a tool of the suburbs to keep out working class, often Black and Brown families. As we rezone, we must be cognizant of such policies.

John Falco: Somewhat support. If elected Mayor, I would look to explore form-based zoning codes, overlay districts, rezoning, and other creative smart-growth approaches to help guide the types of development that target growth in our business squares.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Neither support nor oppose.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Somewhat support. I think a hybrid of use-based and form-based zoning could be a possible solution. I would like to discuss this more and see what advocates, stakeholders, and city staff would like to see in our zoning.

Kelly Catallo: Neither support nor oppose. Changing zoning from use-based to form-based is a significant shift that should not be done lightly. I want to study the issue further to consider what would work best for Medford, including gathering input from constituents to consider how this potential zoning strategy change would impact their homes and businesses.

Kit Collins: Somewhat support. I admit I do not have an expert’s perspective on the comparative pros and cons of use-based zoning vs. form-based zoning. As I continue to learn about it, some benefits of form-based zoning jump out to me. Form-based zoning seems more relevant to Medford than use-based zoning, as we seem likely to increase business and residential neighborhoods in the city, and unlikely to increase industrial and large-scale commercial uses within the city. I had some concerns about if form-based zoning would exacerbate cost/accessibility disparities in housing – i.e. could it create zones where only luxury-looking housing is allowed? – and thus exacerbate racial and class segregation in the city. But then again, I do not think that our current zoning system is addressing that issue either, and my research so far doesn’t indicate that form-based zoning would have this result.

I have also read that form-based zoning provides greater clarity around what kind of development can happen in different neighborhoods, and reduces the need for navigating variances. I have heard the argument that zoning by design standards, and not by use, allows for mixed-use development by not separating residential areas from business areas, for example. All in all, I think that form-based zoning – if approached with a robust and inclusive community engagement process – could be a very interesting and engaging way for us to plan our city and create better standards for development.

Abigail Dickson: Strongly support.

Jim Halloran: Strongly support. Form based zoning would enable us to protect our historic neighborhoods and encourage mixed use development in Medford. It would preserve our existing neighborhoods while still allowing for growth not allowed in our current code.

Nicole Morell: Neither support nor oppose.

Jean Nuzzo: Neither support nor oppose. Well-written, accessible zoning ordinances in conjunction with a well-appointed design review board and redevelopment authority can accomplish far more than a shift to form-based zoning; however I appreciate what this approach attempts to do.

David Todisco: Somewhat support.

Justin Tseng: Somewhat support. I have not done enough research into form-based zoning to commit to saying that I strongly support moving towards it, but from what I have read so far, I believe that such a policy does promote predictability in built results, higher quality public land use, and better mixed-used development.

John Falco: Strongly support.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Neither support nor oppose. This of course depends on where the change is being made – Medford, like many other cities and towns in the Greater Boston Area, consists of diverse areas that have different needs. A one-size-fits-all approach wouldn’t work for every part of Medford. It is crucial to make sure that the policy reflects where we are and where we want to be as a city. 

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Strongly support.

Kelly Catallo: Somewhat support. Reducing parking space requirements promotes lower-cost development and encourages use of public transit. Lower-cost development creates more attainable housing, which I support. However, there are many parts of Medford that do not have access to public transit where this type of policy makes less sense. We need to find the right balance of attainable housing creation with the realities of our community.

Kit Collins: Strongly support. I think that the current parking minimum is a roadblock to creating the higher-density housing that our city needs. The current parking minimum wastes space that could be used for more housing units, protected bike lanes, tree canopy without sidewalk interference, green space, or wider sidewalks that make our business areas friendlier to pedestrians. Furthermore, I think that the city needs to get serious about incentivizing non-car transit use. There’s plenty more involved in that project – implementing safe bike lanes and bike parking, advocating for expanded and improved MBTA access – but designating ever-more space for private car parking enables the ubiquity of private car ownership, and is in opposition to the goal of making non-car transit feasible, convenient and attractive.

Abigail Dickson: Strongly support.

Jim Halloran: Strongly support. Medford needs to reduce this requirement. In areas that are near public transit this requirement is outdated and unnecessary.

Nicole Morell: Somewhat support. I support reducing this number of required parking spots but also understand not all proposed new buildings are the same, nor are all parts of the city as pedestrian, bike, or public transit friendly. This type of reduction needs to come with a heavy focus on supporting a multi-modal Medford where cars are not a necessity to live and thrive in the city.

Jean Nuzzo: Somewhat support. The City of Cambridge has been working on parking minimums for well over 20 years, and they are barely at a 1:1 ratio. Medford, while on the way to a more robust multimodal transportation model, is nowhere near the options available there. Medford needs to draft and codify a Transportation Demand Ordinance and appoint a Board/Commission to do the necessary work to prepare for an overall reduction. Until such time, I am in support of reductions on a case by case basis and reductions where the project sits within zone(s) where public transportation options are present and aren’t just creating an “on paper” reduction that puts cars parking on public streets making it a neighborhood issue.

David Todisco: Strongly support. This could be beneficial depending on the part of Medford. The only reason I would be apprehensive about a policy like this is because in North Medford we have VERY limited public transportation options, and if you have multiple adults who work in a home full time, they may have to travel every day and need the two spots per dwelling. They otherwise might have no additional modes of transportation to get to work or bring their children to school, etc. If a policy like this were put in place, there would have to be an option to add additional cars to a dwelling. However with new buildings, if proper planning is put in place so that individuals have plenty of comfortable options, a policy like this should work.

Justin Tseng: Strongly support.

John Falco: Strongly support.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Somewhat support. Again, I think it depends on which parts of the city the overlay would cover but it is an intriguing idea, especially in areas already primed for multi-unit residential housing developments.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Strongly support.

Kelly Catallo: Somewhat support. I support the creation of new affordable housing. Adding tools such as an Affordable Housing Overlay is an artful way to accomplish that goal through carrots (making it easier for developers to build) rather than sticks (increasing regulations or punitive measures). However, I have concerns about an overlay that is 100% affordable. I believe the percentage should be lower to create housing diversity. We need more market rate housing as well, especially workforce housing for those who earn above the requirements to access deed-restricted affordable housing but who are also facing significant challenges finding attainable homes.

Kit Collins: Strongly support. I think that Medford needs to do many things to present itself as a city that will welcome and work with affordable housing developers, so that more affordable housing will actually be built here. Implementing an AHO could be a key part of this, and could send a stronger signal to affordable housing developers that their projects will be welcomed here. In addition, I think we need more affordable housing built quickly; and I’m given to understand that an AHO could help us fast-track these developments. Finally, we should be seeking to create permanently affordable housing, not settling for only housing that is only affordable until the current owner decides to sell it at market rate or raise rents, and an AHO would invite permanently affordable housing development.

Abigail Dickson: Strongly support.

Jim Halloran: Somewhat oppose. Affordable housing should be part of our overall zoning code and not concentrate affordable units in one location. The threshold for affordable units needs to be lowered in Medford. In neighboring Somerville, new building of 3 units needs to have 1 be affordable.

Nicole Morell: Strongly support.

Jean Nuzzo: Strongly oppose. With dedicated “Affordable” overlays we run the risk of segmenting populations- circumventing the actual goal of MA GLA 40B which was originally crafted to provide housing for multiple income levels within each development. Additionally, capital A Affordable is a semantic, and a 100% Affordable overlay simply provides an excuse for corporate developers to sidestep zoning. The way to truly affordable housing, it to craft ordinances that encourage incremental human scale development which community developers can afford to build.

David Todisco: Somewhat support. I am 100% in support of affordable housing options growing in the City of Medford. We currently face a housing shortage and multiple generations and new potential residents are being pushed out as the housing prices only increase. I am in favor of this but would like to learn more about the specific scenarios for what relaxed zoning laws look like. I know we don’t want an 8 story apartment building in the middle of a strictly residential area. However, a two or three story complex that might fit well with the look of the neighborhood could be a very good fit. We have to take this policy development by development.

Justin Tseng: Strongly support.

John Falco: Strongly support. The City Council just added Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to the Zoning Ordinance during the recodification process. The addition of ADU’s to our zoning tool kit will help expand affordable housing options throughout the City.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Strongly support. ADUs are a great tool to allow residents to age in place and to provide housing support in the city. I strongly support allowing their use in Medford.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Strongly support.

Kelly Catallo: Somewhat support. I strongly support permitting Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in Medford. ADUs represent a unique opportunity for homeowners to create new housing for community members and earn rental income. They are also a great option for seniors, another group facing significant housing challenges, to stay in place but downsize, while freeing up homes for families.

Kit Collins: Strongly support. I think that this is a great way to safely create more housing within the infrastructure and housing that already exists in Medford – to make use of what we already have available.

Abigail Dickson: Strongly support.

Jim Halloran: Somewhat support. I would support ADUs in Medford with restrictions on location and use.

Nicole Morell: Somewhat support. I support these with design guidelines, fit for neighborhoods, and square foot, and lot coverage guidelines. ADUs can be an effective tool at bringing housing to the market and allowing residents to age in place in their own community and remain connected to their existing support networks and routines.

Jean Nuzzo: I strongly support a properly crafted ADU ordinance which provides a housing opportunity to meet additional occupant needs; versus excessive limits that essentially turn single family zones into general residence zones for developer profit. For the record, I’m not opposed to a conversation on up-zoning, and in fact support this as a potential option. However, it should be a transparent and open dialogue and not done under the cover of an ADU ordinance in single family districts. A good example of purposeful ADUs can be found on page 27 of the Stoneham Zoning Ordinance (www.stoneham-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1223/Ch15-Zoning-Part-1).

David Todisco: Strongly support.

Justin Tseng: Strongly support.

John Falco: Somewhat support. As Mayor, I support updating our antiquated zoning ordinance to be responsive to community and business needs. Expanding housing density throughout the City should be closely examined, whereas this is not a one size fits all model.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Somewhat support. Please see above for my thoughts on updating Medford’s zoning ordinance.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Strongly support. I think 1-2 unit increases in density, “legalizing the Triple Decker,” and other methods of creating more affordable housing units to allow people who live here to stay here are possible in every neighborhood in our city.

Kelly Catallo: Somewhat support. I support updating zoning laws to allow for more than 2 dwelling units per building in areas of the city where it makes sense. For example, we have a significant 2-unit residential housing inventory in Medford. Some of it is large enough to be converted into 3 units, where parking constraints allow and without changing the footprint of the building. Coupled with increased access to public transit and careful consideration of ways to mitigate any traffic increases, as well as robust neighborhood engagement processes to obtain public input, appropriate zoning changes can help create new homes in a way that maintains the unique attributes of our neighborhoods while easing the housing supply crisis.

Kit Collins: Strongly support. There is a strong need for denser housing in Medford, so we must roll back regulations that prevent buildings with more than 2 units.

Abigail Dickson: Strongly support.

Jim Halloran: Somewhat support. There are many areas of the city where the number of dwelling units could be increased without negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.

Nicole Morell: Somewhat support. I would want to see public involvement for any changes like this and also have concerns with a blanket approach to this because of potential impacts of lot coverage, impervious surfaces, and worsening or heat islands that can come with structures (and the associated parking) of a certain size.

Jean Nuzzo: Strongly support. As a supporter of incremental development I am open to transparent +1 upzoning in key areas- with proper community dialogue, historical commission involvement, and knowledgeable change management practices applied- to assure all residents feel that they are able to contribute and influence the direction our city moves in, where changes are made, and what we look to preserve/protect.

David Todisco: Somewhat support. Again, this could work depending on the part of the city. Some portions of Medford are too heavily populated as is and I fear this could cause further congestion to an area that is already overwhelmed. It would depend on the specific scenario but overall this could be a good policy.

Justin Tseng: Strongly support.

John Falco: I would support increased housing density on Mystic Avenue and Medford Square.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Subject to community input and in balancing the overall needs and goals of the community, appropriately location underutilized industrial areas, areas in proximity to transit hubs, and areas that could be a catalyst for greater economic development opportunities may be excellent places to review density increases.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: I think there are solutions that would allow increases in every part of the city, especially more dense mixed uses in our squares and in the Wellington and Mystic Avenue industrial and commercial zones as well as allowing ADUs and additional affordable units in SF and GR districts.

Kelly Catallo: I support increasing housing density in a smart, measured way, in areas where infrastructure can accommodate the increase and where it will not exacerbate traffic congestion. The addition of ADUs to existing homes could be a good way to begin. I would also be open to considering specific areas in Medford where it may make sense to allow for increased density based on existing conditions and resources.

Kit Collins: First, I would support increased housing density in the neighborhoods adjacent to Tufts University. Many students must live off-campus (though Tufts should make this less the case by building more on-campus dormitories) and do so in the homes around Hillside, which exacerbates housing scarcity. I would like to see some high-density housing built in and around the Hillsides neighborhood where more students can live, so that students and non-student residents and families in Medford are not competing so fiercely for a mostly static supply of single/two-family homes and triplexes in that area.

I would also love to see Mystic Avenue become a neighborhood that combines businesses with higher-density housing. The southwestern side of the street is already dominated by one- and two-family homes, and some small businesses and restaurants. I think that higher-density apartment buildings would be appropriate in that area; plus, it already has some bus service. Ideally, I’d love to see the northeastern side of the street morph into a thoroughfare for higher-density housing alongside neighborhood-appropriate small businesses (i.e. coffee shops, grocery stores you can walk to).

Abigail Dickson: I would advocate more density around public transit areas. The West Medford commuter rail stop, areas surrounding Medford square and its multiple bus access points, and areas bordering Somerville and the coming Green Line station should all be considered. However, it is critical that we ensure that any increases in housing density and development will be beneficial to overall affordability and sustainability goals for the city.

Jim Halloran: I would support increased housing density in all areas. Single-family zoned areas should have the opportunity to add ADUs. Multi-family districts should be able to add more units if lot size and access to public transit allow. There should be minimum space requirements for any new units added.

Nicole Morell: Areas throughout the city that are well served by public transportation could greatly benefit from this increased density.

Jean Nuzzo: There is substantial opportunity for increased 2 over 1 mixed use along our main streets; including but not limited to areas of- Salem Street, Riverside Ave, High Street, Main Street, Middlesex and Boston Ave and Medford Square. This 2 over 1 development pattern would help to increase our housing stock and commercial tax base, while keeping our city walkable and human scale. Additionally, this incremental model keeps opportunities open for smaller, local developers with a vested interest in our community. Lastly, this approach to development is far less invasive to neighborhoods and helps us to better preserve the things we love about our city.  

I am strongly opposed to using Mystic Ave for housing. A successful career in commercial development provides the insights to see the unique opportunity this 1.1 mile of road with easy on/off access to Rt 93 presents to our city- for an increased commercial tax base, long-term job creation, experiential retail opportunities, open space, and affordable food sources for the neighborhood directly abutting it; among other things. To see more on this unique opportunity readers can visit www.nuzzomedford.com.

David Todisco: Currently, I support increasing the housing supply on Mystic Avenue. It would do little damage to displace current residents and would welcome new residents and new businesses as well if we had mixed use buildings.

Justin Tseng: I support increased housing density overall, but would point to neighborhoods south of the Mystic (Medford Hillside, South Medford) and the Mystic Ave. corridor as areas where I would be particularly supportive of such projects. I believe that these neighborhoods are optimal because they offer land with potential and close access to public transit.

John Falco: Since 2005 there have been numerous plans to redevelop Medford Square:
-2005 Medford Square Masterplan
-2006 Medford Square and the Mystic River
-2009 Parking Advisory Report
-2010 Medford Square Garage Feasibility Study
-2011 Medford Square Garage Site Plan
-2016 Medford Square Existing Conditions & Vision
-2017 Medford Square Masterplan (MAPC)

The 2017 MAPC plan had overwhelming support and the administration should be moving forward on this plan. I support advancing the development of a long-term vision for the community, but work to address the City’s housing and land use needs for Medford Square need to start now.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Launching the Comprehensive Plan process is one of the highlights of my first term as Mayor. Now well underway, we are seeing voices new and old share what they think are the best options for a vibrant future for Medford, and these opinions will be a key part of the final recommendations. For housing and land use, I have always believed in a balanced approach that recognizes the highest and best uses for each part of the city, community and neighborhood input, and our changing needs. If done carefully and deliberately, we can – and will – achieve all these priorities. It will be important to utilize our recently released 10 year Housing Production Plan in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan process to ensure a well-balanced plan that meets the needs for our city’s housing stock – especially creating more affordable housing – while also bringing in valuable and carefully planned commercial development opportunities. One of the areas in which we have already begun to expand, working alongside the Comprehensive Plan process, is bringing in life science and biotech development in our commercially zoned areas. This will connect Medford with industry hubs throughout the region, bring in hundreds of new jobs, and expand our commercial tax base.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: I think our major priorities need to be addressing the housing crisis, planning for the climate crisis, and ensuring that development truly benefits the community and people with a broad range of incomes, not just the big property developers.

Kelly Catallo: Our vision and our implementation plan must align to create new homes across price points to meet the attainability needs of our current residents. To do this, we must find ways to decrease barriers to housing production and facilitate smart development. I was the REALTOR® asked to be part of the housing discussion for the comprehensive plan, where along with a representative of the CPA and the Medford Housing Authority, I shared my professional knowledge and experience to better inform our policies. Together we collaborated some viable solutions. We should also maximize the potential unlocked by increased public transit capacity

Kit Collins: The highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan should be increasing permanently affordable housing; reducing parking minimums; allowing for high-density housing in more of the city; baking in climate change resiliency plans to all existing neighborhoods and new development sites (i.e. plans for how residents will be robustly protected in the event of heat waves, strong winds, stormwater runoff and flooding); requiring carbon-neutrality for all new housing development and municipal buildings; ensuring that all neighborhoods have access to green space and parks; expanding Medford’s tree canopy and ensuring equity in tree canopy and green space across neighborhoods; prioritizing protected bike lanes and proper bike parking; and expanded transit access.

Abigail Dickson: Planning for more housing development, specifically affordable housing development, is a top priority but it will require consideration of the best locations for increased development, transit infrastructure surrounding new development, and how city resources can best support the community in bringing these plans to fruition. The Comprehensive Plan process, which puts community input at its center, is an excellent way to have some of these conversations.

Jim Halloran: Enhanced Zoning

Nicole Morell: Climate adaptation and resiliency, support of multi-modal and complete streets, maintenance of our streets and infrastructure, preservation and expansion of green space, support of affordable housing and economic development

Jean Nuzzo:

• Increased commercial and mixed used opportunities that foster walkability and build a sense of community for all residents
• A variety of housing options that provide choices for all lifestyles and stages of life
• Engaging open spaces that preserve our indigenous green spaces and provide sustainable ecosystems for local wildlife
• Citywide accessibility in our parks, streetscapes, and structures

David Todisco: I believe there are two things in Medford we must focus on when it comes to housing and land use. We must increase our affordable housing stock and we must maintain and possibly expand our green space in Medford. I do not believe our community should sacrifice any of our green space for development.

Justin Tseng: I believe that our top priorities as laid out in the Housing Production Plan should be to address our local needs, meet production goals, and to provide a diverse array of housing choices that cater to varied needs. In terms of concrete steps forward, I believe we should prioritize upzoning, establishing a Municipal Affordable Housing Trust, and making it easier to develop mixed-use developments and multi-family housing.

John Falco: Maybe.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Yes. In my first term, we spent an enormous amount of time as an administration laying the groundwork for a successful future. From the multi-year capital improvement plan, pavement management plan, comprehensive plan process, rework of the City’s budget process, the climate adaptation and action plan, and the Housing Production Plan, we now have a roadmap for best policies and practices needed to move Medford forward. Unfortunately, despite the hard work of staff, the City Council refuses to finalize the plan. Once that happens, I look forward to implementing the plan.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Yes.

Kelly Catallo: No. We must hold public hearings in the neighborhoods that will be affected by the plan before moving forward. More input is needed.

Kit Collins: Yes. The scarcity of affordable housing in Medford is an issue that can’t wait. I support passing the Housing Production Plan without delay so that we can start the conversations about which of the options outlined in the HPP are most appropriate and actionable for Medford, identifying what are the obstacles to realizing those options, and get to work on a plan for developing housing in Medford that is appropriate for every income level.

Abigail Dickson: Yes.

Jim Halloran: Maybe. I would like to see more emphasis on creating housing that incorporates mixed uses including retail. The C2 district is an area that should be more mixed use focused than just residential units.

Nicole Morell: Yes. I support the Housing Production plan but do have strong concerns, which I have voiced in meetings, that the plan references three 40B projects as forthcoming affordable housing in the city while the city actively fights against these projects. When so much of the plan is based on reaching an affordable housing threshold, this is both confusing and concerning.

Jean Nuzzo: Yes. As a member of the HPP team, I would like to see us further discuss, build consensus, and adopt a final version of this plan.

David Todisco: Yes.

Justin Tseng: Yes.

John Falco: No. The administration has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting 40B developments in court. This is in addition to the estimated loss of millions of dollars in taxes and permit fees. More importantly, this has delayed much-needed affordable housing. We need to do better to address our housing crisis and 40B development provides more affordable housing for moderate-income individuals and families.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Yes. Developments submitted under Chapter 40B, while they have affordable components, are not true affordable housing. Unfortunately, the process is often used by developers to subvert local land use policies in order to shoehorn ill-fitting developments where they simply don’t belong – taking our voices away in the process. If we are serious about bringing meaningful affordable housing to our community, then it should be done on Medford’s terms, not on the terms forced upon us by developers whose ultimate goal is profit, not affordability.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: No. In this specific case, the city is below its 10% threshold and the legal arguments to suggest otherwise have not been persuasive. 40B is a state law that supersedes local control over housing and zoning. I do not think this is a good long-term solution for development because it reduces city leverage. However, because we are below the 10% threshold, the state is going to force these 3 projects to be constructed without significant local input. These 3 projects would also put the city over the 10% threshold. My thoughts on this are that we should first implement the Housing Production Plan to give us additional protections from future 40B projects, see these projects be constructed (which is 100% going to happen eventually either way), put the city over the 10% threshold to prevent future 40Bs, and then host robust processes for all future developments including community benefits agreements that provide significant public benefits from projects going forward. Medford’s land is an incredibly valuable resource that is in high-demand. We should ensure that demand is met with equally high-value improvements that benefit our entire community and help address the housing cost crisis and climate crisis.

Kelly Catallo: No. We should sit down with developers and have direct, collaborative conversations about proposals and then negotiate, rather than pursuing lawsuits. Developers and neighbors should be part of these discussions, and it is the role of city government to bring everyone to the table. We should proactively work to ensure we meet the state’s 10% affordable housing requirement so that we have control over where these projects may develop.

Kit Collins: No. I think it is a waste of precious resources to be fighting a statewide law that is meant to hold municipalities to a minimal threshold of affordable housing. The ZBA should be able to consider 40B projects. If they are deemed inappropriate for the proposed location, then the ZBA/the city can negotiate for modifications or greater community benefits, or choose to deny the proposal.

I do sympathize with concerns that 40B projects potentially give private developers an avenue to flout existing regulations and norms; and I am aware that some developers have used 40B as a way to skirt zoning restrictions, in projects where creating affordable housing was never the main goal. However, I do not think that seeking to exempt ourselves from 40B projects is the correct way to deal with this concern. We should indeed hold ourselves to at least 10% minimum affordable housing. At the same time, we should be prioritizing community-controlled and permanently affordable housing, and maintain strong standards with all proposed development to ensure affordable housing; safe, accessible, and multi-modal streets and sidewalks; green space; and climate change resiliency. 40B shouldn’t be our only avenue towards affordable housing development, but we shouldn’t nix it either.

Abigail Dickson: Maybe. In general I believe that while affordable housing is of the utmost importance, it is possible for developers to take advantage of 40B and bypass zoning regulations by building the minimal number of truly affordable units. Court cases like this tend to fizzle and spending city money and resources might not be the best route. Since I’m not well versed at this point in time on the details around these particular cases, I withhold judgment as to whether fighting these developments is worth city resources.

Jim Halloran: Yes. 40B takes the power away from cities and towns. Medford should have zoning that encourages the creation of affordable units without having developers choose the 40B process.

Nicole Morell: No.

Jean Nuzzo: Yes. Absolutely. The sentiment that Medford is fighting “affordable and market-rate housing” is disingenuous. As mentioned previously Capital A affordable does not mean Medford residents will be able to afford to live there. Additionally, it is imperative that we seek our GLAM calculation ruling, considering the Fells alone, Medford qualifies for a reduction in the 10% requirement. Obtaining this ruling allows us to achieve safe harbor, protects us from 40B developments sidestepping our zoning and environmental guidelines; and brings developers to the table to negotiate projects that benefit Medford residents, providing solutions to meet our needs.

David Todisco: No. I believe the city should approve the 40Bs and allow the production to continue. We need an increase in housing options and affordable housing options in Medford.

Justin Tseng: No.

John Falco: In 2018, I served as Chair of the Zoning Subcommittee which developed an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. The ordinance requires new, larger-sized housing developments to include a minimum number of affordable units to address the growing need for housing for low and middle-income residents to help preserve Medford’s diversity. In addition, I also offered a resolution that the City of Medford create an Affordable Housing Trust. An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing.

Long-standing historical and structural racism has impeded access to housing. During the pandemic, people of color were disproportionately more likely to hold low-wage jobs or jobs that could not be done remotely resulting in poorer health outcomes, loss of income, and a spike in housing insecurity. An Office of Housing Stability could help improve access to and retention of housing by providing services and support for issues such as landlord/tenant conflicts, evictions, legal service referrals, rental/mortgage assistance, and tenant education, etc.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: The first step in fighting systemic racism is confronting that it exists and has an effect on the lives of persons of color in Medford, in Massachusetts, and in the country. When we declared systemic racism as a public health threat, we did so to do just this – and so that we could begin the long, hard work of untangling the generations of affects systemic racism has had on these populations. One of the key ways that we have begun this work is through the Comprehensive Plan process, and making sure that those involved – including the process’ steering committee – represents the city that it serves.

I was proud to lead the effort to develop the inclusionary zoning ordinance currently in place as a city councilor, pushed for the Housing Production Plan as mayor, and recognize that we have important work to do to right the wrongs of the past.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: We need to analyze the history of exclusionary zoning in Medford and make changes to our zoning that address past exclusion. Additionally, we need to ensure that new housing in our community is available to a broad range of incomes. Some of the reparative action also must come by ensuring that tenants’ rights are protected and expanded so that all of the units in our community are health and safe, as well as ensuring long-term affordability.

Kelly Catallo: We can increase access to housing for all by creating practical, appropriate strategies to promote the development of diverse housing options for our residents, especially attainable housing options. These housing policies should allow for the creation of homes at different price points across neighborhoods, furthering equal opportunity.

Kit Collins: The city must work to undo the legacy of exclusionary zoning that has resulted in, or was explicitly towards the goal of, racial segregation and the exclusion of Black and Brown people. Due to the effects of systemic racism, Black and Brown people are disproportionately likely to be low-income and low-wealth, and so we must increase permanently affordable housing overall. Housing scarcity also limits our ability to welcome refugees from other areas.

I would support measures to help address racially and class-segregative zoning/housing codes, including: removing minimum lot size and minimum square-footage requirements for new developments; removing prohibitions on multi-family homes or high-density housing; and removing limitations on building height.

In addition, Medford should work towards creating supportive homeownership programs. Black and Brown people are underrepresented in homeownership due to redlining, discrimination, and systemic economic injustice, and therefore disproportionately excluded from the asset-building potential of homeownership. I would like to see the city work to create a municipal affordable homeownership program.

Perhaps Medford could even aspire towards something modeled off of a “right to return” program, like the one that the City of Portland had piloted. To my understanding, under this program, people who can document that they or their relatives were displaced by urban-renewal projects can receive special homebuyer assistance for down payments on homes in those neighborhoods they or their families were displaced from. Perhaps the city could investigate how a program like this could work in or be made relevant to Medford: a city fund for homeownership assistance for families who have been displaced or disenfranchised by redlining, gentrification, exclusionary zoning, urban renewal or other forms of economic predation.

Abigail Dickson: Because BIPOC statistically have lower incomes and less wealth accumulation (in part due to discriminatory housing practices), they are harder hit by our lack of designated affordable housing, increasing housing prices, and lack of support for renters and low and middle income home buyers. Measures that increase our affordable housing stock, foster more affordability overall, connect denser housing areas with public transit and bikeable and walkable streets and green space, and support renters and low- and middle-income home buyers are all ways to combat this systemic racism.

Jim Halloran: Medford needs to increase access to affordable housing in all areas of the city. Individual neighborhoods or developments should not be developments should not be labeled affordable. The move towards form based zoning would also help with this initiative.

Nicole Morell: As affordable housing development projects are proposed, the city needs to make clear a strong preference for affordable ownership opportunities. Ownership provides the opportunity for generational wealth that so many Black and Brown American have been systemically denied through a history of racist housing policies. Increased access to down payment assistance programs and the potential for mixed income neighborhoods through diverse housing types including 2-3 families also allow for more ownership and stable rental opportunities.

Jean Nuzzo: Housing security at its root is an income related issue. Opportunity for well paying jobs, coupled with equal lending and housing laws, and current professional training trends in topics such as unconscious bias, equity, active allyship and more looks to effect positive change that will impact housing access.

David Todisco: We need municipal leaders that are going to bring public and private parties to the same table to have a critical conversation about homeownership programs in Medford. We must keep in mind minorities, seniors, those living on fixed incomes, those who are disabled, and any other marginalized populations and ensure all have access to safe and healthy affordable housing. Right now, Medford is experiencing a lot of gentrification across different parts of the city but specifically in West Medford which is a historic Black neighborhood. This must be a pillar in the community-wide conversation and we should be looking to our neighbors who have made efforts to curb gentrification to see where they have succeeded and where they have failed.

Justin Tseng: As I have mentioned above, Medford needs to stop continuing policies that systemically price out our neighbors of color. We should be allowing greater density in the form of allowing more apartments with affordable units and multi-family homes to be built. We should ensure that housing that is more “affordable” is not placed in neighborhoods with greater levels of pollution and environmental risk, as often is the case. We should reverse the very real problem of housing discrimination, as shown by a Suffolk University Law School/Boston Foundation study conducted last year, by increasing access to and awareness of mortgage and rental assistance. We should stand up against those who are pushing to exclude new residents and newcomers from benefit programs, a relic of thinking from the height of redlining.

John Falco: Yes. The City has the opportunity to take the lead by disposing of excess City owned parcels for the creation of housing. Back in 2017, the City had advanced development of plans for the sale/lease of several City-owned parcels in Medford Square. These properties could yield new diverse housing options, expand the tax base, create new jobs, support local businesses, and provide for private investment in local infrastructure. This is just one example where the City can help take the lead to help address housing needs for its residents.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Yes. Housing itself is a fundamental right. We owe it to ourselves to make sure that housing remains accessible, fair, and equitable. While a lot of this cannot be achieved by Medford acting on its own, we can take steps to advance these priorities at the local level with the tools we do have.

Housing is not a Medford-specific problem for us to solve on our own, and those needs must be balanced against the community’s vision for itself. Housing for the sake of increasing the supply is not the answer for Medford or the region and could have adverse effects to the city’s future – the right housing, in the right place, to serve the most needed populations is the best way to address the supply issue in the greater-Boston area and under my administration, Medford is ready to work toward that goal.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Yes. Yes, and we have a moral obligation to work with surrounding communities to come up with community-led, regional solutions that support people first and are not just trojan horses to allow big private property developers to build large numbers of luxury apartments to maximize their profits. Supply-side and market-based solutions cannot be the only tool in the toolbox to address a housing crisis that stems from significant market failures.

Kelly Catallo: Yes. Yes, we do have a moral obligation to address the housing supply crisis in Medford by creating more homes. However, the rationale for doing it goes beyond a moral obligation. It is not just the right thing to do, but it also makes a great deal of sense as a means to create the type of community we want: one that welcomes and promotes diversity, is responsive to the needs of both long-term and new residents, and one that has a thriving and dynamic local economy. We can do this by making local government processes more accessible to homeowners, builders, and others by being easier to work with. We must cut red tape; make sure that regulations are reasonable, clear, and consistent; and be more collaborative than combative in our approach.

Kit Collins: Yes. I’d put it exactly that way: it’s a moral obligation. There’s a lot to do to make Medford more affordable to the people who live, work, and want to live here, but doing what we can to add housing stock and tamp down on spiraling housing costs and scarcity is a crucial part.

Abigail Dickson: Yes.

Jim Halloran: Yes.

Nicole Morell: Yes. We need to not look at just sheer numbers but also what we are building to ensure we are meeting the needs of the underhoused and providing stable housing opportunities while also being intentional about city planning and understanding the impact of development on climate change adaptation and resiliency.

Jean Nuzzo: Medford commercial tax base currently hovers at 10%. To remain solvent, we need greater than 30%. Additional housing stock without a sustainable growth pattern is meaningless. We must look to properly balance our commercial to residential ratios to assure residents don’t get taxed out of Medford first, provide well-paying jobs within our city, and help to offset the costs of assistance programs. Then we can refocus our efforts on adding new housing stock, which is historically and currently being built at above and at market-rates, with a nominal amount of Capital A Affordable units; all doing little to assist the most vulnerable and at risk in Medford.

David Todisco: Yes.

Justin Tseng: Yes.

John Falco: Affordable housing is an important and complex issue. Working with partners across city lines and with city leaders from the Metro Mayors Coalition is critical. Collaboration with community leaders will help increase housing opportunities in Metro Boston to ensure housing diversity, fair housing, and stakeholder and municipal engagement.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: I think Medford can best address these issues by continuing to be a strong advocate – with our regional and municipal partners – at the state level to advance meaningful change that works for the entire state, not through a patchwork of disparate policies that vary from city to city. Like I said above, this is not just a Medford problem – but Medford’s important perspective must be shared when the decisions that affect us are being made.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: We need to build coalitions and relationships between elected officials, create shared policy commitments that all of our communities work on together, and ensure that Medford has the necessary staff in our planning, development, and sustainability department to do this work.

Kelly Catallo: In order to be successful, we need to focus our efforts within Medford first and foremost. Our state officials are well-equipped to navigate regional issues. At the same time, we can collaborate on planning and funding opportunities, and we can continue to engage actively in regional working groups like MAPC’s Regional Housing Task Force and the North Suburban Home Consortium to promote housing opportunity across city lines.

Kit Collins: Medford must build up its own capacity for housing residents of all income and background levels, and build up its capacity for assisting residents who are encountering housing-related problems, instability and anxiety. When I was involved with the Medford Know Your Rights Coalition earlier this year, and putting together a compilation of resources and recommendations for people seeking housing-related legal aid; rental, mortgage, and utility bill relief; eviction defense/preparation information; etc. – it seemed to me that many of the resources available for people were not based in Medford. We must strive to, as a city, add to and reciprocate the aid and resources spearheaded by other communities like Boston and Malden. In addition, we should strive to be a regional leader in prioritizing permanently affordable housing.

Abigail Dickson: We can work with housing related advocacy groups in surrounding communities, work with surrounding governments to discuss our shared community needs, and potentially work together with both to advocate for change at the state level. We can serve as resources for each other to better understand the housing needs in the area and what policies we can enact to better address the broader housing crisis.

Jim Halloran: Medford needs to adopt policies and zoning that allow the creation of more housing. We should use the lessons of our closest neighbor, Somerville, to see how form zoning can be implemented and be successful.

Nicole Morell: Many communities are facing the same challenges Medford is with regards to housing and affordability. There is a great opportunity to collaborate with community leaders throughout the state to learn from their successes and challenges and bring innovative housing solutions to Medford.

Jean Nuzzo: See Housing Production Plan: www.medfordma.org/storage/2021/04/Medford-HPP-Draft-030121.pdf.

David Todisco: I believe Medford can work with the state and regional partners to have a more holistic view of affordable housing options in the Greater Boston area. We want to make sure we have roughly similar stock when compared to our neighbors and if anything, ensure we are leading on programs when it comes to accessibility and providing resources to those who are marginalized.

Justin Tseng: We must understand that the housing crisis is not contained to Medford itself. Keeping out young professionals, middle class, and upper middle-class folks means that we accelerate gentrification in other working-class towns across the Boston area, worsening an ever-growing regional housing crisis. We must also think of ways to cooperate with other communities, such as creating a “Regional Housing Solutions” tool. Such a tool would allow communities to share data with each other transparently and catalyze civilian and non-profit assistance in identifying cross-regional issues and developing strategies targeted towards regional submarkets.

John Falco: Transportation infrastructure connects families and individuals to areas of employment and education, as well as defines and limits where these individuals can live. Advocating for properly funded, well thought out, reliable public transit and infrastructure supports access to fundamental needs for families and our community.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Transportation is a critical component to Medford’s future success, not just for housing, but for economic development, equity, and growth. The opening of the Green Line extension later in 2022 will be a significant moment for the city that will have far-reaching impacts to housing, home values, parking, traffic, and city operations – while it is currently planned to stop short of Route 16, I am pleased to support the environmental impact studies for the second phase of the extension to continue this progress.

Additional policies and projects that we spearheaded during my administration include dedicated bus lanes on Mystic Avenue, reprogramming traffic patterns at the intersection of South and Main after decades of indecision, advocacy at the highest levels at the MBTA to restore bus routes suspended due to the pandemic, and the promotion of a dedicated Director of Transportation and Traffic to coordinate the City’s efforts across the administration.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: We need to expand public transit at any opportunity and ensure that all new construction and repairs to streets prioritize multi-modal access and safety upgrades.

Kelly Catallo: With the expansion of the MBTA’s Green Line, Transit Oriented Development and smart growth strategies will unlock new housing opportunities while making more of our city walkable. These strategies would allow for more housing without necessitating more cars, traffic, and parking. Transportation policies should support the implementation of housing development strategies.

Kit Collins: We should prioritize transportation policies that reduce car dependency and incentivize cycling and public transit. We should seek to situate high-density housing near train stations – i.e. Hillsides and Magoun Square, near the new green line station stops, for example – and prioritize lobbying for expanded and improved bus service in neighborhoods where many residents do not drive, like the Medford Housing Authority apartments off of Riverside Avenue.

We should lobby the MBTA for restored bus service where lines were deactivated during the pandemic; expanded transit access in the short and long terms (expanded and more reliable bus service; more light rail throughout Medford); improve the feeling of comfort and safety at bus stops and train stations through improved lighting and bus shelters; do regular accessibility audits of bus stops and train stations; implement protected bike lanes and work towards bike lane connectivity throughout the city; implement a municipal bike-share system in Medford, like BlueBikes; and lobby for fee-free public transit.

We should also audit and improve all pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks. Many sidewalks are in disrepair and are thus inaccessible to folks in wheelchairs, among other problems; and I have talked with residents who say they choose to drive to stores less than 2 blocks from their residences, because to cross their street feels so unsafe. Addressing this issue will also require speed-abatement and traffic calming measures.

Abigail Dickson: I am in favor of prioritizing accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists, increasing public transit access, and advocating for cheaper/free public transit. Ideally, creating a more transit-oriented city will allow for more options for housing and mixed use development in transit hubs in the city.

Jim Halloran: The city needs to ensure that all modes of transportation are accessible. We need enhanced bike infrastructure. We need easy access to public transit in all neighborhoods.

Nicole Morell: A stronger focus on complete streets that are less car dependent can allow for both denser housing opportunities and more open and green space. By eliminating the need for multiple cars per household, there is an opportunity to utilize would-be parking spots for higher value use including open space, urban forests, and economic development opportunities that benefit residents.

Jean Nuzzo: I would prioritize a Transportation Demand Ordinance to help address our needs, look to repurpose oversized parking areas for redevelopment through a newly established Redevelopment Authority, and partner with local developers- who understand the market and are highly invested in the outcomes and benefit as we do by mitigation of unintended consequences.

David Todisco: Affordable housing cannot be properly utilized by those who need it most if there is no nearby public transportation or pedestrian accommodations. It is not enough to build housing and assume it will be advantageous if those who would live in it are unable to safely and efficiently go about their daily lives. I am a strong believer that our infrastructure plans should be designed with everyone in mind, not just one mode of transportation, but all options, including pedestrians. One of the core tenets of my campaign has been to repair and revitalize our cities transportation infrastructure, and as a Councilor I will approach this with housing and transportation equity firmly in mind.

Justin Tseng: As we deal with an ever-modernizing urban society and the consequences of climate change, we must develop infrastructure and transit plans centered around safe, environmentally friendly modes of transportation. Increasing bus lanes and bike lanes will make transit safer and more efficient and will incentivize the use of these greener forms of transportation. An increased public transportation capacity in increased bus service and the Green Line Extension should be paired with an upzoning policy in these neighborhoods, which would ease the housing crisis, relieve traffic, and benefit our environment.

John Falco: It’s important that Medford has housing that is attainable, affordable, decent, and livable. We saw during the pandemic an already significant housing crisis worsen. We must learn from this experience and plan for the future to ensure that all residents and families, regardless of financial means, have an opportunity to live in Medford.

Breanna Lungo-Koehn: Housing – like many of the issues the City faces in the coming years – demands a thoughtful, deliberate, and open dialogue in order to find equitable solutions. A huge part of that is laying the groundwork for success through careful planning and community-driven discussions about where Medford is and where we want to be. I am proud of the work my administration has done in the first two years, and grateful to the work done by Housing Medford to move the issue of housing in our community forward. I look forward to the next two years and building upon this strong foundation, together.

Isaac “Zac” Bears: Housing is a top issue for me as a City Councilor and I will continue to make it my priority if re-elected this fall.

Kelly Catallo: Through my 28 year career of working in housing with renters, landlords, buyers and sellers in Medford, I understand housing in Medford at the street level, not just the policy level. Medford has seen very limited housing production over the last decades, and as a result we know that Medford’s housing supply does not meet the needs of Medford residents, nor is it attainable to many. We must act with strong public participation to implement a wide array of housing strategies to create new homes across price points, without adding any costs or regulations that would further drive up the price of home ownership or tenancy. We should not resurrect failed policies like rent control, nor should we add a sales tax to homes. We know that by creating more homes, we expand opportunities for all, and that should drive our housing policy strategy.

Kit Collins: Thank you for the thoughtful questionnaire, and for considering my responses.

Abigail Dickson: Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak about issues that are of such vital importance to our community. I look forward to working with Housing Medford and other community groups to bring more housing affordability to our city!

Jim Halloran: Medford is a unique combination of urban and suburban neighborhoods. We need to have policies that enhance the quality of our housing and allow Medford residents to stay and live in the city long term.

Nicole Morell: So much of what I shared here starts with having a conversation. My role as city councilor is to represent residents and come ready with ideas to start conversations that result in action that the community will benefit most from. I don’t know the perfect solution to many of the housing challenges we face, but I do know if we can get to place of constructive, open, and honest conversation with Medford residents, we can get to the solutions that meet our needs and make us feel great about the future of our Medford and all who wish to call it home.

Jean Nuzzo: Having grown up in residential construction and working in commercial construction and development for several decades, I can tell you that housing valuation and the market forces have become very complex and highly contested issues. In recent years the housing market as an investment opportunity has been increasing exponentially and seemingly with no ceiling. The attraction- it performs reliably well year over year. As Americans many of us accept this reality and leverage it to our own benefits; but it comes with a cost- the rising cost of housing. 

Many will say that it is a “Supply and Demand issue”; and while on its face that seems to be the case; if you spend significant time learning about the industry, markets and programs you will come to see that is a vast oversimplification of the issue. These complications of the market come from not only the way we have allowed housing to become an investment opportunity but also by how we have allowed it to become a commercial endeavor- with corporations holding much of our housing stock in portfolios and thus moving homeownership further away from many who aspire to it. The market is further complicated by AirBnBs that were supposed to help keep rent affordable, but we see all over the city rooms renting for $200+/night further inflating the value of housing stock and removing monthly or yearly rental options for this new business opportunity. Additionally, several federal and local programs provide funding opportunities for project sized such that only corporations can complete them, further eroding Medford’s ability to grow incrementally and shifting small scale builders and contractors into single/double flipping. 

This development pattern puts builders and homeowners in competition for the same parcels, and removes the ability for potential homeowners to build value through sweat equity; eliminating a very effective ownership entry opportunity and the inherent affordability of workforce/missing middle units from our markets, all the while creating over-size housing where modest housing once stood throughout our city. Lastly, our federal tax code provides vacancy tax write offs; thus allowing for “market-rate” units to remain empty until a renter who can afford the asking price is located- artificially setting the market rate. So you can see, this idea that “if we just build enough housing it will eventually become affordable” is a fallacy. To reach the point of inflection on the demand curve you have to have “enough” of something for that demand to be met; with housing being a very reliable investment opportunity for those who can afford it- demand is insatiable. Sadly, we can only work within the constraints we have; many of the programs mentioned above, when properly implemented, can provide some relief, however it’s trying to stop a rising tide. Therefore, we must be realistic in setting our expectations and goals- only then can residents have an honest, meaningful dialogue on how best to move forward, create affordability and housing stability where feasible; and build a better tomorrow for us all.

Thank you for reading; feel free to contact me with any thoughts, questions or feedback at nuzzomedford@gmail.com.

David Todisco: Thank you to Housing Medford for all you do to provide resources, promote conversation, and uplift our community!

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support. In January 2020, I proposed to the City Council that Medford create an Affordable Housing Trust to provide and preserve affordable housing in our community. I still strongly support the Affordable Housing Trust to help steer Medford’s affordable housing strategies as established under state law.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

Money to fund the Affordable Housing Trust can come from a variety of sources including Community Preservation Act funds, federal grants, linkage payments (from developers), PILOT (Payment in Lieu of Taxes from Non-Profits), and inclusionary zoning fees (from developers).

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Strongly support. The right to adequate housing is a human right. An Office of Housing Stability can support residents and the obstacles they may face in attaining and retaining adequate housing. The Office of Housing Stability would provide information and assistance to tenants and landlords in navigating complicated housing issues. In addition, it would also provide support services, resources, and advocacy.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

As a member of the Medford City Council, I offered a resolution that the City Council enact a “housing stability notification ordinance.” The purpose of an ordinance of this nature is to require property owners who service residential tenants with an eviction notice to also serve upon the tenant a document called a “Notice of Tenants’ Rights and Resources.”

In general, a “Notice of Tenants, Rights and Resources” contains a description of basic housing rights and resources, including a list of contact information or organizations available to assist tenants.

As Mayor, I would propose that we continue to provide emergency rental assistance and access to legal assistance via the Community Preservation Act.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

As a member of the Medford City Council, I offered a resolution that the City Council enact a “housing stability notification ordinance.” The purpose of an ordinance of this nature is to require property owners who service residential tenants with an eviction notice also serve upon the tenant a document called a “Notice of Tenants’ Rights and Resources.”

In general, a “Notice of Tenants, Rights and Resources” contains a description of basic housing rights and resources, including a list of contact information or organizations available to assist tenants.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

As a member of the Medford City Council, we are working to recodify the existing Zoning Ordinance. Once the recodification is complete we need to look at the various elements of the Zoning Ordinance that need to be upgraded and set the table to address housing needs. We will have to look at Medford Square to modernize our zoning to allow for a diversity of housing choices. We need to include affordable housing that is responsive to community and business needs and market conditions to allow for flexible smart growth.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Somewhat support. If elected Mayor, I would look to explore form-based zoning codes, overlay districts, rezoning, and other creative smart-growth approaches to help guide the types of development that target growth in our business squares.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly support.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support. The City Council just added Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) to the Zoning Ordinance during the recodification process. The addition of ADU’s to our zoning tool kit will help expand affordable housing options throughout the City.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Somewhat support. As Mayor, I support updating our antiquated zoning ordinance to be responsive to community and business needs. Expanding housing density throughout the City should be closely examined, whereas this is not a one size fits all model.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

I would support increased housing density on Mystic Avenue and Medford Square.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

Since 2005 there have been numerous plans to redevelop Medford Square:
-2005 Medford Square Masterplan
-2006 Medford Square and the Mystic River
-2009 Parking Advisory Report
-2010 Medford Square Garage Feasibility Study
-2011 Medford Square Garage Site Plan
-2016 Medford Square Existing Conditions & Vision
-2017 Medford Square Masterplan (MAPC)

The 2017 MAPC plan had overwhelming support and the administration should be moving forward on this plan. I support advancing the development of a long-term vision for the community, but work to address the City’s housing and land use needs for Medford Square need to start now.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Maybe.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No. The administration has spent hundreds of thousands of dollars fighting 40B developments in court. This is in addition to the estimated loss of millions of dollars in taxes and permit fees. More importantly, this has delayed much-needed affordable housing. We need to do better to address our housing crisis and 40B development provides more affordable housing for moderate-income individuals and families.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

In 2018, I served as Chair of the Zoning Subcommittee which developed an Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance. The ordinance requires new, larger-sized housing developments to include a minimum number of affordable units to address the growing need for housing for low and middle-income residents to help preserve Medford’s diversity. In addition, I also offered a resolution that the City of Medford create an Affordable Housing Trust. An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing.

Long-standing historical and structural racism has impeded access to housing. During the pandemic, people of color were disproportionately more likely to hold low-wage jobs or jobs that could not be done remotely resulting in poorer health outcomes, loss of income, and a spike in housing insecurity. An Office of Housing Stability could help improve access to and retention of housing by providing services and support for issues such as landlord/tenant conflicts, evictions, legal service referrals, rental/mortgage assistance, and tenant education, etc.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes. The City has the opportunity to take the lead by disposing of excess City owned parcels for the creation of housing. Back in 2017, the City had advanced development of plans for the sale/lease of several City-owned parcels in Medford Square. These properties could yield new diverse housing options, expand the tax base, create new jobs, support local businesses, and provide for private investment in local infrastructure. This is just one example where the City can help take the lead to help address housing needs for its residents.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

Affordable housing is an important and complex issue. Working with partners across city lines and with city leaders from the Metro Mayors Coalition is critical. Collaboration with community leaders will help increase housing opportunities in Metro Boston to ensure housing diversity, fair housing, and stakeholder and municipal engagement.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

Transportation infrastructure connects families and individuals to areas of employment and education, as well as defines and limits where these individuals can live. Advocating for properly funded, well thought out, reliable public transit and infrastructure supports access to fundamental needs for families and our community.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

It’s important that Medford has housing that is attainable, affordable, decent, and livable. We saw during the pandemic an already significant housing crisis worsen. We must learn from this experience and plan for the future to ensure that all residents and families, regardless of financial means, have an opportunity to live in Medford.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support. Meaningful affordable housing, developed responsibly, is key to Medford’s future and ensures that we maintain the ability for new residents to make our city home and preserve the ability for long-term residents to stay.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

To fund the Trust, I propose using a combination of Community Preservation Act funds, negotiated fees from new development (similar to linkage), negotiated contributions from PILOT payers, and any other applicable sources allowed. This will be critical once to get the program off the ground and doing the meaningful work of the Trust.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Somewhat support. From the beginning of our administration in 2020, we have made great strides in modernizing and professionalizing city services and operations, including a complete restructuring of our Office of Planning, Sustainability, and Development that for the first time now includes dedicated, professional staff focused on housing issues. As we emerge from the pandemic, and the resulting economic crisis, it is my hope that new operations like an Office of Housing Stability can be discussed with stakeholders – policy and advocacy organizations like Housing Medford, renters, landlords, home owners, and policy makers – to tailor an operation that reflects the needs of the community.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

I am proud to have led the response and recovery efforts as we make our way through this next stage of the pandemic. From the beginning, we knew that food security, housing stability, and thoughtful communication would be key to making sure that Medford emerged stronger than ever. Across the administration, we worked to make sure that no one was left behind – I proudly supported using CPA funds for emergency assistance and legal services to support those in need. These resources, combined with the resources available at the state level, were a lifeline for renters, landlords, and homeowners.

Moving forward, we are about to engage in a community-driven process to determine the best use for the City’s allocation of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds to determine the best way to use these funds in the ways that Medford needs most in the coming years – this includes utilizing funds for housing stability programs, including those already underway.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support. This initiative was a proud achievement for my administration and for everyone involved.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

The most important action we can take to support renters in Medford is to ensure that they know their rights and that they are not able to be taken advantage of. A key achievement of my administration was to increase communication and transparency so that people know their rights and landlords know their responsibilities. When federal funding became available to support local communities through the pandemic, we allocated significant funding to expand outreach efforts, including the creation of a Multilingual Resource Line to support residents in languages other than English on all issues including housing, we hired staff dedicated to outreach efforts related to the COVID-19 pandemic to reach as many residents as possible, and we commissioned two citywide mailers – one dedicated to all COVID-19 related support and one dedicated solely to housing issues. While the pandemic gave a new sense of urgency to this need, we will continue to make sure that renters know what is available in terms of resources and information.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

Since I was a City Councilor and now as Mayor, my top priority for land use policies is that it is community-driven. Zoning should be a reflection of a community’s goals and values, not something changed in a vacuum. It is why I started the process to create a Comprehensive Master Plan making sure that when we make changes they work together for every neighborhood in Medford – good planning and community visioning should always come first.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Neither support nor oppose.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Neither support nor oppose. This of course depends on where the change is being made – Medford, like many other cities and towns in the Greater Boston Area, consists of diverse areas that have different needs. A one-size-fits-all approach wouldn’t work for every part of Medford. It is crucial to make sure that the policy reflects where we are and where we want to be as a city. 

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Somewhat support. Again, I think it depends on which parts of the city the overlay would cover but it is an intriguing idea, especially in areas already primed for multi-unit residential housing developments.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support. ADUs are a great tool to allow residents to age in place and to provide housing support in the city. I strongly support allowing their use in Medford.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Somewhat support. Please see above for my thoughts on updating Medford’s zoning ordinance.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

Subject to community input and in balancing the overall needs and goals of the community, appropriately location underutilized industrial areas, areas in proximity to transit hubs, and areas that could be a catalyst for greater economic development opportunities may be excellent places to review density increases.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

Launching the Comprehensive Plan process is one of the highlights of my first term as Mayor. Now well underway, we are seeing voices new and old share what they think are the best options for a vibrant future for Medford, and these opinions will be a key part of the final recommendations. For housing and land use, I have always believed in a balanced approach that recognizes the highest and best uses for each part of the city, community and neighborhood input, and our changing needs. If done carefully and deliberately, we can – and will – achieve all these priorities. It will be important to utilize our recently released 10 year Housing Production Plan in conjunction with the Comprehensive Plan process to ensure a well-balanced plan that meets the needs for our city’s housing stock – especially creating more affordable housing – while also bringing in valuable and carefully planned commercial development opportunities. One of the areas in which we have already begun to expand, working alongside the Comprehensive Plan process, is bringing in life science and biotech development in our commercially zoned areas. This will connect Medford with industry hubs throughout the region, bring in hundreds of new jobs, and expand our commercial tax base.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes. In my first term, we spent an enormous amount of time as an administration laying the groundwork for a successful future. From the multi-year capital improvement plan, pavement management plan, comprehensive plan process, rework of the City’s budget process, the climate adaptation and action plan, and the Housing Production Plan, we now have a roadmap for best policies and practices needed to move Medford forward. Unfortunately, despite the hard work of staff, the City Council refuses to finalize the plan. Once that happens, I look forward to implementing the plan.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

Yes. Developments submitted under Chapter 40B, while they have affordable components, are not true affordable housing. Unfortunately, the process is often used by developers to subvert local land use policies in order to shoehorn ill-fitting developments where they simply don’t belong – taking our voices away in the process. If we are serious about bringing meaningful affordable housing to our community, then it should be done on Medford’s terms, not on the terms forced upon us by developers whose ultimate goal is profit, not affordability.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

The first step in fighting systemic racism is confronting that it exists and has an effect on the lives of persons of color in Medford, in Massachusetts, and in the country. When we declared systemic racism as a public health threat, we did so to do just this – and so that we could begin the long, hard work of untangling the generations of affects systemic racism has had on these populations. One of the key ways that we have begun this work is through the Comprehensive Plan process, and making sure that those involved – including the process’ steering committee – represents the city that it serves.

I was proud to lead the effort to develop the inclusionary zoning ordinance currently in place as a city councilor, pushed for the Housing Production Plan as mayor, and recognize that we have important work to do to right the wrongs of the past.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes. Housing itself is a fundamental right. We owe it to ourselves to make sure that housing remains accessible, fair, and equitable. While a lot of this cannot be achieved by Medford acting on its own, we can take steps to advance these priorities at the local level with the tools we do have.

Housing is not a Medford-specific problem for us to solve on our own, and those needs must be balanced against the community’s vision for itself. Housing for the sake of increasing the supply is not the answer for Medford or the region and could have adverse effects to the city’s future – the right housing, in the right place, to serve the most needed populations is the best way to address the supply issue in the greater-Boston area and under my administration, Medford is ready to work toward that goal.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

I think Medford can best address these issues by continuing to be a strong advocate – with our regional and municipal partners – at the state level to advance meaningful change that works for the entire state, not through a patchwork of disparate policies that vary from city to city. Like I said above, this is not just a Medford problem – but Medford’s important perspective must be shared when the decisions that affect us are being made.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

Transportation is a critical component to Medford’s future success, not just for housing, but for economic development, equity, and growth. The opening of the Green Line extension later in 2022 will be a significant moment for the city that will have far-reaching impacts to housing, home values, parking, traffic, and city operations – while it is currently planned to stop short of Route 16, I am pleased to support the environmental impact studies for the second phase of the extension to continue this progress.

Additional policies and projects that we spearheaded during my administration include dedicated bus lanes on Mystic Avenue, reprogramming traffic patterns at the intersection of South and Main after decades of indecision, advocacy at the highest levels at the MBTA to restore bus routes suspended due to the pandemic, and the promotion of a dedicated Director of Transportation and Traffic to coordinate the City’s efforts across the administration.

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Housing – like many of the issues the City faces in the coming years – demands a thoughtful, deliberate, and open dialogue in order to find equitable solutions. A huge part of that is laying the groundwork for success through careful planning and community-driven discussions about where Medford is and where we want to be. I am proud of the work my administration has done in the first two years, and grateful to the work done by Housing Medford to move the issue of housing in our community forward. I look forward to the next two years and building upon this strong foundation, together.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support. We need to get this done ASAP.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

I believe in an “every tool in the toolbox” approach. I think CPA funds, federal CDBG and HOME funds, other city funds such as linkage fees, short-term rental fees, etc., as well as creating new sources like a real estate transfer fee on high-value and speculative transactions are the place to start.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Strongly support. I have led the charge to advocate for the creation of an Office of Housing Stability.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

The city should continue its commitment to Housing Assistance Funds, improve connections to state and federal assistance programs, create an Office of Housing Stability, and implement a local eviction moratorium as neighboring communities have.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

I believe we need to focus on expanding tenants’ rights, ensuring that health and safety inspections are prompt and accurate, and request significant local control on items such as rent stabilization, right to counsel, right of first refusal, condo conversion and more to be delegated back to Medford by the State Legislature.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

We need to update zoning laws across the board. I am encouraged by the Council’s push for a Zoning Recodification which will update our zoning bylaws, permit ADUs, and make some minor but important changes to commercial and industrial zoning. The updated bylaws will make future amendment much easier.

I also support many elements included in the Mayor’s Housing Production Plan and would like to see that passed quickly.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Somewhat support. I think a hybrid of use-based and form-based zoning could be a possible solution. I would like to discuss this more and see what advocates, stakeholders, and city staff would like to see in our zoning.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly support.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Strongly support. I think 1-2 unit increases in density, “legalizing the Triple Decker,” and other methods of creating more affordable housing units to allow people who live here to stay here are possible in every neighborhood in our city.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

I think there are solutions that would allow increases in every part of the city, especially more dense mixed uses in our squares and in the Wellington and Mystic Avenue industrial and commercial zones as well as allowing ADUs and additional affordable units in SF and GR districts.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

I think our major priorities need to be addressing the housing crisis, planning for the climate crisis, and ensuring that development truly benefits the community and people with a broad range of incomes, not just the big property developers.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No. In this specific case, the city is below its 10% threshold and the legal arguments to suggest otherwise have not been persuasive. 40B is a state law that supersedes local control over housing and zoning. I do not think this is a good long-term solution for development because it reduces city leverage. However, because we are below the 10% threshold, the state is going to force these 3 projects to be constructed without significant local input. These 3 projects would also put the city over the 10% threshold. My thoughts on this are that we should first implement the Housing Production Plan to give us additional protections from future 40B projects, see these projects be constructed (which is 100% going to happen eventually either way), put the city over the 10% threshold to prevent future 40Bs, and then host robust processes for all future developments including community benefits agreements that provide significant public benefits from projects going forward. Medford’s land is an incredibly valuable resource that is in high-demand. We should ensure that demand is met with equally high-value improvements that benefit our entire community and help address the housing cost crisis and climate crisis.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

We need to analyze the history of exclusionary zoning in Medford and make changes to our zoning that address past exclusion. Additionally, we need to ensure that new housing in our community is available to a broad range of incomes. Some of the reparative action also must come by ensuring that tenants’ rights are protected and expanded so that all of the units in our community are health and safe, as well as ensuring long-term affordability.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes. Yes, and we have a moral obligation to work with surrounding communities to come up with community-led, regional solutions that support people first and are not just trojan horses to allow big private property developers to build large numbers of luxury apartments to maximize their profits. Supply-side and market-based solutions cannot be the only tool in the toolbox to address a housing crisis that stems from significant market failures.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

We need to build coalitions and relationships between elected officials, create shared policy commitments that all of our communities work on together, and ensure that Medford has the necessary staff in our planning, development, and sustainability department to do this work.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

We need to expand public transit at any opportunity and ensure that all new construction and repairs to streets prioritize multi-modal access and safety upgrades.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Housing is a top issue for me as a City Councilor and I will continue to make it my priority if re-elected this fall.

Rick Caraviello did not submit answers to the questionnaire.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support. I support the creation and rehabilitation of affordable housing in Medford and recognize the Housing Trust as an important tool to help accomplish that.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

I am interested in exploring several funding sources including grants, donations, and Community Preservation Act funds. Another strong option is to permit “in-lieu fees” that increase flexibility for developers and can provide a significant funding source.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Neither support nor oppose. I am interested in learning more about whether an office is needed because it would necessitate using public funds for employee costs rather than for direct housing assistance. It would divert much-needed resources away from the creation of new, and maintenance of existing, affordable housing. There may be existing opportunities to meet the needs of our residents through stronger utilization of existing state, local, and partner resources. However, if it would greatly increase access to affordable housing in Medford, I would be supportive.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

I am proud of the work Medford has done thus far, but we must maintain our efforts. Medford should continue using federal funds to support housing stability, including some of the $50 million in American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funds it has received. In addition, Medford should continue to help property owners and renters access state and federal aid through the Emergency Rental Assistance Program (ERAP).

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Somewhat oppose. I have several concerns about this program. This program undermines the community intent of Medford CPA funds. Medford residents pay CPA fees to improve the town’s quality of life and preserve housing stability for its residents, yet this program permits funds to be spent on non-residents. In addition, the high ceiling of permissible income and lack of asset verification appear to leave significant room for abuse. Finally, the state already runs a similar program, so local funds might be better suited for other purposes.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

I would support renters in Medford by expanding outreach and education, in multiple languages, on existing programs and how to access them. I would also continue to support rental assistance programs and using the unprecedented amount of new federal funding to support property owners and renters.

Finally, I would unlock a significant funding source for renters in affordable housing. Medford residents pay a 1.5% real estate surcharge because of the Community Preservation Act. 10% of those funds are required by law to be spent on affordable housing. However, based on the 2021 Medford Community Preservation Commission report, only 4% of CPA funds were spent on affordable housing in FY2020. From FY17-FY2020 CPA affordable housing expenditures were only 22%. This number could be up to 80%, so I strongly believe Medford can do more to assist affordable housing tenants with the funding it already has access to.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

: My top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws is to balance the need for housing development with preserving our community. I want to take a hard look at areas where it makes sense to increase development, especially mixed-use development combining housing with retail and other uses. I also want to examine new construction cost drivers, such as parking space requirements, and determine if they should be amended where it makes sense to do, for example in areas with ready access to public transit.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Neither support nor oppose. Changing zoning from use-based to form-based is a significant shift that should not be done lightly. I want to study the issue further to consider what would work best for Medford, including gathering input from constituents to consider how this potential zoning strategy change would impact their homes and businesses.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Somewhat support. Reducing parking space requirements promotes lower-cost development and encourages use of public transit. Lower-cost development creates more attainable housing, which I support. However, there are many parts of Medford that do not have access to public transit where this type of policy makes less sense. We need to find the right balance of attainable housing creation with the realities of our community.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Somewhat support. I support the creation of new affordable housing. Adding tools such as an Affordable Housing Overlay is an artful way to accomplish that goal through carrots (making it easier for developers to build) rather than sticks (increasing regulations or punitive measures). However, I have concerns about an overlay that is 100% affordable. I believe the percentage should be lower to create housing diversity. We need more market rate housing as well, especially workforce housing for those who earn above the requirements to access deed-restricted affordable housing but who are also facing significant challenges finding attainable homes.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Somewhat support. I strongly support permitting Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) in Medford. ADUs represent a unique opportunity for homeowners to create new housing for community members and earn rental income. They are also a great option for seniors, another group facing significant housing challenges, to stay in place but downsize, while freeing up homes for families.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Somewhat support. I support updating zoning laws to allow for more than 2 dwelling units per building in areas of the city where it makes sense. For example, we have a significant 2-unit residential housing inventory in Medford. Some of it is large enough to be converted into 3 units, where parking constraints allow and without changing the footprint of the building. Coupled with increased access to public transit and careful consideration of ways to mitigate any traffic increases, as well as robust neighborhood engagement processes to obtain public input, appropriate zoning changes can help create new homes in a way that maintains the unique attributes of our neighborhoods while easing the housing supply crisis.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

I support increasing housing density in a smart, measured way, in areas where infrastructure can accommodate the increase and where it will not exacerbate traffic congestion. The addition of ADUs to existing homes could be a good way to begin. I would also be open to considering specific areas in Medford where it may make sense to allow for increased density based on existing conditions and resources.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

Our vision and our implementation plan must align to create new homes across price points to meet the attainability needs of our current residents. To do this, we must find ways to decrease barriers to housing production and facilitate smart development. I was the REALTOR® asked to be part of the housing discussion for the comprehensive plan, where along with a representative of the CPA and the Medford Housing Authority, I shared my professional knowledge and experience to better inform our policies. Together we collaborated some viable solutions. We should also maximize the potential unlocked by increased public transit capacity

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

No. We must hold public hearings in the neighborhoods that will be affected by the plan before moving forward. More input is needed.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No. We should sit down with developers and have direct, collaborative conversations about proposals and then negotiate, rather than pursuing lawsuits. Developers and neighbors should be part of these discussions, and it is the role of city government to bring everyone to the table. We should proactively work to ensure we meet the state’s 10% affordable housing requirement so that we have control over where these projects may develop.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

We can increase access to housing for all by creating practical, appropriate strategies to promote the development of diverse housing options for our residents, especially attainable housing options. These housing policies should allow for the creation of homes at different price points across neighborhoods, furthering equal opportunity.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes. Yes, we do have a moral obligation to address the housing supply crisis in Medford by creating more homes. However, the rationale for doing it goes beyond a moral obligation. It is not just the right thing to do, but it also makes a great deal of sense as a means to create the type of community we want: one that welcomes and promotes diversity, is responsive to the needs of both long-term and new residents, and one that has a thriving and dynamic local economy. We can do this by making local government processes more accessible to homeowners, builders, and others by being easier to work with. We must cut red tape; make sure that regulations are reasonable, clear, and consistent; and be more collaborative than combative in our approach.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

In order to be successful, we need to focus our efforts within Medford first and foremost. Our state officials are well-equipped to navigate regional issues. At the same time, we can collaborate on planning and funding opportunities, and we can continue to engage actively in regional working groups like MAPC’s Regional Housing Task Force and the North Suburban Home Consortium to promote housing opportunity across city lines.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

With the expansion of the MBTA’s Green Line, Transit Oriented Development and smart growth strategies will unlock new housing opportunities while making more of our city walkable. These strategies would allow for more housing without necessitating more cars, traffic, and parking. Transportation policies should support the implementation of housing development strategies.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Through my 28 year career of working in housing with renters, landlords, buyers and sellers in Medford, I understand housing in Medford at the street level, not just the policy level. Medford has seen very limited housing production over the last decades, and as a result we know that Medford’s housing supply does not meet the needs of Medford residents, nor is it attainable to many. We must act with strong public participation to implement a wide array of housing strategies to create new homes across price points, without adding any costs or regulations that would further drive up the price of home ownership or tenancy. We should not resurrect failed policies like rent control, nor should we add a sales tax to homes. We know that by creating more homes, we expand opportunities for all, and that should drive our housing policy strategy.

Georgiana Chevry did not submit answers to the questionnaire.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support. I think an Affordable Housing Trust would be an essential, and overdue, tool for addressing housing instability and the scarcity of affordable housing in Medford.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

I would support creating dedicated funding streams to fund the Trust, including: transfer fees from the sale of market-rate existing housing, and linkage fees from developers who create new market-rate housing. We can also look to other local affordable housing trusts as examples for how to fund our AHT: For example, the Cambridge AHT is funded by appropriations from the City budget – something Medford leadership should work/lobby towards – as well as CPA funds; and incentive zoning policies require contributions to the AHT from large-scale non-residential development.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Kit Collins: Strongly support. I strongly support the creation of an Office of Housing Stability. This is by no means a new idea or a new need, but for me, it rose to the top of my mind this past year, as the statewide moratorium on evictions lapsed and no local eviction moratorium was enacted in Medford. Early this year, City staff, local advocacy groups, and constituents worked hard and collaborated to consolidate, distribute and communicate information for renters and owner-occupiers alike about what to do if you can’t come up with rent and fear eviction; how to apply for rent relief, mortgage relief, or help paying utility bills; what your rights are as a tenant, and how to know if your landlord is attempting an illegal eviction; how to apply for protection under the federal eviction moratorium.

Nevertheless, to me, this process laid bare that the City lacks the adequate capacity to effectively own and communicate these resources. We need dedicated City Hall personnel whose sole mission is to ensure housing stability in Medford, and to make sure that resources and programs that promote stability are pursued, maintained, and communicated to relevant constituencies in Medford in a way they can actually be received (i.e. regular mailers in every major language, not just a page exclusively in English somewhere on the City website).

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

The City should continue to allocate CPA funding for emergency rental assistance to the extent possible: I think this is perhaps the most literal way we can pursue “community preservation.” In addition, the City should be energetically pursuing other avenues for connecting renters and homeowners with relief: Applying for grants that can be used for local rental, mortgage, and utility bill assistance; allocating City staff to help direct residents to these programs, and helping residents apply for them; and lobbying our state and federal representatives to prioritize state- and federal-level funding for rental and mortgage assistance.

In addition, the City should enact a local eviction moratorium. As noted, the pandemic is very much not over. Renters still very much need this protection to ensure that they are not forced out of their homes, especially as these insecure and precarious economic and public health conditions endure.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support. I support this program because for many people, paying first and last month’s rent, plus security, plus sometimes a broker’s fee too, is simply unaffordable – and only becomes more so the higher the housing market climbs. I believe the city has a responsibility to ensure that housing in Medford is affordable to everyone who wants to live in Medford, and so measures that help people out with the “up-front costs” of moving in are essential to that goal.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

I would like to establish an annual or biannual distribution of information about renters’ rights and resources (perhaps in mid-September and mid-June, a couple of weeks after the most popular move-in periods) to every renter-occupied property in Medford. This action could be undertaken by the Office of Housing Stability once we have one, or perhaps the OCD in the meantime. Renters who are encountering any kind of housing instability or anxiety (i.e. “how to I apply for help with utility bills,” “what are my rights,” “I think my landlord is planning to evict me”) should not have to do their own individual research in every case: the City should at least start the conversation, preemptively, by presenting information, resources, and City contacts for future discussion to renters in a way that does not require computer access, and is available in every language spoken in Medford households.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

My priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws is to create more mixed-used zoning to promote accessible and connected neighborhoods; to reconsider rezoning from the standpoint of investigating and ameliorating the racist and classist impacts of Medford’s current zoning (i.e. the placement of industrial/commercial zones exclusively adjacent to lower-income neighborhoods; long-term effects of redlining and exclusionary zoning); to prioritize high-density residential development in neighborhoods with transit access; to prioritize high-density residential housing near Tufts University, so as to address housing scarcity that is intensified by students’ need for off-campus housing; and to allow for higher-density housing in more areas of the city, where currently only two- or one-unit buildings are allowed.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Somewhat support. I admit I do not have an expert’s perspective on the comparative pros and cons of use-based zoning vs. form-based zoning. As I continue to learn about it, some benefits of form-based zoning jump out to me. Form-based zoning seems more relevant to Medford than use-based zoning, as we seem likely to increase business and residential neighborhoods in the city, and unlikely to increase industrial and large-scale commercial uses within the city. I had some concerns about if form-based zoning would exacerbate cost/accessibility disparities in housing – i.e. could it create zones where only luxury-looking housing is allowed? – and thus exacerbate racial and class segregation in the city. But then again, I do not think that our current zoning system is addressing that issue either, and my research so far doesn’t indicate that form-based zoning would have this result.

I have also read that form-based zoning provides greater clarity around what kind of development can happen in different neighborhoods, and reduces the need for navigating variances. I have heard the argument that zoning by design standards, and not by use, allows for mixed-use development by not separating residential areas from business areas, for example. All in all, I think that form-based zoning – if approached with a robust and inclusive community engagement process – could be a very interesting and engaging way for us to plan our city and create better standards for development.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support. I think that the current parking minimum is a roadblock to creating the higher-density housing that our city needs. The current parking minimum wastes space that could be used for more housing units, protected bike lanes, tree canopy without sidewalk interference, green space, or wider sidewalks that make our business areas friendlier to pedestrians. Furthermore, I think that the city needs to get serious about incentivizing non-car transit use. There’s plenty more involved in that project – implementing safe bike lanes and bike parking, advocating for expanded and improved MBTA access – but designating ever-more space for private car parking enables the ubiquity of private car ownership, and is in opposition to the goal of making non-car transit feasible, convenient and attractive.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly support. I think that Medford needs to do many things to present itself as a city that will welcome and work with affordable housing developers, so that more affordable housing will actually be built here. Implementing an AHO could be a key part of this, and could send a stronger signal to affordable housing developers that their projects will be welcomed here. In addition, I think we need more affordable housing built quickly; and I’m given to understand that an AHO could help us fast-track these developments. Finally, we should be seeking to create permanently affordable housing, not settling for only housing that is only affordable until the current owner decides to sell it at market rate or raise rents, and an AHO would invite permanently affordable housing development.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support. I think that this is a great way to safely create more housing within the infrastructure and housing that already exists in Medford – to make use of what we already have available.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Strongly support. There is a strong need for denser housing in Medford, so we must roll back regulations that prevent buildings with more than 2 units.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

First, I would support increased housing density in the neighborhoods adjacent to Tufts University. Many students must live off-campus (though Tufts should make this less the case by building more on-campus dormitories) and do so in the homes around Hillside, which exacerbates housing scarcity. I would like to see some high-density housing built in and around the Hillsides neighborhood where more students can live, so that students and non-student residents and families in Medford are not competing so fiercely for a mostly static supply of single/two-family homes and triplexes in that area.

I would also love to see Mystic Avenue become a neighborhood that combines businesses with higher-density housing. The southwestern side of the street is already dominated by one- and two-family homes, and some small businesses and restaurants. I think that higher-density apartment buildings would be appropriate in that area; plus, it already has some bus service. Ideally, I’d love to see the northeastern side of the street morph into a thoroughfare for higher-density housing alongside neighborhood-appropriate small businesses (i.e. coffee shops, grocery stores you can walk to).

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

The highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan should be increasing permanently affordable housing; reducing parking minimums; allowing for high-density housing in more of the city; baking in climate change resiliency plans to all existing neighborhoods and new development sites (i.e. plans for how residents will be robustly protected in the event of heat waves, strong winds, stormwater runoff and flooding); requiring carbon-neutrality for all new housing development and municipal buildings; ensuring that all neighborhoods have access to green space and parks; expanding Medford’s tree canopy and ensuring equity in tree canopy and green space across neighborhoods; prioritizing protected bike lanes and proper bike parking; and expanded transit access.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes. The scarcity of affordable housing in Medford is an issue that can’t wait. I support passing the Housing Production Plan without delay so that we can start the conversations about which of the options outlined in the HPP are most appropriate and actionable for Medford, identifying what are the obstacles to realizing those options, and get to work on a plan for developing housing in Medford that is appropriate for every income level.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No. I think it is a waste of precious resources to be fighting a statewide law that is meant to hold municipalities to a minimal threshold of affordable housing. The ZBA should be able to consider 40B projects. If they are deemed inappropriate for the proposed location, then the ZBA/the city can negotiate for modifications or greater community benefits, or choose to deny the proposal.

I do sympathize with concerns that 40B projects potentially give private developers an avenue to flout existing regulations and norms; and I am aware that some developers have used 40B as a way to skirt zoning restrictions, in projects where creating affordable housing was never the main goal. However, I do not think that seeking to exempt ourselves from 40B projects is the correct way to deal with this concern. We should indeed hold ourselves to at least 10% minimum affordable housing. At the same time, we should be prioritizing community-controlled and permanently affordable housing, and maintain strong standards with all proposed development to ensure affordable housing; safe, accessible, and multi-modal streets and sidewalks; green space; and climate change resiliency. 40B shouldn’t be our only avenue towards affordable housing development, but we shouldn’t nix it either.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

The city must work to undo the legacy of exclusionary zoning that has resulted in, or was explicitly towards the goal of, racial segregation and the exclusion of Black and Brown people. Due to the effects of systemic racism, Black and Brown people are disproportionately likely to be low-income and low-wealth, and so we must increase permanently affordable housing overall. Housing scarcity also limits our ability to welcome refugees from other areas.

I would support measures to help address racially and class-segregative zoning/housing codes, including: removing minimum lot size and minimum square-footage requirements for new developments; removing prohibitions on multi-family homes or high-density housing; and removing limitations on building height.

In addition, Medford should work towards creating supportive homeownership programs. Black and Brown people are underrepresented in homeownership due to redlining, discrimination, and systemic economic injustice, and therefore disproportionately excluded from the asset-building potential of homeownership. I would like to see the city work to create a municipal affordable homeownership program.

Perhaps Medford could even aspire towards something modeled off of a “right to return” program, like the one that the City of Portland had piloted. To my understanding, under this program, people who can document that they or their relatives were displaced by urban-renewal projects can receive special homebuyer assistance for down payments on homes in those neighborhoods they or their families were displaced from. Perhaps the city could investigate how a program like this could work in or be made relevant to Medford: a city fund for homeownership assistance for families who have been displaced or disenfranchised by redlining, gentrification, exclusionary zoning, urban renewal or other forms of economic predation.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes. I’d put it exactly that way: it’s a moral obligation. There’s a lot to do to make Medford more affordable to the people who live, work, and want to live here, but doing what we can to add housing stock and tamp down on spiraling housing costs and scarcity is a crucial part.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

Medford must build up its own capacity for housing residents of all income and background levels, and build up its capacity for assisting residents who are encountering housing-related problems, instability and anxiety. When I was involved with the Medford Know Your Rights Coalition earlier this year, and putting together a compilation of resources and recommendations for people seeking housing-related legal aid; rental, mortgage, and utility bill relief; eviction defense/preparation information; etc. – it seemed to me that many of the resources available for people were not based in Medford. We must strive to, as a city, add to and reciprocate the aid and resources spearheaded by other communities like Boston and Malden. In addition, we should strive to be a regional leader in prioritizing permanently affordable housing.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

We should prioritize transportation policies that reduce car dependency and incentivize cycling and public transit. We should seek to situate high-density housing near train stations – i.e. Hillsides and Magoun Square, near the new green line station stops, for example – and prioritize lobbying for expanded and improved bus service in neighborhoods where many residents do not drive, like the Medford Housing Authority apartments off of Riverside Avenue.

We should lobby the MBTA for restored bus service where lines were deactivated during the pandemic; expanded transit access in the short and long terms (expanded and more reliable bus service; more light rail throughout Medford); improve the feeling of comfort and safety at bus stops and train stations through improved lighting and bus shelters; do regular accessibility audits of bus stops and train stations; implement protected bike lanes and work towards bike lane connectivity throughout the city; implement a municipal bike-share system in Medford, like BlueBikes; and lobby for fee-free public transit.

We should also audit and improve all pedestrian sidewalks and crosswalks. Many sidewalks are in disrepair and are thus inaccessible to folks in wheelchairs, among other problems; and I have talked with residents who say they choose to drive to stores less than 2 blocks from their residences, because to cross their street feels so unsafe. Addressing this issue will also require speed-abatement and traffic calming measures.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Thank you for the thoughtful questionnaire, and for considering my responses.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

Creating the Affordable Housing Trust will require a discussion of the best way for our community to fund it. Possible options are Community Preservation Act funds, federal and state funds/grants, transfer/linkage fees, and taxing short-term rentals like AirBnB.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Strongly support.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

Establishing more city infrastructure around housing stability and renter support with the aforementioned Office of Housing Stability and Affordable Housing Trust will be important for the COVID-19 pandemic and beyond, but some of these options will take time. Short term, we will want to provide rental assistance programs and potentially assistance programs for low and middle-income homebuyers, support eviction moratoriums, and pass a Housing Stability Notification Ordinance which requires landlords planning to end a tenancy to provide a notice of tenants’ rights and resources.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

As a Medford renter myself, I am deeply committed to advocating for renter rights and resources for renters. An Office of Housing Stability, continuing to offer rental assistance programs (for assistance with move-in costs and beyond), and supporting tenant unions are all options for supporting renters. Additionally, more broad measures like zoning updates and an affordable housing trust will support renters by opening up more housing options, both designated affordable and market rate.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

My top priority is to make our zoning more friendly to affordable housing development, and overall housing development that works for the community and doesn’t perpetuate barriers related to race, class, and ability. This will include many of the policies outlined in the next few questions — reducing parking minimums, accessory dwelling units, and allowing for more multi-family and mixed-use development (particularly in transit oriented areas).

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Strongly support.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly support.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Strongly support.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

I would advocate more density around public transit areas. The West Medford commuter rail stop, areas surrounding Medford square and its multiple bus access points, and areas bordering Somerville and the coming Green Line station should all be considered. However, it is critical that we ensure that any increases in housing density and development will be beneficial to overall affordability and sustainability goals for the city.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

Planning for more housing development, specifically affordable housing development, is a top priority but it will require consideration of the best locations for increased development, transit infrastructure surrounding new development, and how city resources can best support the community in bringing these plans to fruition. The Comprehensive Plan process, which puts community input at its center, is an excellent way to have some of these conversations.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

Maybe. In general I believe that while affordable housing is of the utmost importance, it is possible for developers to take advantage of 40B and bypass zoning regulations by building the minimal number of truly affordable units. Court cases like this tend to fizzle and spending city money and resources might not be the best route. Since I’m not well versed at this point in time on the details around these particular cases, I withhold judgment as to whether fighting these developments is worth city resources.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

Because BIPOC statistically have lower incomes and less wealth accumulation (in part due to discriminatory housing practices), they are harder hit by our lack of designated affordable housing, increasing housing prices, and lack of support for renters and low and middle income home buyers. Measures that increase our affordable housing stock, foster more affordability overall, connect denser housing areas with public transit and bikeable and walkable streets and green space, and support renters and low- and middle-income home buyers are all ways to combat this systemic racism.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

We can work with housing related advocacy groups in surrounding communities, work with surrounding governments to discuss our shared community needs, and potentially work together with both to advocate for change at the state level. We can serve as resources for each other to better understand the housing needs in the area and what policies we can enact to better address the broader housing crisis.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

I am in favor of prioritizing accessibility for pedestrians and bicyclists, increasing public transit access, and advocating for cheaper/free public transit. Ideally, creating a more transit-oriented city will allow for more options for housing and mixed use development in transit hubs in the city.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Thank you so much for the opportunity to speak about issues that are of such vital importance to our community. I look forward to working with Housing Medford and other community groups to bring more housing affordability to our city!

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

I would propose funding the trust via required contributions from developers who propose housing units with greater than 4 units.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Somewhat support. The need for this service needs to be evaluated. We need to protect our most vulnerable residents and if offering this service would help that goal, I would support creation of this office.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

The City should ensure that negatively impacted people have access to resources and knowledge that can help them with their specific situation. HUD has many resources such as what to do if you cannot afford your mortgage or are being evicted. The city of Medford Housing Resources & Support Services web page has many resources.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to assist people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford.

Somewhat support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford? 

Renters in Medford are a vital part of our community. We need to ensure that there are policies in place that enable renters to stay in the community long term.

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

Medford has many different and unique neighborhoods and our zoning needs to reflect that. Our zoning code needs to encourage transit oriented development in areas close to the new green line. Building usage also needs to be evaluated.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Strongly support. Form based zoning would enable us to protect our historic neighborhoods and encourage mixed use development in Medford. It would preserve our existing neighborhoods while still allowing for growth not allowed in our current code.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support. Medford needs to reduce this requirement. In areas that are near public transit this requirement is outdated and unnecessary.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Somewhat oppose. Affordable housing should be part of our overall zoning code and not concentrate affordable units in one location. The threshold for affordable units needs to be lowered in Medford. In neighboring Somerville, new building of 3 units needs to have 1 be affordable.

10. Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Somewhat support. I would support ADUs in Medford with restrictions on location and use.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units in most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Somewhat support. There are many areas of the city where the number of dwelling units could be increased without negative impacts on the surrounding neighborhood.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

I would support increased housing density in all areas. Single family zoned areas should have the opportunity to add ADUs. Multi-family districts should be able to add more units if lot size and access to public transit allow. There should be minimum space requirements for any new units added.

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

Enhanced Zoning.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Maybe. I would like to see more emphasis on creating housing that incorporates mixed uses including retail. The C2 district is an area that should be more mixed use focused than just residential units.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

Yes. 40B takes the power away from cities and towns. Medford should have zoning that encourages the creation of affordable units without having developers choose the 40B process.

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

Medford needs to increase access to affordable housing in all areas of the city. Individual neighborhoods or developments should not be developments should not be labeled affordable. The move towards form based zoning would also help with this initiative.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

Medford needs to adopt policies and zoning that allow the creation of more housing. We should use the lessons of our closest neighbor, Somerville, to see how form zoning can be implemented and be successful.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

The city needs to ensure that all modes of transportation are accessible. We need enhanced bike infrastructure. We need easy access to public transit in all neighborhoods.

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Medford is a unique combination of urban and suburban neighborhoods. We need to have policies that enhance the quality of our housing and allow Medford residents to stay and live in the city long term.

Adam Knight did not submit answers to the questionnaire.

David McKillop Sr. did not submit answers to the questionnaire.

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

CPA funding as allowed, linkage fees

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Strongly support.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

I support an eviction and foreclosure moratorium, ideally set at the state or national level so that there can be consistency in programs and guidance for both renters and landlords. This moratorium would need to be combined with programs like the emergency rental assistance that supports renters and owners so that no one is hurt financially and pushed to make decisions that would endanger individuals as well as the public health goals eviction moratoriums are designed to support.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to assist people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford.

Strongly support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford? 

Establishing an Office of Housing stability would support renters in need of affordable, stable options and provide a centralized place for renters to go to address any number of rental related problems from issues of renters paying rent to landlords who are having trouble making their own bills. Novel pilot programs like the move-in assistance program can also help identify what programs can best assist renters in the community. Last, the city could explore establishing a renters commission which could provide valuable insight for decision makers.

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

I’m in favor of a full zoning review and overhaul to have our zoning reflect the current Medford and the Medford we want to build in the future. I think this should be a collaborative process with great community involvement, so I am wary to be too prescriptive in my ideas, but some things I would like to see are transit oriented development overlays, green density zoning, affordable housing overlay, and mixed use zoning to revitalize Medford Square and other commercial districts.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Neither support nor oppose.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Somewhat support. I support reducing this number of required parking spots but also understand not all proposed new buildings are the same, nor are all parts of the city as pedestrian, bike, or public transit friendly. This type of reduction needs to come with a heavy focus on supporting a multi-modal Medford where cars are not a necessity to live and thrive in the city.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly support.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Somewhat support. I support these with design guidelines, fit for neighborhoods, and square foot, and lot coverage guidelines. ADUs can be an effective tool at bringing housing to the market and allowing residents to age in place in their own community and remain connected to their existing support networks and routines.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units in most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Somewhat support. I would want to see public involvement for any changes like this and also have concerns with a blanket approach to this because of potential impacts of lot coverage, impervious surfaces, and worsening or heat islands that can come with structures (and the associated parking) of a certain size.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

Areas throughout the city that are well served by public transportation could greatly benefit from this increased density.

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

Climate adaptation and resiliency, support of multi-modal and complete streets, maintenance of our streets and infrastructure, preservation and expansion of green space, support of affordable housing and economic development

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes. I support the Housing Production plan but do have strong concerns, which I have voiced in meetings, that the plan references three 40B projects as forthcoming affordable housing in the city while the city actively fights against these projects. When so much of the plan is based on reaching a affordable housing threshold, this is both confusing and concerning.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No.

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

As affordable housing development projects are proposed, the city needs to make clear a strong preference for affordable ownership opportunities. Ownership provides the opportunity for generational wealth that so many Black and Brown American have been systemically denied through a history of racist housing policies. Increased access to down payment assistance programs and the potential for mixed income neighborhoods through diverse housing types including 2-3 families also allow for more ownership and stable rental opportunities.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes. We need to not look at just sheer numbers but also what we are building to ensure we are meeting the needs of the underhoused and providing stable housing opportunities while also being intentional about city planning and understanding the impact of development on climate change adaptation and resiliency.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

Many communities are facing the same challenges Medford is with regards to housing and affordability. There is a great opportunity to collaborate with community leaders throughout the state to learn from their successes and challenges and bring innovative housing solutions to Medford.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

A stronger focus on complete streets that are less car dependent can allow for both denser housing opportunities and more open and green space. By eliminating the need for multiple cars per household, there is an opportunity to utilize would-be parking spots for higher value use including open space, urban forests, and economic development opportunities that benefit residents.

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

So much of what I shared here starts with having a conversation. My role as city councilor is to represent residents and come ready with ideas to start conversations that result in action that the community will benefit most from. I don’t know the perfect solution to many of the housing challenges we face, but I do know if we can get to place of constructive, open, and honest conversation with Medford residents, we can get to the solutions that meet our needs and make us feel great about the future of our Medford and all who wish to call it home.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support. An Affordable Housing Trust is a tool in our toolkit that can be used to help create Capital A Affordable Housing to meet the federally required “Affordable” housing ratios, which we must do. However, the government mandated threshold of up to 110% of area median income (AMI) does not assure that those most in need of assistance will receive it. In 2019 Medford AMI was $96,455; making 110% of AMI $106,100. We see from page 12 of the Medford Housing Production Plan (www.medfordma.org/storage/2021/04/Medford-HPP-Draft-030121.pdf) that over 40%, roughly 9,250 of Medford households don’t even meet 80% AMI. As we delve deeper into the details, we can see that this program will neither create nor preserve truly affordable housing options that would be within reach of many Medford residents. Therefore, while I am in support of this as one of the measures we take to help meet the baseline government mandated goal of 10% Affordable housing; we need to be acutely aware that for many; this still will not address keeping Medford affordable to them.

To learn more about Affordable Housing Trusts, readers can access the MA guidelines here: www.mass.gov/files/documents/2016/07/wm/ahtfguide.pdf

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

• CPA Funds
• Inclusionary Zoning Payments
• Developer/Construction fees
• HOME Funds
• Private Donations

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Neither support nor oppose. MA laws favor tenants, and there are some excellent resources already in place to assist in eviction proceedings. Additionally, we have resources to help with locating existing vacant housing options. While an OHS can help somewhat with short-term needs; the long term answer is diversity in housing options cultivated through proper zoning and planning; in conjunction with solid developer partnerships.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

By far the most beneficial actions any administration can take with respect to COVID is to provide accurate, non-biased information on how best to decrease points of contact, stop the spread and protect oneself from COVID.  Only through non-politicized information sharing can we assure the inclusion and commitment of ALL residents, and the eventual end to the pandemic.

 Secondarily to this, CPA housing funds redirected to emergency housing assistance (for rent and mortgage assistance) can go a long way to keep residents from being displaced.

 Additionally, we should be looking at our Federal Funding to help bridge the gap until such time as we reach our new equilibrium with respect to COVID, and managing/mitigating transmission.  We should also look to take the opportunity to educate on mitigating transmission of other respiratory infections that put the immunocompromised at risk daily

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Somewhat support. This program seems to be a great option to help renters obtain housing by way of assisting with first and last months rent. Whereas this is a new program, I look forward to seeing the data and assuring that we are meeting the needs of the intended demographic. Additionally, it’s crucial to determine the funding sources for these types of programs to ensure sustainability as individuals in need suffer when these programs dry up and disappear.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

• Educating landlords on programs such as section 8 to increase these renting opportunities
• Increasing HUD rental opportunities by requiring SHI units to be in perpetuity
• Encouraging Tufts to develop student housing planning as vigorously and diligently as they do their student growth plans; and sharing those plans with our community
• Create downsizing opportunities for the “overhoused” to open opportunities for the “underhoused”
• Work to balance corporate rental with homeowner rentals to keep rent affordable
• Analyze the impact of our Air BnB policies and absentee landlords on the rental market

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

• Close Zoning loopholes
• Draft a zoning primer to make our zoning laws accessible to all residents
• Author zoning ordinances that encourage incremental development that keeps local developers involved and homeownership opportunities in reach for Medfordians
• Encourage sustainable development and development patterns
• Require proper lot coverage ratios and calculations to protect our environment
• Investigate opportunity and impact to renovate existing oversized, non-historically significant structures to more modest sized workforce/missing middle units.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Neither support nor oppose. Well-written, accessible zoning ordinances in conjunction with a well-appointed design review board and redevelopment authority can accomplish far more than a shift to form-based zoning; however I appreciate what this approach attempts to do.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Somewhat support. The City of Cambridge has been working on parking minimums for well over 20 years, and they are barely at a 1:1 ratio.  Medford, while on the way to a more robust multimodal transportation model, is nowhere near the options available there. Medford needs to draft and codify a Transportation Demand Ordinance and appoint a Board/Commission to do the necessary work to prepare for an overall reduction. 

Until such time, I am in support of reductions on a case by case basis and reductions where the project sits within zone(s) where public transportation options are present and aren’t just creating an “on paper” reduction that puts cars parking on public streets making it a neighborhood issue.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly oppose. With dedicated “Affordable” overlays we run the risk of segmenting populations- circumventing the actual goal of MA GLA 40B which was originally crafted to provide housing for multiple income levels within each development.

Additionally, capital A Affordable is a semantic, and a 100% Affordable overlay simply provides an excuse for corporate developers to sidestep zoning.  The way to truly affordable housing, it to craft ordinances that encourage incremental human scale development which community developers can afford to build.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support. I strongly support a properly crafted ADU ordinance which provides a housing opportunity to meet additional occupant needs; versus excessive limits that essentially turn single family zones into general residence zones for developer profit. For the record, I’m not opposed to a conversation on up-zoning, and in fact support this as a potential option. However, it should be a transparent and open dialogue and not done under the cover of an ADU ordinance in single family districts. A good example of purposeful ADUs can be found on page 27 of the Stoneham Zoning Ordinance (www.stoneham-ma.gov/DocumentCenter/View/1223/Ch15-Zoning-Part-1).

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Strongly support. As a supporter of incremental development I am open to transparent +1 upzoning in key areas- with proper community dialogue, historical commission involvement, and knowledgeable change management practices applied- to assure all residents feel that they are able to contribute and influence the direction our city moves in, where changes are made, and what we look to preserve/protect.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

There is substantial opportunity for increased 2 over 1 mixed use along our main streets; including but not limited to areas of- Salem Street, Riverside Ave, High Street, Main Street, Middlesex and Boston Ave and Medford Square. This 2 over 1 development pattern would help to increase our housing stock and commercial tax base, while keeping our city walkable and human scale.   

Additionally, this incremental model keeps opportunities open for smaller, local developers with a vested interest in our community. 

Lastly, this approach to development is far less invasive to neighborhoods and helps us to better preserve the things we love about our city.  

I am strongly opposed to using Mystic Ave for housing. A successful career in commercial development provides the insights to see the unique opportunity this 1.1 mile of road with easy on/off access to Rt 93 presents to our city- for an increased commercial tax base, long-term job creation, experiential retail opportunities, open space, and affordable food sources for the neighborhood directly abutting it; among other things. To see more on this unique opportunity readers can visit www.nuzzomedford.com.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

• Increased commercial and mixed used opportunities that foster walkability and build a sense of community for all residents
• A variety of housing options that provide choices for all lifestyles and stages of life
• Engaging open spaces that preserve our indigenous green spaces and provide sustainable ecosystems for local wildlife
• Citywide accessibility in our parks, streetscapes, and structures

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes. As a member of the HPP team, I would like to see us further discuss, build consensus, and adopt a final version of this plan.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

Yes. Absolutely. The sentiment that Medford is fighting “affordable and market-rate housing” is disingenuous. As mentioned previously Capital A affordable does not mean Medford residents will be able to afford to live there. 

Additionally, it is imperative that we seek our GLAM calculation ruling, considering the Fells alone, Medford qualifies for a reduction in the 10% requirement. Obtaining this ruling allows us to achieve safe harbor, protects us from 40B developments sidestepping our zoning and environmental guidelines; and brings developers to the table to negotiate projects that benefit Medford residents, providing solutions to meet our needs.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

Housing security at its root is an income related issue.Opportunity for well paying jobs, coupled with equal lending and housing laws, and current professional training trends in topics such as unconscious bias, equity, active allyship and more looks to effect positive change that will impact housing access.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Medford commercial tax base currently hovers at 10%. To remain solvent, we need greater than 30%. Additional housing stock without a sustainable growth pattern is meaningless. We must look to properly balance our commercial to residential ratios to assure residents don’t get taxed out of Medford first, provide well-paying jobs within our city, and help to offset the costs of assistance programs. Then we can refocus our efforts on adding new housing stock, which is historically and currently being built at above and at market-rates, with a nominal amount of Capital A Affordable units; all doing little to assist the most vulnerable and at risk in Medford.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

See Housing Production Plan: www.medfordma.org/storage/2021/04/Medford-HPP-Draft-030121.pdf

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

I would prioritize a Transportation Demand Ordinance to help address our needs, look to repurpose oversized parking areas for redevelopment through a newly established Redevelopment Authority, and partner with local developers- who understand the market and are highly invested in the outcomes and benefit as we do by mitigation of unintended consequences.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Having grown up in residential construction and working in commercial construction and development for several decades, I can tell you that housing valuation and the market forces have become very complex and highly contested issues. 

In recent years the housing market as an investment opportunity has been increasing exponentially and seemingly with no ceiling. The attraction- it performs reliably well year over year. As Americans many of us accept this reality and leverage it to our own benefits; but it comes with a cost- the rising cost of housing. 

Many will say that it is a “Supply and Demand issue”; and while on its face that seems to be the case; if you spend significant time learning about the industry, markets and programs you will come to see that is a vast oversimplification of the issue. 

These complications of the market come from not only the way we have allowed housing to become an investment opportunity but also by how we have allowed it to become a commercial endeavor- with corporations holding much of our housing stock in portfolios and thus moving homeownership further away from many who aspire to it.  

The market is further complicated by AirBnBs that were supposed to help keep rent affordable, but we see all over the city rooms renting for $200+/night further inflating the value of housing stock and removing monthly or yearly rental options for this new business opportunity.

Additionally, several federal and local programs provide funding opportunities for project sized such that only corporations can complete them, further eroding Medford’s ability to grow incrementally and shifting small scale builders and contractors into single/double flipping. 

This development pattern puts builders and homeowners in competition for the same parcels, and removes the ability for potential homeowners to build value through sweat equity; eliminating a very effective ownership entry opportunity and the inherent affordability of workforce/missing middle units from our markets, all the while creating over-size housing where modest housing once stood throughout our city.

Lastly, our federal tax code provides vacancy tax write offs; thus allowing for “market-rate” units to remain empty until a renter who can afford the asking price is located- artificially setting the market rate.

So you can see, this idea that “if we just build enough housing it will eventually become affordable” is a fallacy.  

To reach the point of inflection on the demand curve you have to have “enough” of something for that demand to be met; with housing being a very reliable investment opportunity for those who can afford it- demand is insatiable.

Sadly, we can only work within the constraints we have; many of the programs mentioned above, when properly implemented, can provide some relief, however it’s trying to stop a rising tide. Therefore, we must be realistic in setting our expectations and goals- only then can residents have an honest, meaningful dialogue on how best to move forward, create affordability and housing stability where feasible; and build a better tomorrow for us all.

Thank you for reading; feel free to contact me with any thoughts, questions or feedback at nuzzomedford@gmail.com.

George Scarpelli did not submit answers to the questionnaire.

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

Accessible, safe, healthy, and affordable housing is a human right and as a City Councilor, I will always hold that belief. While I believe we could access grants and CPA funds to support a trust like this, I would like to discuss with our experts at City Hall what they envision would be applicable for funding a program like this. Additionally, we have $51 million in American Rescue Plan (ARP) dollars coming to Medford. These funds must be spent by 2025. We can use a portion of these funds to go towards programs that will stop displacement of families, support an Affordable Housing Trust, and build new affordable and energy efficient housing.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Strongly support.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

Similar to many of the communities surrounding Medford, we should extend the eviction moratorium. The current moratorium expired towards the end of the summer months and as the COVID-19 pandemic and the Delta variant continue to instill harm in our community, we must ensure that families are not being forced to become homeless, especially as we enter the cold months in Medford. This tool is really about protecting the health of residents in Medford while minimizing the financial impact on property owners who are also struggling at this time. The State of Massachusetts recently received approximately $178 million to provide a new and modernized Mortgage Assistance Program. A program like this will support Medford residents as well, and it is on our local leaders to connect residents to these state resources. Additionally, we must look into options like property tax relief for seniors.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

Renters make up nearly half of our population in Medford, yet it often feels like renters are woefully disconnected from the community. I would like to work with the Mayor’s office and other councilors to launch an outreach effort welcoming renters in the City of Medford and letting them know resources that are available here in the community. Additionally, I do think a program like the Move-In Assistance was a key step in the direction we should go to providing support, resources, and assistance to those who are struggling as well as welcoming new individuals to our community.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

An option would be to exempt affordable housing and all public housing projects from the parking requirements in Medford and intentionally place them near public transportation options as well as close proximity to major transit ways. This would encourage less car use for affordable housing options and promote a city that is better connected.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Somewhat support.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support. This could be beneficial depending on the part of Medford. The only reason I would be apprehensive about a policy like this is because in North Medford we have VERY limited public transportation options, and if you have multiple adults who work in a home full time, they may have to travel every day and need the two spots per dwelling. They otherwise might have no additional modes of transportation to get to work or bring their children to school, etc. If a policy like this were put in place, there would have to be an option to add additional cars to a dwelling. However with new buildings, if proper planning is put in place so that individuals have plenty of comfortable options, a policy like this should work.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Somewhat support. I am 100% in support of affordable housing options growing in the City of Medford. We currently face a housing shortage and multiple generations and new potential residents are being pushed out as the housing prices only increase. I am in favor of this but would like to learn more about the specific scenarios for what relaxed zoning laws look like. I know we don’t want an 8 story apartment building in the middle of a strictly residential area. However, a two or three story complex that might fit well with the look of the neighborhood could be a very good fit. We have to take this policy development by development.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Somewhat support. Again, this could work depending on the part of the city. Some portions of Medford are too heavily populated as is and I fear this could cause further congestion to an area that is already overwhelmed. It would depend on the specific scenario but overall this could be a good policy.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

Currently, I support increasing the housing supply on Mystic Avenue. It would do little damage to displace current residents and would welcome new residents and new businesses as well if we had mixed use buildings.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

I believe there are two things in Medford we must focus on when it comes to housing and land use. We must increase our affordable housing stock and we must maintain and possibly expand our green space in Medford. I do not believe our community should sacrifice any of our green space for development.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No. I believe the city should approve the 40Bs and allow the production to continue. We need an increase in housing options and affordable housing options in Medford.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

We need municipal leaders that are going to bring public and private parties to the same table to have a critical conversation about homeownership programs in Medford. We must keep in mind minorities, seniors, those living on fixed incomes, those who are disabled, and any other marginalized populations and ensure all have access to safe and healthy affordable housing. Right now, Medford is experiencing a lot of gentrification across different parts of the city but specifically in West Medford which is a historic Black neighborhood. This must be a pillar in the community-wide conversation and we should be looking to our neighbors who have made efforts to curb gentrification to see where they have succeeded and where they have failed.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

I believe Medford can work with the state and regional partners to have a more holistic view of affordable housing options in the Greater Boston area. We want to make sure we have roughly similar stock when compared to our neighbors and if anything, ensure we are leading on programs when it comes to accessibility and providing resources to those who are marginalized.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

Affordable housing cannot be properly utilized by those who need it most if there is no nearby public transportation or pedestrian accommodations. It is not enough to build housing and assume it will be advantageous if those who would live in it are unable to safely and efficiently go about their daily lives. I am a strong believer that our infrastructure plans should be designed with everyone in mind, not just one mode of transportation, but all options, including pedestrians. One of the core tenets of my campaign has been to repair and revitalize our cities transportation infrastructure, and as a Councilor I will approach this with housing and transportation equity firmly in mind.

Conclusion

Do you have anything else you would like to highlight or add regarding housing in Medford?

Thank you to Housing Medford for all you do to provide resources, promote conversation, and uplift our community!

Housing Stability

An Affordable Housing Trust would allow the City to aggregate funds from different sources to be able to spend directly on affordable housing. Do you support the creation of an Affordable Housing Trust in Medford?

Strongly support.

If you support the creation of the Trust, what sources would you use to fund it?

Ideally, the Trust would be at least partially funded by a reallocation of resources within the existing municipal budget. We do, however, have to face the realities of our budget, which has suffered from years of funding shortages as politicians have kicked the can down the road. I would be supportive of creating additional streams of funding dedicated to solving the housing crisis here in Medford, such as with transfer fees and linkage fees.

At the moment, there is no central authority to which Medford residents can appeal for housing issues. One option to address this issue is to create an Office of Housing Stability, as some neighboring communities have done. Do you support the establishment of such an office in Medford?

Strongly support.

At the start of the COVID-19 pandemic, Medford supported vulnerable renters by designating $250,000 in Community Preservation Act funds for emergency rental assistance. With the rise of the Delta variant and increasing caseloads across the country, including Massachusetts, it is clear the pandemic is not yet over. What actions should the City take to aid Medford renters, landlords, and homeowners during the pandemic?

With the pandemic still ongoing and the economy still recovering, it is pivotal that our city continue to provide support to our community stakeholders, which means re-implementing an eviction moratorium as well as increasing financial support for renters, landlords, and homeowners in the form of rental and mortgage assistance. This information needs to be available in multiple languages, and our city government (and an Office of Housing Stability) should take initiative to reach out to our vulnerable and housing insecure residents to connect them with resources, inform them of and protect their rights, and support tenants’ unions.

Renters are a significant part of Medford’s community, making up 43.8% of residents. The city recently created a pilot Move-In Assistance program to help people in being able to obtain an apartment in Medford. Did you or do you support this program?

Strongly support.

What other actions would you take to support renters in Medford?

One major shortfall in our current approach to renter assistance which I’ve alluded to earlier is that of communication. I support the City of Medford explicitly publishing a guide of renters’ rights online and in paper form, something that many other Massachusetts municipalities do. I also believe that we should pass legislation along the lines of a “Housing Stability Notification Act,” which aims to inform tenants who are facing displacement of their rights and of resources available to them by requiring landlords and foreclosing owners to give tenants a rights document and a resource document (with necessary translations) when serving an eviction notice. Another measure we should take is by passing a “Tenant’s Bill of Rights,” a suite of policies which uphold existing renters’ rights and guarantee renters the right to Organize, Right of First Refusal, and Right to Counsel.

Another shortfall in our current approach is in enforcement of health and safety codes. We need to fund an Office of Housing Stability and to give it teeth to make sure that health and safety codes are enforced. This would offer protections and safeguards from neglect experienced on the part of landlords. To do this, the Office of Housing Stability should also be tasked with communicating with tenant unions and renters here in Medford.

Zoning Reform

Many local communities have changed their zoning laws in recent years. What are your top priorities for modernizing Medford’s zoning laws?

My top priority for modernizing our zoning laws is ensuring that we have inclusionary zoning, which would ensure that new developments in the area are affordable to those with low and moderate incomes.

At the core of our housing crisis is a shortage of housing supply. To alleviate this problem, I would support zoning that increases density and which allows for more multifamily houses and denser forms of living, supported by increased access to public transit. The science is clear that such zoning is crucial to solving the housing crunch and is beneficial to the environment as well.

Another top priority is to reverse zoning laws which have been harmful to communities who have been historically marginalized and excluded, such as BIPOC. Single family zoning, in particular, has traditionally been wielded as a tool of the suburbs to keep out working class, often Black and Brown families. As we rezone, we must be cognizant of such policies.

Below are some types of zoning reforms that nearby communities have recently enacted. Please indicate whether you support these reforms in Medford.

Medford’s zoning is currently written based on uses (e.g., commercial, residential, etc.). Another strategy is “form-based” zoning, where areas are zoned based on the size and shape (the “form”) of the buildings. Do you believe Medford should move toward a more form-based zoning code?

Somewhat support. I have not done enough research into form-based zoning to commit to saying that I strongly support moving towards it, but from what I have read so far, I believe that such a policy does promote predictability in built results, higher quality public land use, and better mixed-used development.

Do you believe Medford should reduce the number of parking spots required (currently 2 per dwelling unit for most buildings) for new buildings?

Strongly support.

An Affordable Housing Overlay would relax zoning laws for developments that were 100% affordable. Do you support an Affordable Housing Overlay in Medford?

Strongly support.

Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) are smaller, independent residential units located on the same lot as the primary house. Do you support allowing ADUs in Medford?

Strongly support.

Zoning laws in Medford prevent construction of buildings with more than 2 dwelling units for most of the city. Do you support updating zoning laws to allow for more units per building in more areas of the city?

Strongly support.

Are there areas of the city where you support increased housing density? If so, where? Please be as specific as possible.

I support increased housing density overall, but would point to neighborhoods south of the Mystic (Medford Hillside, South Medford) and the Mystic Ave. corridor as areas where I would be particularly supportive of such projects. I believe that these neighborhoods are optimal because they offer land with potential and close access to public transit.

Current Housing Issues in Medford

In June, Medford launched its Comprehensive Plan process to develop a long-range vision for the City with policy and guidance for implementation of the Plan over the next ten years. In your opinion, what are the highest priorities for housing and land use in Medford for the Comprehensive Plan?

I believe that our top priorities as laid out in the Housing Production Plan should be to address our local needs, meet production goals, and to provide a diverse array of housing choices that cater to varied needs. In terms of concrete steps forward, I believe we should prioritize upzoning, establishing a Municipal Affordable Housing Trust, and making it easier to develop mixed-use developments and multi-family housing.

Medford currently has a draft of a Housing Production Plan that outlines eighteen strategies for producing more affordable housing. Would you implement the Housing Production Plan?

Yes.

Medford is currently fighting in court to prevent three developments from adding affordable and market-rate housing to the city under the state Chapter 40B law. This law gives developers greater leeway to build in cities, like Medford, which fall below the threshold of 10% affordable housing. Do you believe this is the correct stance for the city to take?

No.

Regional Housing Issues

One of the primary sources of racial inequality in America generally and Massachusetts in particular is the way that housing policies, like redlining and exclusionary zoning, have reduced access to housing for Black and Brown Americans. How do you propose that Medford combat systemic racism by increasing access to housing?

As I have mentioned above, Medford needs to stop continuing policies that systemically price out our neighbors of color. We should be allowing greater density in the form of allowing more apartments with affordable units and multi-family homes to be built. We should ensure that housing that is more “affordable” is not placed in neighborhoods with greater levels of pollution and environmental risk, as often is the case. We should reverse the very real problem of housing discrimination, as shown by a Suffolk University Law School/Boston Foundation study conducted last year, by increasing access to and awareness of mortgage and rental assistance. We should stand up against those who are pushing to exclude new residents and newcomers from benefit programs, a relic of thinking from the height of redlining.

There is currently a housing supply crisis across Massachusetts, as housing prices and rental costs rise, and wages stagnate. Do you believe Medford has a moral obligation to address this crisis by supporting the creation of additional housing stock within the city?

Yes.

How do you think Medford can work with other communities to address the broader regional housing crisis?

We must understand that the housing crisis is not contained to Medford itself. Keeping out young professionals, middle class, and upper middle-class folks means that we accelerate gentrification in other working-class towns across the Boston area, worsening an ever-growing regional housing crisis. We must also think of ways to cooperate with other communities, such as creating a “Regional Housing Solutions” tool. Such a tool would allow communities to share data with each other transparently and catalyze civilian and non-profit assistance in identifying cross-regional issues and developing strategies targeted towards regional submarkets.

Housing policy and transportation policy are highly interconnected. What kinds of transportation policies should be prioritized in Medford, and how do you see them affecting local housing policies?

As we deal with an ever-modernizing urban society and the consequences of climate change, we must develop infrastructure and transit plans centered around safe, environmentally friendly modes of transportation. Increasing bus lanes and bike lanes will make transit safer and more efficient and will incentivize the use of these greener forms of transportation. An increased public transportation capacity in increased bus service and the Green Line Extension should be paired with an upzoning policy in these neighborhoods, which would ease the housing crisis, relieve traffic, and benefit our environment.