If there is one key lesson to learn from these past months under COVID shutdown, it is that all of the social inequalities in our society are linked together, and that all of them impact our ability to withstand a crisis.
The failure of our healthcare system to handle coronavirus was made more severe by Lynn’s lack of affordable housing because people could not self-isolate in increasingly unstable and crowded living conditions. Building new housing that is priced appropriately for the full range of Lynn’s income levels is an essential part of building a thriving, sustainable city.
One important strategy that can significantly impact Lynn’s housing future is using public land for public benefit. Public land refers to land owned by the City of Lynn. After all, the people who live, work, and make community here, land is perhaps Lynn’s most economically-valuable asset.
The value of public land is that it is meant to serve a public need while also contributing to our city’s struggling economy. Properties owned by the city, like schools and parking lots, are currently used to meet the needs of people who work and live in our city.
Because we have such a tight municipal budget, and we are likely facing a long economic recovery, city officials reasonably want to maximize the sale price of these properties. About 80 percent of our city’s revenue comes from residential property taxes, city officials want to impose the highest taxable value on these parcels by developing housing for a high-end market that does not exist in Lynn.
But what is the point of generating revenue with the use of public land if that money will not benefit the people who live here now? Our taxes paid for these properties, therefore we should benefit from them. Privatizing this public land effectively privatizes the benefits that we’ve already paid for, while exacerbating the gentrification and displacement we already experience.
As the city itself sets the value of the land it sells, we recommend a policy on the disposition of public lands that gives preference to nonprofit developers building homes targeted to Lynn’s more modest incomes. It should be a policy that invests in community participation and civic engagement in the design of these sites, and that gives preference for units and jobs to Lynn residents.
We further recommend a community oversight committee tasked with creating and implementing a democratic community vision and development plan in partnership with the Massachusetts Area Planning Council and Lynn’s new city planner.
Vacant land is our city’s most basic resource. The public must have a real say in how it is used. We are in a moment of great transformation, and we must ensure that our city transforms in a way that benefits all of us.
Another exclusionary “market-rate” tower will further gentrify the city, drive up housing costs, and exacerbate displacement, overcrowding, and homelessness (especially among families and the elderly). Instead, we can invest in our future by bringing those most negatively impacted by the housing crisis into the planning process, building new housing for our families, elders, and youth, and expanding our vision of development to be about the people who have invested their lives and taxes in our city.
Jonathan Feinberg wrote this piece on behalf of the Lynn Housing Coalition which includes a diverse group of individuals and organizations, including The New Lynn Coalition, Lynn United for Change, the Massachusetts Senior Action Council; LEO (Leading Through Empowering Opportunities); ECCO (Essex County Community Organization); Harborlight Community Partners, Northeast Justice Center; The United Way; Danya Smith (Lynn resident and Zoning Board of Appeals member); Alex Cuevas (Lynn resident, real estate agent, property manager) and Lynn residents Lorraine Medrano, Marissa Walsh and Lilian Romero.