►
From YouTube: Committee on Government Operations on March 4, 2021
Description
Docket #0239 - Order regarding a text amendment for Boston Zoning Code relative to affordable housing and jobs training exactions
A
Hi
everyone
we're
going
to
go
ahead
and
get
started.
I'm
going
to
do
the
you
know
the
opening
statement
and
then
I'll
announce
my
colleagues
and
kind
of
guide
this
conversation
and
then
kick
it
over
to
the
panel.
I
really
wanted
the
advocates
to
go
first
and
kind
of
reverse
order,
but
I
know
sanal
has
a
time
crunch.
A
So
if
it's
okay,
if
sanaa,
has
something
to
say
that's
great
and
then
I
really
wanted
the
the
advocates
to
kind
of
say
their
statement,
then
the
then
the
then
administration
falls
immediately
afterwards
kind
of
hear
what
the
thoughts
are
about.
What
the
you
know
the
updates
are
suggested
and
then
we
go
into
questions
from
counselors.
So
let's
go.
A
Good
afternoon
everyone,
I'm
city
council,
lydia,
edwards,
chair
of
the
government
committee
on
government,
ops,
it's
thursday
march
3rd
2021,
and
we're
here
today
for
virtual
hearing
on
docket
0239
order
regarding
a
text
amendment
for
boston
zoning
code
relative
to
affordable
housing
and
jobs.
Training
extractions
this
matter
is
sponsored
by
myself
and
was
referred
to
the
committee
on
january
27th.
In
accordance
with
governor
baker's
2012
excuse
me
march,
12
20
20
executive
order,
we're
having
this
conversation
appearing
on
zoom.
A
This
allows
us
to
balance
our
the
public
safety
concerns
of
today,
but
allows
for
us
to
do
our
job.
The
public
may
watch
this
meeting
via
live
stream.
That's
www.boston.gov
city
dash
council
dash
tv,
we'll
also
be
re-broadcast
at
a
later
date
on
xfinity.8
rcn,
82
and
fios
964
for
public
testimony.
Written
comments
may
be
sent
to
the
committee
email
at
ccc.go
at
boston.com,
and
we
made
a
part
of
the
record
and
available
to
all
counselors
a
quick
summary
of
the
docket
as
filed.
A
It
adds
edits
and
definitions
to
the
boston,
zona
code
relative
to
inclusionary
development
and
linkage
fees,
and
it's
consistent
with
the
homeworld
petition.
That's
passed
by
the
city
council
and
was
approved
this
year,
as
as
it
was
passed
by
and
signed
by
the
governor,
and
in
short,
I'm
I'm
getting
right
to
it.
A
If
you
will,
we've
got
this
new
power
to
have
an
in-house
family
conversation
about
development
and
exactions
that
we
otherwise
would
have
had
gone
to
the
state
house
for,
and
so
we
had
a
celebration
and
we're
so
grateful
for
the
fact
that
we
can
have
these
conversations
and
really
get
to
the
back
and
forth
here
in
boston
for
the
boston
folk
benefit.
So
that's
one
thing,
and
so
the
suggested
amendments
or
suggested
moments
in
this
particular
ordinance.
A
I
just
quickly
summarized-
is
to
one
to
codify
the
cpi
increases
to
make
sure
that
they're
part
of
the
regular
amounts
that
get
that
we
step
up
every
year.
Two
is
to
make
sure
that
as
pdas
are
amended.
So
if
a
pda
is
approved
under
a
certain
linkage,
as
it's
amended
as
many
pdas,
are
that
the
the
whatever
happens
after
the
amendment?
A
When
that
amendment
becomes
effective
that
that
new
linkage
becomes
what
the
developer
has
to
apply
for
news-
and
essentially
it
did
have
conversation
about
idp
in
that-
and
I'm
just
letting
folks
know
idp,
which
is
our
inclusionary
development
policy.
We
are
having
a
separate
hearing
on
that.
So
we're
going
to
take
all
this
course
around
ibp
a
little
out
of
this
today
and
we'll
be
discussing
that
13
and
the
70
ami
at
a
separate
hearing,
because
idp
is
now
part
of
our
zoning
code.
A
If
we
want
to
make
amendments
and
do
something
with
it,
we
should
first
talk
with
community,
hear
what
they
want
to
hear,
discuss
that
in
a
separate
hearing
and
then
we'll
bring
that
back.
So
I
just
want
to
kind
of
remove
that
other
things
that
I
think
are
going
to
come
up
today
and
I'm
excited
to
have
a
discussion
about,
is
wow
and
I'll.
Thank
you,
mayor
walsh,
for
increasing
the
idp.
Excuse
me
the
linkage
recently.
A
I
think
for
many
of
us
that
really
brought
us
up
to
what
we
should
have
been
anyway.
So
the
increase
wasn't
in
terms
of
really
bringing
us
forward
or
bringing
us
more.
It
was
bringing
us
to
level.
That's
one
thing
number
two:
I
think
that
there's
a
real
question
about
whether
an
amendment
should
be
a
trigger
for
making
sure
the
updated
linkage
should
come
through
or
whether
buildings
and
as
buildings
are
coming
up,
should
be
a
question
of
whether
the
linkage
should
be
updated.
A
So
we
just
want
to
make
sure
there's
a
codified,
streamlined
understanding
of
that
study,
and
so
those
are
kind
of
my
initial
thoughts.
This
is
basically
our
attempt
to
continue
to
upgrade
and
change
what
our
linkages
and
be
very,
very
honest
about
it.
I'm
looking
at
an
increase
because
I
feel
we're
finally
level
funded,
but
I
think
we
need
to
also
increase.
We
need
more.
A
So
here
for
excuse
me.
Let
me
announce
who's
here.
We
have
counselors
flynn,
counselor
sobby
george
councillor
braden,
counselor
baker,
counselor
mejia
and
counselor
campbell.
Our
panelists
today
include
sonal
gandhi,
chief
deputy
chief
of
staff
of
the
bpa
tim
davis,
deputy
director
at
dnd
ryan,
glascock,
deputy
director
for
regulatory
planning
and
zoning
at
bpda,
michelle
mccarthy,
housing
policy
manager,
bpda
and
lizzie
torres
housing
policy
assistant
bpda.
A
We
also
have
joe
craigsberg
krisberg
from
massachusetts.
Community
development
corporations,
hillary
pizer,
associate
executive
director
of
the
massachusetts,
affordable
housing
alliance,
also
known
as
maha
amy
nisham
from
the
jobs,
training
alliance,
samantha,
montano,
jamaica
from
jamaica,
plain,
neighborhood,
development,
corporation
and
brian
doherty
might
be
joining
us.
I
don't
know
if
he's
here
yet,
but
his
name
is
listed
for
the
on
behalf
of
the
building
trades
coalition.
A
B
B
Amendment
and
again,
I
want
to
say
thank
you
to
the
advocates,
as
well,
for
their
advocacy
and
making
sure
that
boston
is
a
city
for
everybody,
but
especially
for
low-income
residents,
our
seniors
in
workers
looking
for
a
decent
job,
with
with
training
options
and
and
and
and
a
good
place
to
live,
affordable
housing.
Thank
you.
Council,
edwards.
C
D
A
E
A
F
A
G
H
I
am
joined
here
today
by
our
partners
at
the
boston
planning
and
development
agency,
including
brian
glasscock,
deputy
director
for
regulatory
planning
and
zoning,
sonal
gandhi,
deputy
chief
of
staff,
and
also
just
to
make
sure
you're
all
kind
of
aware
of
who
the
housing
go-to
people
at
bpda
are
now
introducing
michelle
mccarthy,
housing
policy
manager
and
lizzie
torres
who's,
our
housing
policy
assistant
on
behalf
of
the
walsh
administration.
We
are
enormously
pleased
that
the
state
house
passed
the
idp
linkage
home
rule
petition.
H
This
significant
win
for
us
in
terms
of
local
control
and
home
rule,
in
that
it
allows
us
the
flexibility
to
change
what
we
can
require
of
large
commercial
developments,
to
pay
as
linkage
fees
to
support
the
creation
and
preservation
of
income,
restricted
housing
and
for
workforce
development
programs.
It
also
allows
the
city
of
boston,
for
the
first
time
to
codify
our
20
year
old
inclusionary
development
policy
into
zoning,
allowing
us
to
capture
important,
affordable
housing
benefits
regarding
regardless
of
zoning
variances.
H
This
helps
us
to
preserve
the
policy,
while
also
updating
our
zoning,
whether
it
be
city-wide
or
neighborhood
by
neighborhood,
knowing
that
this
hearing
is
now
going
to
be
focused
specifically
on
linkage,
only
we
did
have
some
remarks
from
brian
glascock,
which
we're
going
to
put
on
hold
for
now,
we'll
probably
use
that
in
our
hearing
on
the
30th,
but
also,
but
I
will
be
turning
it
over
to
sonoma
for
her
statement
about
the
linkage
program.
Thank
you.
G
Thanks
so
much
tim
I
want
to.
I
want
to
join
everyone
here
in
in
in
expressing
our
extreme
excitement
and
delight
at
the
passage
of
the
home
repetition
that
allows
us
to
have
more
resources
for
affordable
housing
and
job
training.
We
are
so
thrilled
and
we're
so
thankful
to
counselor
edwards
for
her
leadership
for
all
the
advocates
for
their
incredible
support
and
all
the
work
that
I
know
that
they've
done
and
we
are
we're
completely
and
absolutely
thrilled
that
we
are
here
today.
G
So
you
know
I
I
know
we're
all
amongst
friends
here.
Everyone
here
is
very
familiar
with
the
linkage
program,
but
just
for
those
in
the
audience
that
may
not
be
familiar
with
it.
Let's
give
a
very,
very
quick,
brief
overview
and
then
I'll
I'll
talk
a
little
bit
about
some
of
the
points
that
counselor
edwards
raised
and
looking
forward
to
a
a
really
really
fruitful
and
and
and
a
healthy
discussion.
G
So,
as
you
know,
boston
linkage
program
was
created
in
1986
to
leverage
funding
for
affordable
housing
and
workforce
training
through
payments
by
large-scale
commercial
real
estate.
Development.
Large
scale
is
a
any
development
over
100
000
square
feet
that
is
not
conver
that
is
not
housing
would
be,
will
be
paying
into
a
linkage
fund
for
jobs
and
housing.
Interestingly,
enough
boston
is
one
of
the
only
cities
in
the
country
that
has
jobs,
training
and
since
its
inception
in
1986,
linkage
has
generated
more
than
200
million
dollars
for
affordable
housing
and
workforce
training.
G
Since
2014,
the
language
program
has
generated
over
80
million
dollars
for
support,
affordable
housing
and
job
training
from
new
development,
and
linkage
provides
industry,
recognized
job
training
to
over
2
000
residents
annually
and
the
neighborhood
jobs.
Trust
has
dedicated
over
2.4
million
dollars
to
emergency
support
for
workforce
and
education
programs,
as
well
as
specialized
job
training
for
workers
preparing
to
enter
the
I.t
tech
and
health
healthcare
industries,
especially
since
the
onset
of
the
clover
19
pandemic.
G
Mayor
walsh
thought
it
was
important
to
take
advantage
of
the
new
flexibility
provided
by
the
legislation.
So,
on
february,
9th
mayor
walsh
announced
a
42
increase
in
the
linkage
fees.
The
increase
rate
is
15.39
per
square
foot,
of
which
13
will
be
dedicated
to
affordable
housing
and
2.39
cents
to
workforce
training.
This
was
approved
by
the
bpda
board
on
thursday
february
11th,
and
we're
expecting
this
to
appear
at
the
bottom
zoning
commission
on
march
10th.
G
G
This
is
up
from
10.81
cents
per
square
foot
and
this
was
set
in
2018,
so
our
last
increase
was
in
2018
and
at
that
point
the
linkage
rates,
our
903
for
affordable
housing
and
1.78
for
workforce
development.
The
new
rate
was
determined
based
on
several
years
of
feasibility
assessments
and
the
current
economic
climate.
We
have
a
very
robust
research
department
and
we
had
feasibility
assessments
to
look
at
we.
As
counselor
edwards
pointed
out.
G
Fine,
finding,
affordable
housing
in
boston,
as
we
all
know,
continues
to
be
challenging
for
low
and
moderate
income.
Employees
employed
in
new
commercial
developments,
average
monthly
rent
for
an
apartment
in
boston
rose
to
2407
in
2020
and
preparing
boston
residents
to
fill
the
jobs
created
by
new
commercial
development
will
continue
to
require
city
investments
and
skills,
training,
english
for
speakers
of
another
language
and
adult
basic
education
services.
G
The
opportunity
to
increase
linkage
exactions
to
meet
this
pres.
These
pressing
challenges
comes
at
a
time
when
the
commercial
real
estate
market
faces
uncertainty
brought
on
by
the
covert
19
pandemic.
As
a
pandemic
has
kept
office.
Workers
at
home
and
customers
away
from
restaurants
and
retail
businesses
demand
for
commercial
space
has
fallen.
G
Given
current
economic
uncertainties,
many
companies
are
deferring
long-term
precisions,
while
others
are
looking
to
sub-lease
the
office
space
that
they
are
not
currently
using.
As
businesses
have
looked
to
shrink
their
office
footprint,
the
amount
of
office
space
currently
available
for
sublease
has
risen
to
3.4
million
square
feet.
As
of
the
fourth
quarter
of
2020..
G
This
was
up
from
3.1
million
in
the
prior
year,
though
below
the
historically
strong
numbers
of
2017,
which
was
4.4
million
square
feet
and
2018
was
4.8
million
square
feet.
The
bpd
also
approved
1.1
million
square
feet
of
institutional
development
in
2020
up
from
up
from
600
000
square
feet
in
2019.
G
Strong
approval
signal
optimism
that
boston's
market
will
emerge
will
emerge
from
the
current
downturn,
maintaining
its
advantage
in
knowledge
sectors
such
as
health
care,
higher
education,
tech
and
finance.
We
are.
We
are
confident
that
the
economy
will
bounce
back
and
continued
growth
in
the
city's
life
sciences
sector
is
expected
to
feed
demand
for
new
lab
for
a
new
lab
and
office
space.
G
G
Unfortunately,
much
to
the
recent
decline
in
the
rate
is
attributable
to
people
moving
from
from
unemployment
to
out
of
the
labor
workforce
rather
than
back
into
employment.
Unemployment
rates
were
12.9
percent
in
august
and
11
in
september,
so
we're
moving
the
right
direction,
given
that
we
reached
historically
unprecedented
levels.
For
example,
the
great
recession
peaked
for
boston
was
eight
point
four
percent,
and
we
were
at
18.9
in
june
of
last
year
a
few
quick
words
on
the
linkage
nexus
study
that
was
mentioned
in
2016.
G
The
bpda
did
commission
a
study
to
refuse
exaction
rates
and
policies
in
response
to
changes
in
the
nature
of
the
city's
development
and
unemployment,
housing,
market
conditions,
housing
development
costs
and
a
growing
need
for
housing
and
living
wage
employment.
The
study
found
that
fully
financing
the
affordable
housing
impact
of
new
development
would
require
linkage
fees
well
in
excess
of
the
then
current
rates,
and
also
caution
that
such
rates
could
not
be
sustained
without
boston's
office
market,
losing
competitiveness
to
regional
and
national
peers.
G
By
taking
the
step,
we
believe
that
that
we
are
prudently
ensuring
that
responsible
development
continues
to
occur
in
boston
while
continuing
to
address
some
of
the
most
pressing
needs
of
bostonians.
The
bpd
and
dnd
are
committed
are
committed
to
future
reviews
of
the
linkage
program
following
boston's
economic
economic
recovery
from
the
clover
19
pandemic.
Thank
you
so
much
for
your
time.
I
look
forward
to
hearing
from
all
all
our
colleagues
and
friends
on
this
call
today.
Thank
you.
A
Thank
you
before
we
turn
over
to
the
advocates.
We've
been
joined
by
counselor
flaherty
and
councillor
bach
and
just
wanted
to
know.
One
of
the
other
things
I
forgot
to
mention
to
be
discussed
is
the
the
draw
down
or
the
to
draw
down
the
threshold
of
which
point
linkage
would
apply
so
we're
at
100
000
square
feet.
A
Other
things
to
come
up
is
also,
should
we
go
lower
than
that,
so
I'm
going
to
go
directly
to
to
the
advocates
and
then
for
counselor
florida,
counselor
box,
just
knowledge
we're
going
from
advocates
we're
going
to
go
then
back
through
the
administration
and
and
and
then
we're
going
to
turn
it
over
to
questions
from
from
colleagues
so
counts.
Excuse
me,
joe
crisper,
from
macdc.
I
I
Our
members,
as
many
of
you
know,
build
and
manage
affordable
housing
about
eight
to
nine
thousand
apartments
across
the
city,
as
well
as
a
number
of
affordable
home
ownership
projects
that
we've
developed
over
the
years,
and
our
members
are
also
some
of
them
involved
in
workforce
development
and
job
training
programs.
So
we
care
very
much
about
both
aspects
of
this
program.
I
I
want
to
thank
the
council
for
your
leadership
in
getting
this
home
rule
petition
through
the
legislature
and
we're
excited
to
be
working
with
you
to
to
implement
it
and
we're
very
appreciative
of
the
mayor
and
his
team
for
immediately
increasing
the
linkage
fee.
So
we
can
capture
the
value
that's
coming
online
in
2021,
but
we
agree
with
you
chairwoman
that
that's
not
the
end
of
the
conversation.
I
It
should
be
the
beginning
of
the
conversation
and
it
was
interesting
to
listen
to
cinahl's
presentation,
and
so
I'm
wondering,
if
you'd
be
willing
to
call
me
cdc's
office
landlord,
because
our
lease
expires
in
september
and
he
wants
a
40
increase.
So
maybe
he
hasn't
been
following
the
statistics
as
closely
as
you
have
hopefully
he's
listening
today.
I
One
of
the
couple
things
that
I
just
wanted
to
say
about
the
linkage
program
that
I
think
are
really
important
is
that
by
having
this
resource,
the
city
also
gets
more
federal
and
state
money,
because
we
have
these
local
dollars.
It
helps
our
members
and
other
affordable
housing
developers
to
leverage
more
state
and
federal
money
into
the
city,
so
the
bank
for
the
buck
is,
is
increased
beyond
that.
I
So
I
also
want
to
echo
what
the
chairwoman
said
about
the
importance
of
balancing
the
need
to
do
some
analysis
and
research
to
come
up
with
the
right
number,
but
also
the
urgency
to
act
and
not
to
allow
the
research
to
become
an
excuse
not
to
act.
One
of
the
great
things
about
the
home
rule
petition
is,
if
we
need
to
in
the
future
the
city
can
adjust
it
downward
or
sideways
or
upwards.
So
we
have
some
flexibility
going
forward.
I
We
don't
have
to
go
back
to
the
legislature
each
time
so
as
the
market
evolves,
we
can
respond
accordingly
and
I
think,
notwithstanding
the
short-term
challenges
we
have
with
kovid,
there
still
seems
to
be
strong
interest
in
the
development
community.
So
I
think
there's
opportunity
to
grow
this
program,
and
with
that
I
will
thank
you
for
the
time
and
happy
to
take
questions
at
the
appropriate
point.
J
Hi,
thank
you
chairwoman.
Thank
you
for
the
opportunity
to
to
testify.
Today.
Maha
has
been
really
excited,
like
you
are
to
be
having
this
conversation
at
this
virtual
city
hall
and
not
at
the
state
house,
and
we
want
to
thank
everybody
who
worked
on
that.
I
know
there
were
a
lot
of
counselors
involved
in
pushing
that
as
well
as
community
organizations,
and
I
think
what
I
want
to
emphasize
today
is
that
the
formal
name
for
linkage
is
a
is
a
development
impact
fee,
and
you
know
the
nexus
study
that
was
done
in
2016.
J
J
We
want
good
jobs
in
the
city,
but
we
also
have
to
have
places
for
those
folks
who
work
there
to
live,
and
if
we
don't
have
places
for
them
to
live,
then
the
higher
income
people
who
are
coming
to
work
in
those
buildings
are
are
going
to
displace
our
members
and
a
lot
of
other
good
people
across
the
city
who
are
working
their
butts
off.
They
have
decent
jobs,
they
have
great
credit.
J
J
You
know
we're
dealing
with
a
very
large
development
dorchester-based
city
in
dorchester,
that
is,
three-quarters,
commercial
and
the
plan
is
not
sort
of
traditional
office
space,
but
much
more
in
the
life
sciences
areas
there's
a
lot
of
development
in
austin.
I
know
life
sciences,
there's
two
million
square
feet
called
on
the
dot
not
far
from
us
in
south
boston,
again
life
sciences.
J
So
I
agree
that
it,
the
how
many
of
us
are
going
to
be
full-time
in
our
in
our
cubicles
is
not
certain
at
this
point,
but
we
are
getting
many
many
proposals
for
large-scale
commercial
development
in
other
areas.
Right
now-
and
I
do
worry-
that
if
we
don't
have
a
plan
for
the
low
and
moderate
income
workers
who
are
going
to
come
and
want
to
work
in
that
in
those
buildings
that
we
are
going
to
exacerbate
a
really
difficult
problem.
J
A
couple
of
examples
that
I
can
just
cite
off,
the
top
of
my
head
are
dorchester
bay
city
for
one
umass
boston
bought
the
land
where
a
lot
of
it's
going
to
be
built
for
18.7
million
dollars
in
2010
and
eight
years
later,
they
leased
it
for
235
million
dollars,
18.7
to
235
million
dollars.
In
eight
years.
J
We're
graduating
almost
3
000
people
this
year
from
our
home
buyer
classes.
80
are
people
of
color.
Most
of
them
are
under
80
area
median
income.
It
cannot
find
a
place
to
live
in
the
city.
We
don't
want
commercial
development
to
make
it
worse.
We
want
the
commercial
development,
but
we
need
the
affordable
housing
to
go
along
with
it,
and
our
reading
of
what's
been
done
to
date
in
terms
of
very
careful
analysis
and
study,
is
that
the
24
dollars
that
was
cited
in
that
study
would
not
adversely
impact
development.
Again.
J
We
are
not
against
development.
We
do
not
want
to
stop
development,
but
we
want
it
to
be
responsible
development
and
we
want
to
have
a
linkage
fee
that
really
speaks
to
the
need
that
happens
when
you
build
a
whole
lot
of
commercial
space.
So
thank
you
and
I
hope,
to
work
with
all
of
you
again
really
excited
to
be
having
this
conversation
at
the
city
level.
K
Thank
you,
councillor,
edwards,
and
to
the
committee
for
allowing
us
to
be
here
today
to
continue
to
talk
about
the
need
to
improve
and
increase
linkage
fees
in
the
city
of
boston.
I'm
amy
nishman,
I'm
the
senior
vice
president
at
jvs,
and
I'm
also
the
vice
president
of
the
job
training
alliance,
a
group
of
24,
non-profit
job
training
providers
who
advocate
for
low-income
workers
in
the
city
in
order
to
not
say
the
same
things
over
and
over
again.
I
just
want
to
plus
one
to
everything
that
the
advocates
before
me
have
already
said.
K
I
also
want
to
thank
the
mayor
for
what
his
administration
just
did
to
increase
the
linkage
fees
after
we've
been
talking
about
this
for
so
many
years
and
plus
one
to
counselor
edward
saying
that's
just
the
beginning,
and
we
need
to
do
more.
The
increase
will
make
a
big
impact
on
both
affordable
housing
and
job
training
programs
in
the
city,
but
we
believe
we
can
do
even
more
to
improve
the
programs
and
ensure
that
it
continues
to
ensure
residents
can
stay
and
work
in
boston.
K
One
critical
change
that
we
think
must
be
made
to
the
program
is
that
developers
should
pay
the
linkage
fee,
that's
in
effect
at
the
time
that
they
build
those
actual
buildings
not
when
they
pull
their
permits.
Developers
should
not
be
able
to
lock
in
their
linkage
fee
rates
at
a
time
when
it
could
take
possibly
years
for
the
building
to
actually
be
built.
K
K
Opponents
of
changes
to
the
program
may
point
to
kovid
and
the
economic
downturn.
It
has
resulted
in
arguing
that
developers
can't
pay
any
more
in
the
current
climate,
but
it
would
be
a
mistap
for
me
not
to
critically
underscore
that
affordable
housing
and
job
training
are
needed.
Now
more
than
ever.
K
Many
of
the
industries
in
which
we
provide
targeted
job
training
have
been
severely
impacted
by
covid
and
there
are
a
lot
of
workers
that
need
to
be
retrained,
and
this
is
the
vehicle
that
we
could
help
with
it'll
take
years,
if
not
longer,
for
some
of
those
industries
to
recover.
We
need
to
help
people
pivot
now,
so
that
we
can
move
our
low
and
middle
income
residents.
K
L
Hi
folks,
thanks
for
having
me,
I'm
samantha
montano,
I'm
here
for
coalition
for
truly
affordable,
boston,
boston,
antenna
coalition
and
jamaica,
plain
neighborhood
development
corporation.
So
I'd
like
to
outline
some
asks
we
have,
and
I
hope
that
these
asks
can
be
seen
through
a
reparational
racial
equity
lens
understanding
that
you
know
now
is
not
the
time
to
be
careful
with
money,
especially
when
a
lot
of
folks
are
hurting.
L
So
something
to
consider
is
the
new
linkage
rate
is
15.39
per
square
foot
and
if
we
wait
till
after
the
first
hundred
thousand
square
feet
for
commercial
space,
we're
losing
out
on
one
million
five
hundred
thirty
nine
thousand
dollars
in
linkage
and
buildings
are
only
paying
for
half
of
the
linkage
space
right
because
you're.
If
a
two
hundred
thousand
square
foot
building
is
only
getting
100,
000
square
foot
linkage
charge.
L
That's
a
lot
of
money
that
we
could
be
bringing
in
for
job
training
and
affordable
housing,
and
then
also,
we
would
like
to
lower
the
100
dollar
square
foot
trigger
to
thirty
thousand
square
feet.
Recognizing
that
the
folks
who
are
going
to
be
working
in
these
commercial
spaces
are
low
income.
Moderate
folks,
who
need
as
much
opportunity
to
have
housing
in
the
city
of
boston
as
possible,
also
understanding
that
housing
you
know,
affordable
housing
is
not
equity.
Building
we
don't
are.
L
I
don't
know
what
what
is
this
once
every
10
years
or,
however
often
it
is,
we
need
to
have
elected
officials
who
are
ready
to
make
those
small
incremental
cost
of
living
adjustments
so
that
we're
staying
at
pace
with
what
it
costs
to
develop,
affordable
housing
and
what
it
costs
to
do.
Job
training
in
the
city
of
boston,
understanding
that
you
know
these
are
reparational
issues
and
because
you
know
who
is
this
impacting
most
right,
black
and
brown
folks?
L
A
H
Yeah,
I
know
that's
why
I
had
to
find
the
mute
button.
No,
we
did
brian
was
going
to
speak
a
little
bit
about
the
idp,
because
we're
clearly
going
to
be
talking
about
that
at
the
other
hearing,
right
that
we
are
done
with
our
testimony
for
today.
So
if
you
want
to
turn
over
to
the
council,
that
would
be
fine.
Thank.
A
You
thank
you
so
much.
Thank
you
so
we're
going
to
go
then
through
the
questions
from
folks.
I
at
this
point
I
kind
of
want
to
since
I've
since
I
filed
I'm
going
to
go
ahead
and
pop
off
some
questions,
real,
quick
and
then
we'll
go
in
order
of
arrival
and
those
who
are
still
here.
So
I
am
curious
specifically
about
the
nexus
study
in
a
24
recommendation.
A
G
Yeah,
so
I
just
want
to
address
address
that,
so
there
was
a
rate.
There
was
a
range
in
the
study.
The
range
was
between
1486
and
24.04,
and
so
hillary,
your
your
statement
is
absolutely
correct,
but
what
I
quoted
was
the
housing
exaction
rate
was
between
1287
and
2139,
and
the
jobs
was
199
to
264
per
square
foot
and
a
combined
you
know,
recommendation
was
between
1486
and
24.04,
so
the
study
is
available
online.
That
was
posted
as
soon
as
it
was.
G
You
know,
as
soon
as
way
before
the
2018
increase
as
well.
So
the
understanding
at
that
point
was
this.
You
know
they.
This
was
done
by
carl
seidman,
who
is.
It
was
a
really
really
great
great
resource
for
a
lot
of
cities,
including
boston
and
cambridge,
on
linkage,
and
he
looked
at
as
hillary
rightly
pointed
out,
he
looked
at
what
the
funding
gap
would
be
to
build
housing,
and
so
the
number
was
in
the
80s
and
then
what
the
cities
could
could
afford.
G
A
G
So
it
also
found
that
the
impact
of
new
development
would
require
linkage
fees
well
in
excess
of
the
then
current
rates,
but
also
caution
that
such
rates
could
not
be
sustained
without
boston's
office
market,
losing
competitiveness
to
regional
and
national
peers.
So
there
was
that's
where
there
was
a
range
that
was
presented
and
the
24.04
was
the
high
of
that
range
and
was
1486
to
24.04.
A
So,
just
for
folks
background
we
did
send
a
copy
of
the
study
to
all
of
the
counselors
in
advance,
and
so
I
think
what
I'm
trying
to
nail
down
is
if
we
were
to
go
to,
maybe
so
now
we're
in
well.
Let
me,
before
I
get
to
the
post
pandemic
questions
the
other
just
for
for
background
in
education.
You
know
the
linkage
payments
aren't
paid
in
one
lump
sum.
My
understanding
is
they're
paid
over
seven
years.
A
G
A
So
at
the
time-
and
I
remember
having
some
discussions-
that
there
were
some
developers
who
were
actually
behind
payment
or
there
seemed
to
be
no
enforcement
mechanism
if
they
weren't
making
their
payments
on
time,
do
we
have
a
gap?
Right
now
are
people
as
everybody
up
to
par
on
their
payments
for
linkage.
G
So,
as
far
as
I
know,
the
the
linkage
payments
are
collected
by
the
treasurer
and
as
far
as
I
know
so
so
the
so
the
linkage
payments
are
collected
for
housing
over
seven
years
and
for
jobs
over
two
years,
and
I
don't
want
to
put
words
in
tria
dylan's
mouth.
But
I
do
know
that
this
is
actually
looked
at
favorably.
So
we
have
an
income
stream
for
housing.
So
there's
a
seven
year
stream
for
housing
that
comes
in
and
that's
something
that
and
you
know
that
the
nht
really
likes.
And
so
we
can.
G
A
I
guess
I
would
be
curious
also
about
what
is
the
enforcement
if
they're
late,
you
know,
do
we
add
interest?
Do
we
I
mean?
What
do
we
do
because
sometimes
the
building's
done
so
they're
still
paying
on
what
they've
already
finished
right?
So
there's
not
like
no
permits
to
pull
back.
So
what's
the
reinforcement
mechanism,
if
they're
late.
A
That's
okay,
it
might
be
something
that's
worth
looking
at,
then.
If
there
are
late
payments
or
if
there
were
people
falling
behind
what
we
can
do
to
either
increase
the
step
them
up
or
something
that's
one
thing
we
could
put
out
there.
I
do
wonder
if
there's
also
a
balance
between
the
long
like
the
payments
over
time
and
possibly
getting
more
money
up
front
at
a
higher
rate,
but
they
don't
have
to
make
long-term
payment
plans.
A
I
don't
I
don't
know,
but
I
just
think
there
might
be
a
balance
that
allows
for
us
to
look
at
different
rates
based
on
how
fast
we
get
the
money
as
a
city
which
I
I
would.
I
would
like
to
to
further
discuss
that.
I
know
you
know
thank
you
so
now
for
bringing
up
the
fact
that
we
want
revenue,
regular
revenue-
and
I
know
in
the
housing
trust
that
I
sit.
We
want
regular
revenue,
but
I
wonder
if
we
couldn't
get
higher
amounts
sooner
versus
a
lower
amount
that
spread
over
time.
H
What
I
can
speak
to
is
the
housing
creation.
Housing
creation
is
already
a
part
of
the
program.
That
is
where
that
a
developer
is
making
a
contribution
directly
to
an
affordable
housing
development
that
we
have.
We
get
the
money
all
up
front
now
that
actually
is
because
of
inflation.
There
is
actually
a
kind
of
a
deflation
rate,
so
they
actually
pay
a
smaller
amount
than
all
their
total
payments,
but
we're
getting
it
all
at
once.
So
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
that
that
has
workforce.
H
We
usually
do
about
one
of
those
a
year.
The
most
one
of
the
most
recent
is
a
connection
between
the
hub
on
causeway
project
and
a
23
unit
elderly
building
in
the
north
end
also
between
children's
hospital
and
a
project
in
mission
hill.
So
those
are
kind
of
the
way
that
we
can
get
money
earlier
for
immediate
projects
that
are
usually
somewhere
near
the
actual
development.
H
G
N
O
G
I
think
can
I
just
add
one
more
thing:
sorry
and
I
and
this
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
we
talk
about
dip
agreement.
So
you
talk
about
enforcement,
so
developers
do
sign
legal
documents,
they
sign.
You
know
what
what's
called
diff
agreements
that
memorializes,
what
their
linkage
obligations
out
to
the
city,
so
those
are
legal
documents
and
assignment
developers.
So
those
agreements
are
our
legal
documents
and
that's
that
is
that
is
part
of
the
enforcement
for
linkage.
A
So
before
I
turn
it
over,
I
just
wanted
to
in
general,
I
guess
get
a
feel
for
understanding
how
the
administration
is
seeing.
This
conversation,
you've
heard
about
increases,
you've
heard
about
lowering
the
threshold,
and
I
guess
I
want
to
know
if
you're,
if
there's
an
appetite
to
really
engage
in.
I
know
we
just
didn't
increase
but
to
continue
that
conversation
and
to
head
towards
the
goal
of
increasing
linkage.
G
So,
as
I
mentioned,
we're
committed
to
future
reviews
of
the
linkage
program
absolutely
committed
to
it.
You
know
it's
that
we've
had
there's
a
lot
of
folks
on
this
call
who
you
know,
I
know
really
really
well
a
lot
of
friends
on
this
call.
We've
been
working
on
this
for
a
long
time,
so
we're
committed
to
future
reviews
of
the
linkage
program.
Yes,.
A
Great,
so
so
for
the
actual
language
in
this
ordinance,
because
we're
not
going
to
get
too
deep
in
the
weeds
we're
going
to
go
into
that
in
a
working
session.
But
I
do
I'm
excited
to
hear
about
your
thoughts
at
that
time
about
the
actual
language
in
the
in
the
ordinance.
So
I'm
going
to
turn
over
to
counselor
braden.
D
D
So
there
is
a
desire
for
more
transparency
around
linkage,
how
much
how
much
money
is
generated
by
these
projects
and
how
is
it
being
spent-
and
I
think,
there's
a
general
desire
to
follow
the
money
and
and
also
to
understand
how,
if,
if
it
is
tied
to
a
development
impact
fee,
is
the
neighborhood
that
is
being
directly
impacted
by
the
development,
how
much
money?
How
much
of
that
money
stays
to
mitigate
the
impact
of
the
development
in
that
neighborhood.
H
D
For
for
those
folks
who
are
really
coming
in
at
a
very
low
level,
the
focus
is
getting
jobs,
but
there's
a
lot
of
folks
who
aren't
even
getting
on
the
bottom
rung
of
the
ladder,
because
there's
there
isn't
adequate
funding
for
very
basic
english
english
language
skills.
So
that's
something
I'd
like
to
raise
up
as
we
discuss
these
things.
H
D
And
then
the
other
thought
I
had
and
with
regard
to
vacancies
and
traditional
office
spaces,
you
know
we're
seeing
increased
vacancy,
as
so
much
of
our
industry
is
moving
into
the
biotech
sphere.
If
we
end
up
with
a
lot
of
office
space
that
is
sort
of
chronically
underused,
should
we
be
looking
at
converting
those
buildings,
or
at
least
some
of
them,
into
housing
as
a
way
to
address
our
incredible
need
for
more
more
housing,
that's
affordable
for
the
actual
workers
who
live
live
in
the
city.
A
D
Madam
chair,
I
had
just
one
other
question.
I
might
turn
my
page
when
a
building,
if
you,
if
a
building
is
built
and
the
developer
signs
a
memorandum,
a
contract
with
the
city
to
pay
a
certain
level
of
linkage
money
over
a
period
of
time.
What
happens
if
the
building
is
sold
is?
Does
the
new
owner
have
a
commitment,
a
requirement
to
continue
to
pay
those
linkage
fees?
Yes,.
D
F
E
Thank
you,
madam
chair.
So
let
me
just
speak
to
if
it's
okay
with
you,
madam
chair,
to
liz
a
little
bit
so
through
the
the
hou,
the
the
jobs
trust
in
this
past
couple
of
rounds,
we've
been
looking
at
trying
to
enhance
english
english
learners,
but,
as
you
know,
it's
about
getting
the
job.
So,
at
the
end
of
the
day
we
have
a.
E
We
have
a
you
know
the
system,
that's
in
place,
it's
about
dollars
going
out
and
how
many
jobs,
how
many
jobs
were
you
able
to
point
to
with
those
with
with
that
money?
I
I
personally
think
that
we
should
be
thinking
a
little
bit
differently
about
the
money
coming
in
the
money
coming
out.
I
think
that
we
should
be
trying
to.
You
know,
build
more,
build
more
programming.
That's
that's
doing
the
job
training,
maybe
actual
brick
and
mortar
places
where
people
can
stop
by
those
sorts
of
things
in
neighborhoods.
E
In
the
the
entrance
level,
people
that
are
just
learning
english,
it's
more
difficult
to
maybe
get
them
into
that
job,
job
or
job
readiness,
where
people
that
have
a
little
bit
of
english.
If
they
get
more
training
in
that
in
the
language,
then
then
you're
able
to
to
more
easily
show
them.
You
know
direct
them
towards
a
job.
I
hope
that
helped
you
a
little
bit
there
liz.
You
know
it's
we've!
We've
we've
just
been
kind
of
focusing
on
the
language
the
last
and
I've
been
on
for
a
year.
E
E
E
G
E
E
One
more
question:
institutional
development:
where
they,
you
know
a
lot
of
times
their
pilot
institutions,
do
they
pay
in.
So
if
the
hospital
expands
300
000
in
hospital
use,
that's
just
so.
Will
they
pay
into
this,
or
is
that
part
of
the
pilot
they
don't
need
to
pay
in
for
it
or,
and
is
it
the
developer
that
would
have
to
pay
into
this.
G
E
E
I
I
can't
think
of
it
right
now.
Thank
you,
madam.
Thank
you,
oh
no.
I
I
do.
I
do
have
somewhat
of
a
concern
we're
talking
about.
We
just
raised
the
the
contribution
amount
and
and
we're
sitting
there
talking
about
how
do
we?
How
do
we
raise
it
more?
I
think
we
should
be.
I
think
we
should
be
looking
at.
E
You
know,
let's
see
how
this
see,
how
this
initial
increase
lands
and,
let's
see
what
the
next
year
looks
like
before
we
start
going
to
a
maximum
of
24
of
of
what
the
what
the
study
said.
We
want
to
go
right
at
the
maximum.
I
think
we
have
to
be
careful
doing
that
because
we
are
in.
We
are
in
somewhat
of
a
depression
here
and
I
think
we
ought
to
let
the
economy
see
what's
going
to
happen.
E
M
M
What
does
that
look
like
in
terms
of
that
conversation,
especially
for
those
who
have
less
capital
to
build
with?
And
I
really
just
want
to
uplift
that
I
love
sam's
comments
around
the
whole
cola
situation.
I
think
that's
the
the
right
thinking
and
would
love
to
see
what
that
looks
like
in
terms
of
those
increases
being
parallel
to
the
cola.
So
thank
you
for
bringing
that
to
the
space
sam.
H
I
think
that
well
first,
I
may
have
to
get
a
little
bit
repeated,
but
on
the
one
of
the
questions
is
about
inclusionary
development
policy,
which
we're
not
focusing
on
in
this
particular
hearing,
but
our
preference
for
some
time
has
been
that
developers
put
their
units
on
site
and
through
the
new
affirmatively,
furthering
fair
housing
zoning
process.
That's
also
greatly
encouraged
for
people
to
keep
their
units
on
site
in
order
to
encourage
diverse
communities
and
diverse
developments.
H
No,
no,
I
just
it
was
just
that
I
had
a
I
had
a
siren
in
the
background,
the
in
terms
of
developers
and
making
sure
that
we
have
more
developers
who
are
mwbe
developers,
etc.
There
is
the
existing.
This
is
not
something
I
work
with
daily,
but
there's
the
boston
resident
jobs
policy
which
keeps
track
of
the
hours
in
terms
of
minority
women
and
residents
who
were
working
on
projects
both
funded
by
the
city
and
large
private.
H
You
know
market
rate
projects,
and
that
is
something
that
I
think
will
be
continue
to
be
a
discussion
both
within
the
office
of
economic
development
and
within
the
pda
and
within
the
department
of
naval
development
going
forward.
I'm
sure
that
that
will
be
a
lively
discussion
under
an
acting
mayor
and
or
you
know,
whoever
is
the
mayor
in
the
future.
H
In
terms
of
the
department
of
neighbor
development,
we
are
looking
at
our
rfps
to
kind
of
see
more
about
how
we
can
encourage
wmbe
developers
to
play
a
part
in
those
or
to
be
partners
in
developments
where
there's
city
funding-
and
you
can
see
some
of
that
has
already
been
taking
place
in
our
rfps
and
the
pdas
are
these
for
that
matter,
for
the
parcels
around
nubian
square.
So
those
are
some
efforts
that
are
ongoing.
H
H
P
The
issue
that
sam
montagno
and
councillor
mejia
brought
up
about
the
cost
of
living
right.
So
one
of
the
things
that
the
the
home
rule
position
did
was
authorize
us
to
make
that
automatic
annually,
because
what
we
saw
was
that
you
know
if
you
have
to
go
and
and
go
through
all
these
motions
going
through
the
bbpda
board
and
the
zoning
commission
every
three
years,
those
things
get
lost
in
the
shuffle.
So
this
that
became
automatic.
But
you
know
we.
P
M
So
yeah,
okay
tim,
I
wanted
to
just
go
quickly
back
and
counselor
edwards.
This
is
probably
something
where
your
expertise
can
redirect
me.
If
I'm
going
off
the.
If
I'm
going
off
the
train
here,
you
can
bring
me
back
to
where
we
need
to
be
because
you're
really
good
at
that.
But
I'm
just
curious
to
you
know
when
we
think
about
equity
and
we
think
about
creating
opportunities
for
developers
of
color.
H
Right
right
right-
and
I
just
it's
just-
that
we
don't
really
have
the
right
person
on
the
call
to
make
that
commitment
here,
but
I
can
say
what
we've
been
doing
and
what
we're
working
on
I
mean
there
are.
We
know
that
there
are
a
number
of
ways
that
we
can
increase
participation
by
people
of
color
in
development.
It's,
whether
it's
that
we
put
out
packages
of
of
work
or
parcels
that
are
smaller.
H
Where
there's
you
know
so,
there's
not
as
much
of
a
leap
to
make
for
those
projects
we're
doing
that
with
the
neighborhood
homes
initiative,
which
has
been
very
impactful
in
bringing
in
new
people
into
the
development
space.
It's
looking
at
ways
to
maybe
provide
technical
assistance
to
these
same
developers
so
that
they
can
actually
participate
in
these.
There
are
a
number
of
things
in
the
the
recent
disparity
study
that
out
of
that
disparity
study.
H
There
also
will
be
recommendations
about
ways
that
we
can
engage
people
more
and
get
them
more
involved,
and
that
will
be
more
overseen,
at
least
in
our
department,
by
the
neighborhood
housing
division,
which
is
which
is
a
jessica
boatwright
shop.
And
I
just
don't
have
her
on
the
call
today
because
I
was
not.
I
didn't
think
we'd
be
approaching
this
kind
of
question
today,
but
thank
you.
M
Yeah,
I
don't
want
to
occupy
any
more
space
before
I
get
the
gavel
that
I'm
done,
but
I
just
want
to
say
amy.
It
was
so
good
to
see
your
kids
in
the
backdrop
as
as
as
a
working
mom
doing
remote
learning.
It's
so
great
to
see
the
kiddos
really
just
want
to
give
you
a
shout
out
on
that,
but
anyways
council
edwards
I'm
going
to
stop
asking
questions
for
now
and
thank
you
so
much
if
I
have
any
more
I'll
just
follow
up.
If
there's
an
opportunity
to
do
so,.
Q
However,
the
current
language
in
this
proposed
text
amendment
says
that
the
bra
shall
require
project
seeking
pda
amendment
to
contribute
at
the
rate
of
affordable
housing
and
drop
execution
currently
effective
in
the
year
proposed
amendment.
So
I
guess
I
just
wanted
some
clarification
on
that
is.
Is
there
a
difference
between
the
linkage
bill
that
that
was
passed
and
what
that's
doing
compared
to
what
the
zone
text?
The
text
amendment
to
the
zoning
amendment
is
seeking
to
do
here.
A
A
So
that's
it
I'll
give
you
an
example.
What
we're
trying
to
do
is
like
based
off
of
suffolk
downs,
right,
it's
going
to
take
20
years
for
it
to
be
built,
and
we
didn't
want
20
years
from
now
to
be
using
linkage,
fees
from
2020,
1
or
20..
We
wanted
to
be
using
linkage
fees
in
2040
and
we
believe
the
way
to
connect
that
is
through
the
amendment
process.
O
Thank
you,
madam
chair,
and
thank
you
to
everyone
all
the
advocates
and
the
administration
I'm
so
excited.
I
was
excited
at
three
in
the
morning
when
this
got
passed
and
and
I'm
excited
and
I
was
excited
when
the
administration
went
ahead
and
made
that
initial
move
and
and
excited
for
us
to
keep
kind
of
thinking
about
how
to
grow
the
linkage
program
and
support
these
critical
critical
issues
for
the
city.
O
I
think
it
it's
something
that
you
know
has
really
worked
since
we
did
it
in
the
80s
and
and
we
just
have
to
look
for
opportunities
to
scale
it
up.
So
I
guess
my
questions
I
mean
I
wanted
so
one
thing,
brian.
I
I
wanted
to
circle
back
on.
Are
you
saying
that
indexing
is
already
built
in
to
what
was
what
just
went
through
and
now.
P
P
Well,
no,
we
would,
we
were
authorized
to
every
three
years
go
to
the
bra
board,
get
them
to
authorize
as
to
recommend
a
change
that
would
then
have
to
be
adopted
by
the
zoning
commission.
So
it
was
a.
It
was
a
no.
You
know,
sort
of
an
overt
act
that
we
had
to
to
do
to
make
this
all
happen,
and
you
know
we.
We
know
that
there
were
times
over
the
last
30
years,
30
plus
years.
P
Where
that
didn't
happen,
we
missed
a
window
because
it's
it's
every
three
years
and
you've
got
to
hit
that
window.
And
if
you
miss
it,
then
you
got
to
wait
and
now
it's
automatic,
rather
than
one
big
jump
every
three
years
in
a
small
incremental
jumps
every
year,
but
that
happens
automatically.
So
we
can
build
it
into
the
into
the
formula.
We
don't
need
to
do
anything
other
than
just
change.
The
number.
O
P
P
O
P
O
But
I
think
I
think
counselor
edwards
is
language
and
I
I
know
we
might
be
skirting
madam
chair
close
to
working
session
territory.
So
it's
fine
if
we,
but
I
did
want
to
highlight
that
the
indexing
concept
is,
I
think,
a
core
part
of
the
legislation
before
us
and-
and
I
guess
my
question
is,
do
we
like?
I
think
the
idea
of
counselor
edward's
proposal
is
to
basically
like
make
it
as
sort
of
you're
saying
like
super
automatic,
so
that
we're
not
necessarily
even
like
having
a
kind
of
like.
O
Should
we
shouldn't
we
conversation
every
year
right,
but
it's
like
just
saying,
like
oh
the
bpda
every
year,
this
is
going
to
happen.
Just
walk
me
through
mechanically,
then,
if
we
didn't
pass.
This
is.
How
is
that
gonna
happen?
And
if
we
do
pass
this
like?
Is
it
still
gonna?
Is
it
still
gonna
take
a
motion
to
the
board
and
then
the
zoning
commission,
like
I'm,
just
trying
to
think
about
like
logistically
how
to
streamline
it
as
possible.
P
Yeah,
so
I
think
you
know
the
my
my
the
the
way
the
enabling
legislation
home
rule
was
intended
was
intended
to
make
that
automatic
so
that
their
we
need
do
nothing.
It
just
happens
automatically,
but
I
I
think
you
know
it.
I
think
your
your
point
that
there's
the
remains
sort
of
an
inconsistency
between
that
and
what
the
current
zoning
says.
So
we
may
need
to
to
change
that
part
of
the
of
the
zoning.
I
think
yeah
somebody
told
me
it
said
section.
P
14
of
the
of
the
bill
goes
into
that
into
detail
about
what
that
is,
but
to
your
point
it
it
will
happen
automatically,
and
it's
based
on
that
combined
index.
I
think
the
bill
also
allows
us
to
add
in
other
factors
in
the
combined
in
index,
and
I
think
council
edward's
proposal
does
bring
in
other
other
factors
and
that
I
think
that's
something
worth
we're
looking
at.
We
we
would
need
to
change
the
definition
of
the
combined
index.
O
P
100
agree
on
that
that
that's
that's
that's
what
we
want
to
it's
it's
it's
one,
less
thing
that
you
have
to
worry
about
and
wonder:
am
I
gonna
forget
it
or
miss
it,
because
this
every
three
years
thing
you
know
was
just
is
not
very
workable
and
it
it
creates
a
much
bigger
jump
than
if
you
did
it
annually.
So
that's!
That's!
It
smooths
out
the
bumps
in
the
road.
O
Right
right
absolutely
and
then
does
the
does
the
authority
or
dnd
or
anyone
have
opinions.
On
this
question
of
of
lowering
the
threshold
from
100
000,
I
mean
certainly
I
and
of
course,
there's
two
aspects
to
that
right.
It's
both
it's
both
lowering
the
threshold
of
what
projects
it
kicks
in
for
and
there's
the
question
about
whether
the
exaction
applies
below
the
threshold.
I
think
that
sam
referenced
that
right
so
that
if
it's
a
200
000
square
foot
building,
it
then
applies
below
my.
O
My
understanding
is
that
it
might
actually
be
easier
to
do
the
first
and
the
second,
because
if
you
do
the
second,
then,
if
we,
if
we
set
the
threshold
to
30
and
then
we
also
required
you
to
pay
the
whole
amount,
then
like
it
was,
it
might
seem
unfair
for
somebody
who
builds
like
a
29
and
doesn't
get
any.
So
I
know
there's
some
issues
around
that,
but
I
wondered
if
brian
or
anybody
could
speak
to
orson
all.
O
H
So
it's
my
understanding
that
we
have
the
authority
to
change
both
the
threshold
and
the
square
footage
that
we
would
count
toward
at
what
point
we
would
start
applying.
So
whether
it's
a
50
000
square
foot
building
and
we
start
at
50
000
or
we
start,
you
know
we
do
all
the
square
footage.
I
think
those
are
both
up
for
discussion.
H
I
think
that
what
we
would
want
to
take
into
account
is
looking
at
you
know,
data
on
what
kinds
of
projects
are
actually
are
those
smaller
projects
and
seeing
whether
they're
actually
becoming.
If
we
want
to
encourage
smaller
development
over
larger
development,
we
may
not
want
to
do
it
on
smaller.
You
know
we
may
want
to
set
our
trigger
based
around
that
notion.
H
I'm
not
sure
what
that
is
also
it's
significantly
easier
for
the
bpga
to
do
enforcement
on
anything
that
is
considered
a
large
project,
so
that
is
at
50
000
square
feet,
so
maybe
50
000
square
feet
would
be
a
place
where
we
would
want
to
start
so
those
are
considerations,
but
it
is
my
understanding
that
we
would
have
the
control
to
be
able
to
set.
You
know,
is
it
all
a
square
footage?
Is
it
a
starting
particular
square
footage,
and
is
it
only
projects
during
this
particular
square
footage
as
well.
O
Great
yeah,
my
instinct,
also,
would
be
that
at
a
minimum
are
large
projects.
You
know
reviews
where
we're
doing
all
of
the
kind
of
board
memo
efp,
stuff
anyways.
It
would
make
a
lot
of
sense
and
then
I'll
I'll
also
just
say
that
I
am
also
supportive
of
raising
the
amount,
so
just
for
the
advocates
out
there.
I
think
I
think
we
could.
O
O
O
Wouldn't
it
wouldn't
be
crazy
for
that
to
be
part
of
the
market
sort
of
conditions
that
you're
considering
as
you
as
you
start
to
build
with
some
with
some
guardrails
around
it.
So
that's
just
my
thought
on
it,
but
I
would
love
to
hear
about
that
and
then
just
some
clarity
on
the
pnf
versus
approvals
versus
building
permit
kind
of.
O
H
G
G
So
that
means
that
any
project
that
will
file
a
pnf
after
february
18th
starts
the
article
80
process
will
be
subject
to
the
higher
linkage
rate,
which
is
1539
in
a
square
foot
and
if
you're
in
the
legislation
accounted
for,
if
you're
already
in
the
review
process,
this
does
not
apply
to
you.
So
if
you're
already
in
the
review
process,
I
mean
it's
you,
it's
you've
got
the
the
1081
and
any
anyone
filing
after
february
18th,
which
is
the
day
that
we
advertise
for
the
zoning
commission.
G
So,
for
example,
we
didn't
want
to
do
letter
of
intent.
We
were,
we
were
very
careful
about
this,
so
you
know
we
wanted
to
be
sure
that,
for
example,
when
we
did
idp,
we
said
you
know
if
you
file
a
letter
for
intent,
you
would
be
accepted
to
the
older
idp
and
we
didn't
get
as
many
kind
of
letter
of
intents
as
we
were
contemplating,
or
we
were
afraid
of
to
be
quite
honest,
but
you
know
learning
the
lesson
from
there.
G
We
actually
said
pnf,
so
we
didn't
think
that
we
were
trying
to
make
sure
that
we
wouldn't
have
a
slew
of
litter
events
between
the
february
11th
board
meeting
and
the
zoning
commission
even,
and
so
we
the
what
we
what
we
have
in
in
in
place
and
it's
in
the
board
memo
is
that
it's
it's
it's.
The
higher
linkage
rate
applies
to
anyone
finding
a
pnf
and
the
probability
of
someone
submitting
a
pnf
in
that
time
period.
O
O
It
says
that
your
linkage
number
is
basically
locked
in
so
I
understand
the
pnf
thing
relates
to
this
update
right,
but
then
now
that
we're
in
this
world,
if
I,
if
I
have
a
board
memo
that
goes
in
now,
and
then
six
months
from
now
we
updated
linkage
again,
like
is,
is
it
always
right?
Now
it's
always
going
to
be
tied
to
the
prior
board
memo.
G
F
G
Yeah-
and
I
think
someone
made
a
point
earlier
about
the
amount
of
value
I'm
I'm
sorry-
I
think
it
was
hillary
and
your
dog
is
adorable
hillary
about
the
the
amount
of
the
value
created
if
a
profit
developer
does
resell
their
project
or
even
value
created
for
a
building.
So
how
do
you
capture
that
value
over
time?
And
it
goes
to
predictability
as
well?
So
I
think
there's
a
group
of
conversation
there
absolutely
yeah.
P
So,
just
to
make
sure
that
you
know
for
folks
are
playing
along
at
home
there.
There
are
a
couple
different
scenarios
that
that
you
know
will
come
into
play
that
the
simplest
one
to
think
about
is
a
a
large
project
review
and
that
not
part
of
a
planned
development
area,
not
part
of
a
pda
master
plan,
but
just
simply
straight
straight
forward.
A
large
project
review
that
dip
rate
gets
locked
in
at
the
filing
of
the
pnf.
P
And
then
I
think
one
of
your
questions
was
you
know
what
happens
if
they
sit
on
that
and
they
come
back
with
a
notice
of
project
change
later,
and
you
cited
a
section
that
allows
the
bpda
board
to
consider
adjusting
the
dip
rate
based
on
a
notice
of
project
change,
and
I
think
that's
the
the
question
you
know
there
is
always
going
to
be.
Is
the
noticeable
project
change?
P
P
When
the
linkage
rate
gets
determined
by
by
project,
you
know
it
may
be
locked
in.
It
is
possible
to
lock
it
in
the
pta
master
plan,
but
generally
like
the
last
couple
of
pda
master
plans,
and
there
there
haven't
been
many-
do
lock
in
a
rate
for
a
certain
period
of
years.
But
after
after
10
years,
when
new
projects
come
along,
it
gets
recalculated
at
the
at
the
current
rate.
So
there
are.
P
O
O
O
A
You
so
we
do
have
some
public
testimony
or
folks
who
are
in
attendance
and
what
I'm
going
to
do
is
just
go
ahead
and
call
out
your
name.
If
you
would
like
to
testify,
I
believe
karen
chen
from
cpa
boston
might
still
be
on,
and
then
I
see
a
charles
flick.
He
might
just
be
here
for
questions,
I'm
just
listening
and
then
I'll
go
further
down
the
list
after
those
two
and
I
see
we
have
markeisha
as
well.
A
R
R
You
know
we
have
over
2000
members,
you
know,
and
many
of
our
members
are
in
need
of
affordable
housing
and
job
training.
I
I
don't
need
to
we
iterate.
You
know
the
importance
of
affordable
housing
and
job
training.
You
know
in
the
past
and
actually
in
the
next
period
and
cpa
want
to.
You
know,
support
what
some
of
the
advocates
have
said
before.
We
think
that
the
linkage
rate
should
be
at
least
24.00.
R
R
You
know
if
you
want
to
live
in
boston,
you
know
to
to
rent
a
two-bedroom
apartment.
You
have
to
make
35-53
to
afford
it
and
for
most
of
our
members
who
who
are
in
you
know
only
making
minimum
wage
when
it
was
12.75.
That
means
that
you
have
to
work
111
hours
a
week.
You
know
to
afford
to
live
here,
and
so
we
need
to
do
both.
You
know.
Affordable
housing
and
up
training
and
cpa
has
been
involved.
You
know
in
actually
several
economic
downturn.
R
You
know
when
government
workers
were
the
industry,
gov
government
indus
industry
was
declining
in
the
80s
and
then
more
recently,
around
2000,
when
the
electronic
manufacturing
industry
was
declining,
and
we
recognized
that,
in
order
for
people
to
be
fully
employed,
we
employed
and
gainfully
employed.
You
know
we
need
to
look
into.
S
Yes,
hi
hello,
hi.
Thank
you
counselor
edward.
I
had
I
want
to
testify.
I
had
a
few
thoughts
I
want
to
piggyback
on
sam
and
karen
part
of
the
the
on
a
coalition
thing
that
we
do
need
more
like
the
threshold
needs
to
be
higher
and
it
needs
to
be
higher
at
a
lower.
You
know,
I
see
a
lot
of
I
live
in
dorchester,
I'm
at
dorchester
native.
I
raise
my
children
in
dorchester
and
I
see
a
lot
of
development
happening
in
dorchester.
S
That's
having
a
negative
impact
on
the
community.
I
wanted
to
I
just
two
things.
Three
things
really,
but
one
of
them
is.
I
want
people
to
realize
that
these
developments
are
going
on
based
on
projections
of
income
based
on
amis
that
are
already
too
high
for
the
area
where
they're
developing
that.
So
that
is
a
big
problem
in
pushing
people
out
and
not
having
people
being
able
to
remain
where
they
are.
But
I
see
a
lot
of
I
heard
they,
mr
baker,
talking
about
that.
S
There
are
like
we
need,
there's
a
recession
and
we
need
to
be
mindful
of
people
coming
out
of
a
recession.
I
just
want
people
to
think
about
that.
It's
never
really
a
recession
for
people
who,
for
for
people
who
have
the
money
to
build
these
projects,
they
they
don't
this.
It's
a
recession
for
the
people
who
need
housing.
It's
a
recession
for
the
people
who
are
being
displaced
because
of
these
buildings,
but
it's
not
a
recession
for
people
who
have
the
money
to
build
these
projects.
S
They're
never
going
to
be
without
money
and
to
say
that
to
raise
this
to
24
is
too
much
for
them
is
in
the
front
to
the
people
that
are
affected
by
this
number.
Two
I
heard
someone
quote
that
the
vacancies
in
these
buildings
are
at
nine
percent.
Is
that
I
want
to
know?
Are
you
all
taking
into
account
like
people
who,
like
corporations
or
billionaires,
who
are
renting
out
apartments,
but
not
using
them,
saving
them
for
when
they
they
want
to
send
people
acros?
Because
I
live
in
dorchester?
S
S
So
I
just
I
want
people
to
really
think
about
like
what
these,
what
what
these
buildings
are
being
built
on,
like
what
is
what
what
is
the
existing
ami
in
boston,
which
all
of
this
goes
down
to
linkage.
It's
all
connected
the
existing
ami
is,
is
already
too
much
for
people
who
live
here
like
I
don't
live
in
in
these
outlying
places.
S
Where
I
make
this
exorbitant
amount
of
money,
nobody
I
know
does,
but
we
are
included
in
those
those
amis
are
included
in
our
area
and
then,
when
you
come
in
and
the
the
linkage
fee
is
low
and
it's
they
don't
have
to
pay
leakage.
Unless
they
build
this
amount,
then
we
we
are
losing
out.
So
you
it's
not
about
saving
billionaires
pockets.
It's
about
saving
our
communities,
they
they
not
they're,
not
going
through
a
recession.
We
are
and
that's
those
are
the
points
that
I
wanted
to
make.
S
A
No
passion
is
beautiful
and
I
appreciate
the
questions
specifically
around
the
vacancy,
so
I
think
it
was
the
bpda
who
brought
up
the
vacancy
rate.
So,
while
she's
answering
that
quick
question
or
we'll
see
if
we
can
get
your
question
answered
about
that,
I
wanted
to
just
know
who
else
is
going
to
speak?
Michael,
you
raised
your
hand.
Are
you
on
charles
glick's
channel.
N
A
A
Okay,
so
you
you,
I
think
you
and
pam
is
pam.
Coke
coker
we'll
bring
her
over
as
well
pam
from
the
municipal
research
bureau
and
I'm
not
sure
if
kate
worrell
is
also
here
for
public
testimony,
but
we
can
bring
her
over
as
well.
So
actually
let
me,
let's
just
let
the
public
go
before
the
bpda
responds
just
to
make
sure
we
get
everyone
through
if
it's
okay,
michael,
if
you
can
be
brief,
then
pam
and
then
kate.
If
she
has
testimony.
N
Okay,
thank
you,
counselor,
thank
you
for
holding
this
hearing
and
congratulations
to
the
council
and
the
city
for
getting
this
home
rule
petition
passed
and
for
considering
an
ordinance
to
implement
it.
The
mayor
gets
credit
for
in
raising
the
fees
I'm
the
organization
I'm
here
representing,
is
the
mass
alliance
of
tenants.
N
We've
been
around
since
1983,
representing
low-income
tenants
that
are
fighting
to
save
their
homes,
but
the
original
idea
for
linkage
came
out
of
the
struggle
around
copley
place
where
advocates
proposed
a
payment
to
offset
the
indirect
displacement
which
was
measured
in
the
copley
place
environmental
impact
statement.
Now
that
the
bppda
is
going
to
be
evaluating
fair
housing
impacts,
that
would
include,
presumably
indirect
displacement.
N
N
We
strongly
believe
that
you
could
charge
a
lot
more
and
it's
not
going
to
discourage
development
in
this
overheated
market.
So
we
support
we're
part
of
the
ctap
coalition.
We
support
the
twenty
four
dollars
and
lowering
the
threshold,
but
this
hearing
has
unveiled
one
loophole
in
the
whole
process,
which
is
what
happens
when
a
development
is
approved.
They
pay
their
linkage
fee
over
seven
years
and
then
they
resell
it
and
the
example
I'll
give
is
101c
port,
which
was
billed
for
150
million.
N
N
N
A
Q
I
T
T
During
this
hearing,
we've
heard
remarks
from
brian
glasscock
we've
heard
remarks
from
tim
davis
and
councillor
bach,
and
a
number
of
others
wanting
to
talk
about
not
only
the
increases
that
have
can
happen
automatically
to
this
program,
but
implementation
of
the
linkage
rate,
the
timing
and
when
those
the
linkage
fees
are
leveraged
on
particular
projects
and
also,
I
want
to
recognize
and
appreciate
councillor
edwards
comma
comment
much
earlier
in
the
hearing
about.
I
believe
it
was
an
intention
for
additional
conversation
around
a
clear
process
for
considering
leakage
updates.
T
So
I
certainly
look
forward
to
some
additional
robust
conversation
about
creating
a
clear
process
for
how
to
consider
linkage
updates
going
forward,
such
as
the
timing
of
updates
and
additional
other
factors
beyond
the
combined
cpi.
Thank
you
for
your
time
and
I
look
forward
to
more
conversation
on
this
issue.
A
I'm
really
trying
to
do
that,
and
but
I
do
know
that
there
was
one
question
about
the
vacancy
rate
of
nine
percent
from
69
and
after
that
question
is
answered,
or
at
least
discussed.
If
we
could
counselors
of
you.
If
you
have
any
concluding
remarks,
I'm
gonna
go
go
through
a
round
and
then
we're
going
to
conclude
so
someone
could
someone
discuss
where
we
showed
maurice
just
excuse
me
question
about
the
vacancy
rate.
A
G
I'm
happy
to
do
that.
This
is
edited
markeisha,
yes,
markeisha!
Thank
you
so
much
for
the
comments.
Markeisha.
It's
really
great
to
hear
from
folks
like
you
and
I
agree,
passion
is,
is
always
appreciated,
and
I
really
appreciate
you
coming
on
today
and
sharing
your
experiences
and
and
your
story.
So
the
the
a
little
bit
of
kind
of
background
on
the
vacancy
rates
that
I
talked
about,
so
the
bpda
research
department
tracks
office
vacancy
rates.
G
G
So
the
daily
vacancy
rate
for
offices-
and
this
is
for
downtown
offices-
is
usually
around
between
six
percent
in
2019
and
it
went
up
to
nine
percent,
so
we're
looking
at
you
know.
We
really
are
tracking
the
vacancy
rates
for
offices
and
and,
like
I
said
it's
mostly
for
downtown
locations,
and
then
we
we
also
track
vacancy
rates
for
housing
and
and
retail.
G
S
G
A
We
are
actually
having
we're
gonna
we're
not
stopping
this
conversation,
so
you'll
be
invited
if
you'd
like
to
come
back
to
the
working
session,
so
we
can
go
on
and
further
and
by
then
either.
You
can
wait
till
then
and
get
the
information
or
you
know,
write
cinahl
and
get
it
directly
right
now,
but
there's
this
is
these
questions
are
reserved
for
continued
conversation
and
there
will
be
answers
at
the
working
session.
A
H
A
D
M
M
Yes
to
all
those
questions
that
you
asked.
Okay,
because
if
we're
not
really
serious
about
this
whole
idea
of
this
recession,
who
is
standing
to
benefit
from
the
backs
of
our
people
right,
so
everybody
should
be,
all
things
should
be
impacted,
not
one
group
over
the
other.
So
I
really
do
appreciate
that
insight
that
you
brought
to
the
conversation
and
hillary
earlier
today.
M
You
were
also
pushing
us
to
really
kind
of
be
more
aggressive
around
this
conversation,
so
I
just
wanted
to
just
give
a
shout
out
to
maha
for
for
your
steadfast
conviction,
specifically
around
the
things
that
are
happening
in
dorchester
umass.
Boston
is
a
great
example.
What
happens
when
we're
not
hyper
village?
So
thank
you
for
that
and
amy
too.
You
know
it's
just
it's
just
great
and
the
administration
and
everybody
else,
but
you
know
and
counselor
edwards.
M
A
O
A
So
I'll
just
quickly
conclude
all
of
those
things
that
you
were
going
to
say
that
you
just
listed
kenzie
is
going
to
say
including
remarks.
I'll
just
add
to
that.
We
have
also
the
study
we
wanted
to
make
sure
there
was
a
time
frame,
beginning
middle
and
end
so
that
the
study
isn't
the
end
counselor
flynn.
I
didn't
know
if
you
wanted
to
say
any
concluding
remarks,
but
I'm
just
concluding
the
the
the
the
hearing,
but
we
have
the
study.
A
We
also
have
the
question
of
resale
and,
if
there's
a
windfall,
if
there's
any
way
to
link
linkage
payments
to
that,
but
other
than
that,
I
think
I
just
want
to
remind
folks.
A
lot
of
people
were
very
much
interested
in
the
idp,
which
is
that
13
at
the
ami
markeisha
brought
it
up.
Counselor
mejia
brought
it
up.
A
Council
braden
brought
it
up
and
we
could
bring
it
all
up
again
on
march
30th,
because
that's
when
we're
going
to
have
the
hearing
specifically
on
idep,
because
that
percentage
and
that
ami
does
need
to
change.
I
don't
think
anyone
doubts
that,
and
so
we
have
that,
and
then
I
just
wanted
to
remind
folks
that
to
thank
to
thank
folks
again
for
participating
for
coming
here
today.
Counselor
flynn,
we're
just
ending,
I
don't
know
if
you
wanted
to
say
your
thank
yous
and
then
we'll.
We
will
conclude.