The state senate unanimously approved a $1.35 billion housing bond bill late last week as community-based developers pushed lawmakers to spend more on foreclosure prevention counseling and housing.
The five-year bond bill includes funding that developers rely on to create and preserve housing for lower-income families.
Leaders of community development corporations from throughout Massachusetts were at the State House last Thursday to lobby legislators to pass the measure and to include $2 million for foreclosure prevention counseling and nearly $2.3 million for small-business grants in the state budget.
The money has been included in Gov. Deval Patrick’s budget.
Patrick, speaking to the assembled CDC members, asked them to push legislators to close corporate tax loopholes and lower the corporate tax rate. Patrick has proposed gradually reducing the state’s corporate tax rate from 9.5 percent to 8.3 percent. The tax changes would generate an estimated $279 million fiscal year 2009, according to the governor’s office.
Patrick said his proposal would close tax loopholes that benefit large companies that have “been shifting their wealth outside of Massachusetts in order to avoid paying their fair share.”
“That must end and will end in this legislative session,” Patrick said to applause.
CDCs also want Patrick to boost the annual housing bond cap to $200 million from $170 million.
Joseph Kriesberg, president of the Massachusetts Association of Community Development Corporations, told Banker & Tradesman that CDCs will continue to push for legislation to protect so-called expiring-use properties. Expiring-use apartments were privately built using time-limited federal and state subsidies. The properties include affordable apartments. But once the subsidized mortgages are paid off, the owners have the option of increasing rents.
Sen. Susan Tucker, D-Andover, has filed a bill that would give cities and towns the right to purchase such properties before they convert to market-rate units. But the legislation is facing stiff opposition from the real estate industry.
“We’ve been talking to the industry and various intermediaries to see if we can reach a common ground,” said Kriesberg, who added that the two sides thus far haven’t been able to reach an agreement.