Stay Focused On Core Responsibilities

I was surprised to read that Norwood is considering programs under which the Town, or a partner organization, would acquire, renovate, and resell homes to low- and moderate-income households. Affordable housing is an important issue, but I question whether buying, renovating, and reselling residential properties is an appropriate function of municipal government. Private developers, nonprofit organizations, banks, and state housing agencies are already engaged in this work and are generally far better equipped to manage the financial, legal, and operational complexities involved. At a time when Town officials are warning of structural budget challenges, seeking Proposition 2½ overrides, and discussing the possibility of additional overrides in the future, it is difficult to understand why Norwood would consider taking on responsibilities that traditionally belong outside local government. The past two Town Meetings should have made one thing abundantly clear: Norwood is struggling to fund its core municipal responsibilities. Residents have been told that additional tax revenue is needed simply to maintain services and meet existing obligations. If that is the case, then the Town’s focus should be on public safety, schools, roads, infrastructure, and other essential municipal functions – not purchasing and rehabilitating residential properties. What makes this proposal particularly difficult to understand is its timing. In just a few weeks, Norwood voters will decide whether to approve a Proposition 2½ override that Town officials have proposed to fund additional public safety personnel, equipment, and related expenditures. At the very same time, residents are being asked to consider new programs that could place the Town in the business of acquiring, renovating, and reselling residential properties. Before expanding the scope of municipal government, voters may reasonably ask whether the Town should first demonstrate that it can meet its existing obligations within its current means. Taxpayer-funded housing programs also expose the Town to significant financial risks. Property acquisition costs, renovation expenses, carrying costs, legal issues, market fluctuations, and administrative oversight all require money and resources. If projects fail to meet expectations or costs exceed projections, taxpayers ultimately bear the burden. Norwood has already demonstrated a willingness to spend millions of dollars acquiring property without a clearly defined long-term plan. Last fall, Town leadership unanimously recommended spending approximately $9 million to purchase the Cofsky Farm properties despite concerns raised by many residents and despite the recommendation of the Finance Commission. Six months later, the Town is still studying what should ultimately be done with those properties. The proposal also suggests that Community Preservation Act (CPA) funds could be used to support such efforts. To be clear, community housing is one of the four purposes authorized under the CPA, alongside historic preservation, open space, and recreation. The issue is not whether CPA funds may legally be used for housing. The issue is whether using those funds to acquire, renovate, and resell residential properties is the wisest use of limited public resources. There is a meaningful difference between supporting community housing and having the Town, or entities acting on its behalf, actively participate in the housing market. Property acquisition, rehabilitation, financing, resale administration, deed restrictions, and long-term compliance monitoring create ongoing obligations and risks that extend well beyond traditional municipal responsibilities. Before creating new housing acquisition programs, Town officials should first demonstrate how they intend to pay for existing municipal obligations without repeatedly asking taxpayers for overrides. Affordable housing is a challenge that deserves thoughtful attention, but Norwood cannot solve every social and economic issue facing society, nor should it attempt to assume roles better suited to private enterprise, nonprofit organizations, lenders, and state housing agencies. The Town’s primary responsibility is to provide essential municipal services in a fiscally responsible manner. Until Norwood can fully fund its existing obligations without seeking additional tax increases, it should remain focused on those core responsibilities rather than venturing into the housing development and real estate business. Steve Konetchy District 4 Town Meeting Member

Advertisement