A major point of interest was the Boston Housing Authority’s plan to construct additional Faircloth units, with the aim of remedying the fact that no net new public housing units have been built in the last 40 years. The meeting explored various financing options, including the success of the Housing Production Fund in Montgomery County, which provides short-term loans for mixed-income projects. This fund has been crucial in increasing the number of affordable housing units without relying on federal subsidies, inspiring questions about its applicability in Boston.

The participants discussed the financial structures for mixed-income housing, highlighting the significant role of public investments in covering construction loans and managing development risks. The Montgomery County and Vienna models were cited as reference points. The potential for a similar revolving fund in Boston was discussed, which could subsidize moderate-income rents and potentially enable the city to intervene in stalled development projects.

The debate included the need for publicly supported middle-income housing and the role of public vs. private ownership in safeguarding the rights of low-income individuals. The possibility of utilizing the city’s borrowing capacity to finance housing projects was also a point of discussion, alongside the importance of maintaining quality across all income brackets in housing construction and maintenance.

The council also talked about the potential of workforce development housing for municipal employees. There was a consensus on the importance of developing affordable housing on public land with city funds to maintain affordability and prevent property sales. The idea of using the city’s borrowing authority for such projects was discussed, as was ensuring adherence to fair housing rules.

As the meeting unfolded, the participants addressed the financial challenges of expanding the public housing inventory and the need for federal support in housing production. The conversation underscored the need for public financing and targeted support for income groups, with a comparison to Singapore’s approach which illustrated the potential benefits of a federal-level focus on housing security.

The potential for a mixed-income housing model to serve as a laboratory for innovative housing policies, including rent stabilization and just-cause evictions, was embraced with excitement. The idea of a momentum fund at the state level to support affordable housing initiatives was mentioned, highlighting the need for comprehensive approaches to housing security and the economic benefits that could ensue.