40B Safe Harbor: Protect People in Group Homes
Donation protected
I need your help. Group home residents are our loved ones and neighbors. Their right to privacy is at risk.
NY Ventures proposed a 40B project in North Reading: They could bypass crucial zoning laws but only IF the town did not meet minimum requirements for affordable and subsidized housing, that is, did not meet “safe harbor” by having a high enough percentage of affordable homes or enough acreage in affordable or subsidized housing.
The town informed the state it met “safe harbor” in accordance with the state's own parameters of this definition, and noted it also had a state-approved affordable housing plan, although NY Ventures’ parcel was not included because it was at an inappropriate location. The case immediately proceeded to the state Housing Appeals Committee (HAC).
When the developer’s progress to break the town’s safe harbor claim hit its first major bump, their lawyer tried to change the rules regarding the safe harbor evaluation process to be more to their advantage– even though it would breach major rights of disabled people, one of them my ward. Instead of accepting the acreage number provided by the state for group homes in town, the developer demanded something no developer or town had ever gotten before: the actual locations of each home itself, and their lawyers issued subpoenas to four state agencies to get the information formally protected by state and federal law.
Because of our unique legal position as a targeted family, I could do something neither the town nor the community group fighting this 40B project could do. I hired a lawyer and directly fought this ugly tactic: We got a letter of support from the Arc of Massachusetts, which understands how every group home resident in the state could be at risk if a precedent is set for other developers to follow. My affidavit gave specifics about the potential harms that come to people, including my loved one, when these residences are identified, which in turn identifies the occupants.
I have already run up over $10,000 in legal bills and costs are rising. There has been no group support, although several friends have graciously given donations.
After we filed our motion and affidavit, the developer received his first negative decision, but still has many options, including a move to court.
Throughout this process, NY Ventures has publicly claimed their proposal would provide a service to people who need homes – a move that would benefit North Reading – even though 40B law only requires a developer to temporarily place some units into less-than-market-rate rental. The town gets no long-term benefit if this complex is built.
The subpoenas to fight the town’s safe harbor status are in place now, although the state agencies are not responding to them – The residents, like my ward, are there because they are so disabled they require 24-hour care and adult assistance whenever they leave their homes. Their need is permanent.
I have had insults hurled at a loved one. I have worried about staying invisible as I visit unwanted group homes in residential neighborhoods. And I have heard the stories of other parents frightened of their children’s futures.
Please help me keep our neighbors and loved ones safe. Please help me keep the process regarding our town’s future as fair as possible under the 40B law.
All funds raised will cover fees for the attorneys I hired to ensure evaluation of the town’s safe harbor status is done according to law and that the rights of all town residents are preserved during this process. I will keep everyone appraised of updates, costs, and legal options as events unfold. Thank you.
Elizabeth Coolidge-Stolz, North Reading resident/ guardian of group home residents
NY Ventures proposed a 40B project in North Reading: They could bypass crucial zoning laws but only IF the town did not meet minimum requirements for affordable and subsidized housing, that is, did not meet “safe harbor” by having a high enough percentage of affordable homes or enough acreage in affordable or subsidized housing.
The town informed the state it met “safe harbor” in accordance with the state's own parameters of this definition, and noted it also had a state-approved affordable housing plan, although NY Ventures’ parcel was not included because it was at an inappropriate location. The case immediately proceeded to the state Housing Appeals Committee (HAC).
When the developer’s progress to break the town’s safe harbor claim hit its first major bump, their lawyer tried to change the rules regarding the safe harbor evaluation process to be more to their advantage– even though it would breach major rights of disabled people, one of them my ward. Instead of accepting the acreage number provided by the state for group homes in town, the developer demanded something no developer or town had ever gotten before: the actual locations of each home itself, and their lawyers issued subpoenas to four state agencies to get the information formally protected by state and federal law.
Because of our unique legal position as a targeted family, I could do something neither the town nor the community group fighting this 40B project could do. I hired a lawyer and directly fought this ugly tactic: We got a letter of support from the Arc of Massachusetts, which understands how every group home resident in the state could be at risk if a precedent is set for other developers to follow. My affidavit gave specifics about the potential harms that come to people, including my loved one, when these residences are identified, which in turn identifies the occupants.
I have already run up over $10,000 in legal bills and costs are rising. There has been no group support, although several friends have graciously given donations.
After we filed our motion and affidavit, the developer received his first negative decision, but still has many options, including a move to court.
Throughout this process, NY Ventures has publicly claimed their proposal would provide a service to people who need homes – a move that would benefit North Reading – even though 40B law only requires a developer to temporarily place some units into less-than-market-rate rental. The town gets no long-term benefit if this complex is built.
The subpoenas to fight the town’s safe harbor status are in place now, although the state agencies are not responding to them – The residents, like my ward, are there because they are so disabled they require 24-hour care and adult assistance whenever they leave their homes. Their need is permanent.
I have had insults hurled at a loved one. I have worried about staying invisible as I visit unwanted group homes in residential neighborhoods. And I have heard the stories of other parents frightened of their children’s futures.
Please help me keep our neighbors and loved ones safe. Please help me keep the process regarding our town’s future as fair as possible under the 40B law.
All funds raised will cover fees for the attorneys I hired to ensure evaluation of the town’s safe harbor status is done according to law and that the rights of all town residents are preserved during this process. I will keep everyone appraised of updates, costs, and legal options as events unfold. Thank you.
Elizabeth Coolidge-Stolz, North Reading resident/ guardian of group home residents
Organizer
Elizabeth C
Organizer
North Reading, MA
