Stop Abusing Our Trust
A commentary by William C. Shelton

Will city government stop wasting its time, our money, and the city’s future with shabby planning, back-room deals, and illegal zoning?

In August, 1999, 300 Somerville citizens attended the Assembly Square Mall developers‚Äô presentation of their plans to build big-box retail stores.  Every single attendee who spoke rejected those plans. 

The emerging consensus was that Assembly Square, developed as an office-based T-reliant urban district, could provide $30 million in net new tax revenues, 30,000 jobs, and 30 acres in usable open space.  However, the city administration and its Planning Board violated the law they are charged to enforce by permitting those developers to build a giant new Home Depot there.

  In 2001, the city administration and its Redevelopment Authority favored the same developers by giving them exclusive control of Yard 21‚Äôs nine acres, while not requiring them to buy the land until 2009.  Today, the city receives no tax revenue, while it pays the property‚Äôs carrying costs.  To achieve this, city officials rejected developers who had committed to pay twice as much for the land, create twice as much new tax revenue and 50% more jobs, give the city a new performing arts center, bring an Orange Line station, and begin construction immediately.

  In January 2003, the Massachusetts Superior Court revoked the Home Depot permit. The judge wrote that city officials had bent the law to accommodate the developers rather than requiring the developers to obey the law.

  Meanwhile, these developers decided that they could make much more money if they dumped Home Depot in favor of a big-box strip mall. So the mayor bullied Home Depot into letting the developers off the hook.  He hired a law firm whose partners had contributed heavily to his campaign.  He directed them to draft legislation that gutted Assembly Square‚Äôs zoning and health protections. 

  Citizens submitted solid evidence showing why this legislation was unlawful and harmful to the city.  A majority of Aldermen never read the evidence, and only Aldermen Pero, Provost and White voted against it.  The hundreds of thousands that the law firm received in off-the-budget federal funds were supposed to support low- and moderate-income residents.

  Last week, the Court found that this legislation was illegal. For almost seven years now, city officials have flaunted the law so they can enable favored developers to build harmful projects, while preventing others from building what Somerville most needs. 

  All of the stated rationalizations for this pattern of lawlessness‚Äîthat tax revenues from big boxes will help our fiscal crisis; that there is no market for high-density office development; that K-Mart‚Äôs lease prevented such development‚Äîhave proven to be false.

  Instead of the strip-mall providing tax relief, homeowners are subsidizing the big boxes.  The increase in tax revenues that came from mall renovation and re-tenanting is less than the new costs the city must now pay.  Meanwhile, Cambridge‚Äôs University Park, about the same size as the mall site, brings in $15 million in taxes per year.

  Several high-density office developers were very much interested in Assembly Square. In fact, city officials would not delay a vote on the illegal Assembly Square rezoning long enough for negotiations to conclude between University Park‚Äôs developer, Forest City, and the mall owners.

  The developers‚Äô high-priced PR consultants assessed Somerville voters.  They advised their clients and city officials to portray activists who insisted on the rule of law as well-to-do elitists and environmentalist tree-huggers. Many Somervillians believed this, while, the real elitists left town after making $30 million in profit without having built a thing.

  Assembly Square remains the best large-scale development site left in Greater Boston.  Its $6 billion in publicly-paid-for infrastructure is only bettered by Boston‚Äôs financial district.

  Somerville citizens are still willing to donate much more development talent and experience than all city-hall‚Äôs highly-paid consultants collectively possess.  The city‚Äôs administration can work with its citizens to create a realistic Assembly Square master plan that will solve the city‚Äôs fiscal crisis, create an entry-level-to-professional spectrum of job opportunities, and be an extraordinary asset to its families.  Or, it can delay, appeal the Court‚Äôs decision, re-jigger another tortuous zoning amendment, and continue to promote deals that are harmful to its citizens.