Search arcmass.org

Testimony: Opposition to the removal of C40b incentives

Testimony presented by: John Thomas, Deputy Director, The Arc of Massachusetts
Date:
January 24, 2006
Subject: Housing - C40B


I am John Thomas, Deputy Director of The Arc of Massachusetts. The Arc is the largest disability advocacy organization in the country, and here locally in Massachusetts. I appreciate the ability to speak before the Committee today in support of C40B as an advocate for the disability community.

Being part of the community and living as independently as possible are among the most important values and goals shared by people with disabilities, their families, and advocates.  A home of one’s own – either rented or owned - is the cornerstone of independence for people with disabilities. However, across the Commonwealth, people with intellectual disabilities face a crisis in the availability of decent, safe, affordable, and accessible housing. Today many still live in large congregate facilities or other inappropriate places like state schools. 

The Massachusetts Department of Mental Retardation [DMR], a $1.1 billion agency, serves approximately 33,000 people, yet we know for a fact that statistically, there are between 50,000 and 60,000 people with disabilities that could be found eligible for services by the state. Where are these people living? Many continue to reside with aging parents. We know for a fact that more people are entering the adult human service system than ever before, as younger families are raising children with disabilities with the expectation that they will one day move into the community. This is occurring at a critical time as the state struggles to address the affordable housing needs of the general population, let alone the needs of people with intellectual and other disabilities.

Among the key findings from the most recent report* from the Technical Assistance Collaborative and the Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Housing Task Force are several striking facts that I hope this committee considers when deciding whether to reduce, rather than increase, the number of tools available in the toolbox to address an affordable housing crisis that disproportionately affects people with disabilities:

  • With incomes equal to only 14.1% of the median one-person household income, people with disabilities receiving Supplementary Security Income are among the lowest-income citizens in Massachusetts.
  • Federal housing affordability guidelines state that low-income households should pay no more than 30 percent of monthly income towards housing costs. This long-standing policy recognizes that money must be left over after the rent is paid to cover other basic needs, such as food, clothing, transportation – however, the average rent for a modest one-bedroom unit continued to be higher than the entire monthly income of a person with a disability receiving SSI payments.In Boston, this rent represents 158.8% of a person’s SSI payment.
  • As the average one-bedroom rent in Massachusetts continues to climb well above the amount of income available to the individual, who makes up the difference? Again, the answer is families, for the most part - and, secondly, we the taxpayers foot the remainder of the bill, along with other revenues that flow into state line items that provide reimbursement to those individuals lucky enough to receive a portion of the DMR residential line item. For others who do not meet eligibility guidelines set forth by DMR or DMH, there are few safety nets. People with autism and other related disabilities, such as Asperger’s Syndrome, are currently left to the mercy of generic affordable housing subsidies and supports.

It is against this backdrop that The Arc of Massachusetts, along with many other disability advocacy organizations, urge the committee to consider very strongly the potential impact that removing C40B incentives would have on our constituents.

We know that C40B encourages development of affordable housing, but what about affordable accessible housing for people with disabilities? 

With the new statutory and regulatory language allowing municipalities to count DMR and DMH units towards a community’s affordable housing stock, 40B now provides an even greater incentive for cities and towns to welcome the development of housing that meets the needs of our population. According to figures on file with DMR and DHCD, there are currently 8,013 affordable housing units that Massachusetts towns and cities are able to claim as part of their affordable housing stock. The ability for individuals to continue living in their own communities will become increasingly difficult if incentives are removed by statutory changes to C40B. Yet the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Supreme Court’s recent Olmstead decision, and Massachusetts’ own Olmstead Plan provide powerful obligations for the state to specifically assist those with disabilities who wish to live in their communities.

Municipalities have voiced concern that increased affordable housing creates a fiscal hardship for local budgets – how does the DMR population affect local budgets?

There is concern that tax revenue generated by affordable housing cannot keep pace with the demands that lower-income families place upon schools. This argument has no bearing on the DMR population since these individuals are adults who have aged out of the education system and place no burden on local schools. In addition, DMR consumers utilize relatively few municipal services due to accessibility issues – something we as advocates would like to change, but for purposes of this argument, is yet another reason why cities and towns should welcome the development of C40B-generated DMR housing. 

The Arc of Massachusetts will continue to support C40B and all other housing statutes and regulations that increase affordable housing choices for persons with intellectual disabilities living within the Commonwealth. Thank you very much for allowing me the opportunity to speak today, and if there are ever any questions that you or your colleagues have with regard to housing policy related to persons with disabilities, I welcome your inquiries.


______________________________

* Priced Out, September 2005, Technical Assistance Collaborative, Inc. | Boston, MA
Consortium for Citizens with Disabilities Housing Task Force | Washington, D.C.
Foreword by Senator Jack Reed (D-Rhode Island)