By Dawn Aberg
Contributor
6/19/08

(previous)
William Stoughton, who served the Massachusetts Bay Colony as governor, in a 1701 trust document required that the land be used for the benefit of “the poor” of Milton.
Selectmen, named as trustees, are legally obligated to implement the trust’s terms. But how these terms should be construed 300 years later and how the selectmen should now fulfill their responsibilities, emerge as issues today.
Selectmen appointed an advisory committee of residents in February to study options for the land and make recommendations as to its future.
The committee’s seven members are knowledgeable in matters Selectmen figured were important to the evaluation, such as real estate, development, engineering and affordable housing.
At present, rents from two rapidly deteriorating buildings on the site are the town’s only source of Stoughton property income.
To fulfill the trust’s charitable purpose, Selectmen say, they must either maximize the property’s income or use the property directly. The advisory committee hosted the June 3 public meeting to get a sense of public opinion.
Affordable housing advocates (more than half the speakers) argued that housing development at the site falls well within the trust’s charitable purpose.
“We need to bring the starter home concept back to this town,” resident and Massachusetts Affordable Housing Alliance Director Tom Callahan said, insisting that, “We can do this right.”
Milton firefighter Jack Grant noted that affordable housing on the property would “allow town workers to live in town.”
One Milton schoolteacher and 15-year resident said that she would not be able to remain in town after her divorce. “I am the face of affordable housing,” the woman declared.
Like a refrain, other speakers repeated verbatim that phrase throughout the evening: “I am the face of affordable housing.” They included a clinical psychologist who had chosen a lower-paying public sector job, as well as a fourth-generation Milton resident who could no longer handle local real estate prices.
Rev. Jeff Johnson, pastor of First Congregational Church, said that once he retired, he wouldn’t be able to afford to stay in Milton.
“Are you worried about the kind of people moving in?” he asked the committee. “Well, it’s me.”
Affordable housing opponents say development would not satisfy the trust’s terms.
“‘Ye poore’ had a specific meaning” in the 18th century, argued town meeting member Charlie Collins. “Low or moderate income is not synonymous with ‘ye poore.’”
Martin DeMatteo rose to complain that the trust should take care of “the poor of Milton, not the poor of somewhere else. This will cost the town money.”
Beyond the parsing of “poor,” Bob Sweeney, co-chair of the advisory committee, argued that affordable housing was the “wrong use” for the land.
Sweeney had sprung from his seat on the dais to the speaker’s podium directly after helping to open the meeting. Sweeney, also president of the homeowners’ association for the Indian Cliffs development that abuts the Stoughton property, declared that affordable housing on the site would negatively impact “safety, the quality of life, and our property values.”
At the end of the meeting, committee member Julie Creamer made a point of telling everyone that Sweeney was “not the only voice on the committee.” Creamer said she works for an affordable housing developer.
Other speakers took umbrage at what they termed as “code words” being used in the housing debate. Words like “safety” and “outsiders,” they claimed, were in fact thinly-veiled comments on race and class.
“It is a matter of what justice looks like,” said the Rev. Ranjit Mathews, assistant rector of St. Michael’s Episcopal Church.
Forty-year resident Jeff Stone noted that diversity was key to Money magazine’s decision to rank Milton as the seventh most desirable place to live in the United States. “We have cared about diversity since 1701,” he said.
Beyond the affordable housing issue, several speakers spoke on behalf of community-supported agriculture (CSA), and farm uses for the property.
Judy Lieberman of Brookwood Community Farm pointed out that preserving at least part of the Stoughton property for such use could serve the community through educational programs and revenue possibilities, as well as directly help “the poor” via donations to food banks.
Others argued for historical preservation of the property’s unique “character.”
Still others suggested a thoughtful integration of all the proposals for the site.
David Price, a non-profit developer, described his vision of mixed-income housing that would serve first-time homeowners as well as town workers and even low-income residents. By incorporating existing structures into the plan, historic preservation concerns could be addressed. And community farming could be included, as well, especially on those parts of the site where building would not be feasible.
Reflecting later on the well-attended meeting, Town Administrator Kevin Mearn pointed out that a report from the advisory committee is many months away. And that report, when it comes, will be just the beginning of a long process.
After Selectmen make their choice, “there will be public hearings on the choice,” he said. “And then it has to go to the attorney general and the courts for approval.”