EDAB/EDD and Zoning Changes.
By Arshag A. Mazmanian
Earlier installments of this series focused upon zoning changes. [Links] The Brookline TAB issue of 10/11/07 includes an interesting (and well done) article by staff writer Neal Simpson titled “Town gets creative to keep tax dollars” focusing on a small parcel of adjoining land owned by the Town that may provide it leverage in connection with a proposed development at the Red Cab site on Boylston Street.
The Economic Development Advisory Board (EDAB) and the Economic Development Department (EDD) are on the case. A major concern is to avoid such a large site (enhanced by the Town’s 502 square-foot parcel) falling into the hands (ownership) of a property tax exempt charitable non-profit. Presumably EDAB and EDD together may serve as the Town’s camel-nose under the developer’s tent to avoid ownership in the future by such a property tax exempt non-profit.
Simpson points out:
“Town planners have come to focus more on ‘tax certainty’ as hospitals and other tax exempt organizations in the crowded Longwood Medical area begin eying potential development sites along Route 9 in Brookline….
“Town planners are hoping to mimic recent success with 2-4 Brookline Place, where the town used a similar bargaining chip to negotiate a land lease that guarantees the property will stay on the tax rolls no matter who owns the property.”
The United States and Massachusetts have long adopted public policies that provide certain tax exemption benefits to charitable non-profits that historically have served society’s interests. Brookline’s methods, with the encouragement of EDAB and EDD, may be seen as contrary to or even in violations of such public policies. EDAB and EDD’s missions include encouraging zoning changes to enhance commercial development in Brookline.
Possibly EDAB and EDD have come close to or even crossed the line in their efforts to thwart ownership in Brookline by charitable non-profits. The US Supreme Court has in several decisions expressed concern with the use by municipalities of zoning for purposes having no significant nexus to a parcel’s land use.
Property owners/developers may be so anxious to have their sites up-zoned for commercial development that they may go along with the sale/leaseback gimmick utilized with the B-2 parcel. By doing so, these property owners/developers limit their rights to sell. A property tax exempt charitable non-profit purchaser might be willing to pay a price premium because of its tax exempt benefits that are not available to a for-profit purchaser.
Then there is the matter of the referenced public policies. Perhaps steps may be taken to enforce these policies by someone with standing, including the United States and Massachusetts.
Perhaps the greatest concern to our community is that EDAB and EDD may encourage the over-development of certain sites as part of the bargaining with the property owner/developer for their recommended up-zoning changes. Town Meeting Members must be on guard when they consider zoning changes recommended by EDAB and EDD.
Query: Were TMMs taken in by the B-2 zoning changes several years ago permitting for a Biosafety Level 2 lab? Fool us once, shame on you; fool us twice, shame on us?
