City Council Votes Against Inclusionary Zoning Ordinance

Believing that an inclusionary zoning proposal would not help provide “real affordable housing opportunities” to residents, the City Council voted against establishing an inclusionary zoning ordinance in the city at its meeting Monday night.

The Zoning Sub-Committee, under the direction of Chair Patrick Keefe, the Ward 4 councillor, began the meeting by opening the floor to questions for the city’s Chief Innovation and Data Management Officer, Reuben Kantor.

Before the questions began, however, Councillor-at-Large Dan Rizzo said bluntly, “In the interest of full disclosure, I am completely against it [inclusionary zoning] for several reasons. I could not be any more against this than I am. I plan on voting against it.”

Ward 6 Councillor Richard Serino agreed with Rizzo’s ardent opposition to the proposal. “I just don’t think this is what we need in Revere right now.”

Council President Gerry Visconti also agreed with Rizzo’s assessment of the proposed ordinance.

“My colleague has really pointed out the obvious and really the negative impacts that this is going to have in our city,” said Visconti.

Ward 2 Councillor Ira Novoselsky said he would like to see more affordable housing units in the city. “But in this case, I have a problem with the way it’s written, with the numbers themselves.”

 Ward 1 Councillor Joanne McKenna also expressed her opposition. “If it was written differently, I might be [in favor of it], but it’s not.”

Keefe then commenced a series of questions for Kantor and Alexis Smith of the Metropolitan Area Planning Council (MAPC), who with Kantor provided statistical data that inclusionary zoning has been successful in other communities.

 From the outset of his questioning, Keefe demonstrated that he had done a remarkable amount of research on inclusionary zoning and his distaste for the proposal was evident.

Keefe further illuminated on his opposition to the proposal in an interview following the meeting.

“I truly didn’t believe this inclusionary zoning ordinance would help in offering real affordability to the residents in our city,” said Keefe. “More recently, we have seen these developments only offer a benefit to someone being pushed out of Boston. “I felt it takes too much control away from the neighborhoods it will ultimately impact. As a city, I believe we can reassess and come back with a better plan that serves our residents’ true needs. Revere’s developmental track has had good guidance up to now, and in no way are we being obstructionist, but we also need to be true to some over-congestion concerns and our ability to serve our current residents’ needs,” concluded Keefe.