Boston City Council Committee on Ways and Means Chair Councilor Brian Worrell convened a public hearing on Jan. 14, 2025, on docket 0108, a proposed appropriation of $110,000,000 to launch a Housing Accelerator Fund intended to speed housing production by lowering the cost of capital for projects across the city.

The proposal would pair the city’s funds with a state “momentum” fund managed by MassHousing and use public equity and lower-cost senior debt to bridge financing gaps on projects that officials say are otherwise “stuck.” Devon Cork, deputy chief of the Planning Department, told the committee the city’s investment would take “an equity ownership position in private market housing,” offering a lower financial return than private investors to make projects feasible.

Why it matters: City officials say rising construction costs and high interest rates have pushed many otherwise ready projects out of reach. The administration estimates the fund can unlock mixed-income and affordable housing, preserve deeply affordable replacement units at Boston Housing Authority (BHA) developments and support a pilot to restart stalled homeownership construction.

How the fund would work and governance

City officials described a two-part technical structure for the rental side: (1) a public equity stake that would reduce the private-equity share of a development (staff described a target public equity share near 10% of construction cost) and (2) access to a lower-cost Freddie Mac-backed senior loan that would shave senior-debt rates. Reuben Kantor, senior policy adviser in the Planning Department, said the combined changes could turn projects that are “a little off from feasibility to feasible.”

Administration witnesses said the city would partner with MassHousing, which would underwrite projects, sign contracts with developers and manage investments. According to planning staff, MassHousing has existing underwriting and compliance infrastructure and currently manages several billion dollars in public housing investment; the administration said that arrangement reduces the need for the city to build a new bureaucracy to run the fund.

Chief Financial Officer Ashley Grafenberger told the committee the appropriation would be sourced from the city’s unrestricted fund balance (commonly called “free cash”) and described the appropriation as a one-time, nonrecurring use of those funds. Officials said the city expects most investments to be repaid over roughly a 10-year horizon and that the city would be in a preferred equity position so it and the state are repaid before other equity holders.

Bunker Hill / Boston Housing Authority details

Kenzie Bach, administrator of the Boston Housing Authority, said the first planned use of accelerator funds would be to finance Building F, a mixed-income phase of the long-running Bunker Hill redevelopment in Charlestown. Bach described Building F as a 265-unit building that includes about 58 deeply affordable replacement units for existing public housing residents and said Building M, the first new building, has begun occupancy.

Bach and resident leaders stressed resident protections in the redevelopment. Bach said the project includes tri-party agreements with the Charlestown Resident Alliance (CRA) and that residents have a contractual right to return; she and other witnesses said the Uniform Relocation Act governs the relocation process. Councilors and CRA leaders asked that utilities and tenant protections remain in place for assisted households; Bach and other administration witnesses said assisted residents will continue in the same position on utilities and that resident involvement and a community center are explicit elements of the development agreement.

Homeownership pilot and other priorities

Sheila Dillon, chief of housing, described a separate pilot to use a share of the $110 million to provide low-cost construction financing for stalled for-sale homeownership projects. MassHousing’s momentum fund, officials said, cannot invest in homeownership starts, so the city would issue an RFP for a financial institution to underwrite and manage the homeownership pilot. Dillon said the city has already helped more than 800 families buy their first homes under existing programs and that the pilot would be a complementary tool to unlock a small set of stalled for-sale projects.

Project criteria, timing and safeguards

Witnesses said projects seeking accelerator funds must meet basic thresholds (including readiness to start construction within about a year and a requirement that projects include 20% income-restricted units, which the administration described as an inclusionary requirement tied to the state or program eligibility). After those thresholds, officials said projects would be evaluated on added priorities such as diversity of the development team, climate resilience, and positive community impact.

Reuben Kantor said MassHousing is reviewing pilot applications now and expects the state to select two or three pilot projects in the near term, with a larger round of investments in spring. The administration said the city would hold its appropriation in an account and transfer funds to MassHousing about 30 days before a developer needs a capital call. Administration staff told the committee they will prepare a memorandum of understanding and annual reporting to the council to document investments and outcomes.

Public comment and concerns

Charlestown Resident Alliance leaders — including Nancy Martinez (president of the Charlestown Resident Alliance) and Tina Goodnow (executive director of the Charlestown Resident Alliance) — spoke in support of the accelerator funds as necessary to keep the Bunker Hill redevelopment moving. Carla Wert (listed on the Zoom record as vice president of the Charlestown Resident Alliance) said, “There’s just no more Band Aids,” and urged the council to preserve momentum so residents can move into healthier, finished homes.

Other members of the public expressed opposition or concern. Diane Valle and Rosemary Massaro said they opposed using city funds for the project, raised questions about tree loss and local engagement, and asked for detailed public documents and transparent contract terms before any appropriation is made.

Next steps

The hearing was informational; the council did not vote. Administration witnesses told the committee they would return written answers to outstanding questions and provide follow-up materials (including underwriting, MOU terms and an annual reporting plan) as councilors requested. No formal appropriation was adopted during the hearing.

Ending

Councilors of differing perspectives said they supported using city tools to lower the cost of housing construction but asked for clear written guardrails and reporting on how the $110 million would be deployed, how resident protections would be enforced and how the city would prioritize projects that expand affordability and support resident homeownership pathways.