Yes To Question 2

QUESTION 2 is poorly worded, confusing, and controversial, but it nevertheless deserves support.

If approved in the non-binding referendum and then passed into law by the city council, the law proposed in Question 2 would keep Harvard Real Estate Inc. from selling off rent-controlled two and three unit houses according to its current policy. This practice leads indirectly, and some cases directly, to the displacement of current tenants, to an increase in rents, and ultimately to a decrease in affordable housing in Cambridge.

When one vacancy occurs in its multi-tenant houses, Harvard has been offering them for sale first to the faculty, then to the current tenants, and finally to the general public. However, because the houses are offered at speculative prices, they are largely innaccessible to faculty and tenants. Only three of the ten houses sold to date were purchased by faculty members; moreover, one already owns another house and another resold the property almost immediately at a substantial profit.

Even when the sales do not lead to direct eviction of current tenants by the new owner, the prices at which the University has offered these houses are so high that purchasers have to demand significantly higher rents, forcing current tenants to move elsewhere. Because owner-occupied houses with rental units are exempt from the city's rent control laws, tenants are left unprotected. As Harvard sells off these houses, occupants will be forced out.

It would clearly be unfair to prohibit Harvard from selling of its property in some way or another. It is also unfair and unconscionable for Harvard to displace moderate income tenants by offering their houses for sale at speculative prices that most of them simply cannot afford. The law proposed in Question 2 would force Harvard to find an equitable way to sell its rent-controlled multi-unit housing--perhaps by cooperating with the city in arranging sales that are affordable to the buildings' current tenants.

At issue is whether Harvard is more concerned about profits than about the effect of its actions on the community. The cost to Harvard of finding a reasonable solution to this problem would be relatively small compared to the potentially devestating impact of its sales on tenants. Ten houses have been sold; 20 more are about to be put on the market. These 20 houses represent almost 100 units of affordable housing. They are home for many people.

Harvard's tenants have been lobbying the University for two years in hopes of working out a compromise. Harvard has not been interested. Voting yes on Question 2 will send Harvard Real Estate a message it cannot ignore.