It’s no surprise to anyone that there is a long-term workforce housing crisis in Portland. Folks who work here cannot afford to live here.

That is bad for the workers who are forced to spend time and money on their daily commute and parking. It’s bad for the climate. It’s bad for the city, which loses out on the participation of those workers in the broad range of cultural and civic activities the city offers.

The persistent increase in housing costs is a trend in cities across Maine, and in most of the country for that matter. But decisions made by the city – Portland City Council, the planning board, the planning department – have continued to exacerbate the crisis by failing to protect the interests of working individuals and families. While there is no single “fix” available, there are a number of actions that the city could take to address the housing crisis.

Broadly speaking, the action plan should have two parts: preserving the existing housing stock that serves (or could serve) as long-term workforce housing; and creating new units to add to the existing supply. Preservation of housing offers the benefits of being less expensive and quicker to implement, and carries a much lower environmental load. The creation of new units is more complicated, and will require a longer-term strategy to address siting, zoning, financing and management issues. But it would offer an opportunity to directly target working individuals and families, and could add to the supply over time.

Preservation efforts should start with protecting the existing affordable units in Munjoy South and numerous 2-4-unit buildings found throughout the city to ensure that they remain available for long-term rentals. There were more than 800 registered short-term rentals in the city in 2022, approximately half of which are mainland, non-owner occupied units. Each of those units represents the loss of one potential long-term housing unit, which could be workforce housing.

The city’s recent revaluation process dealt a significant blow to workforce housing by dramatically raising property taxes on residential units in peninsula neighborhoods. The increase was particularly devastating to rental housing in our neighborhood, which saw an average rise of 40% in tax bills for residential units, almost three times the increase for commercial properties. Those tax increases inevitably lead to rent increases. The city needs to mitigate the impact of the tax increase by providing rebates or subsidies to landlords who provide long-term workforce housing.

The creation of new long-term workforce housing will require even more persistence and creativity, but there are things that the city can do to encourage healthy development. It could use the zoning code to incentivize development of workforce housing on and off the peninsula. It could remove the “opt out” clause that allows developers to avoid having to include workforce housing in their projects.

The city could lease rather than sell city-owned property to developers willing to provide long-term workforce housing. Sale of city-owned property could be limited to limited-equity co-ops or similar organizations. The city could impose a “vacancy fee” on apartment owners who do not reside in their units year-round; again, those units are effectively not on the market for workers and their families. The city could use zoning and tax relief to incentivize the development of long-term workforce housing off-peninsula, siting them near public transportation. Finally, the city could incentivize development of low income and workforce housing on the peninsula.

The Munjoy Hill Neighborhood Organization has long been supportive of any effort to preserve or develop real long-term workforce housing on Munjoy Hill and elsewhere in Portland. Enough housing for people of all income levels is critical for the preservation of a healthy, diverse and livable city.

« Previous

Letter to the editor: Shed some light on Baxter Boulevard

Next »

Commentary: Save Maine’s veterans from suicide by forging greater connections