2 days ago
Judge throws out ‘unfunded mandate' lawsuits over MBTA Communities Act
Multiple lawsuits against the state filed by towns trying to avoid following the MBTA Communities Act were dismissed by a judge Friday.
Nine towns — Duxbury, Hamilton, Hanson, Holden, Marshfield, Middleton, Wenham, Weston and Wrentham — filed lawsuits earlier this year after the state Division of Local Mandates determined the law was an 'unfunded mandate.'
The cases were the latest in a history of challenges to the 2021 law, which requires towns and cities served by the MBTA to update their zoning to allow more multifamily housing.
'We are pleased the courts have again affirmed the intent of the MBTA Communities Law, and we look forward to working with the remaining communities to complete their zoning changes,' Housing and Livable Communities Secretary Ed Augustus said in a statement. 'Massachusetts' housing shortage has led to unaffordable prices and rising rents, but the MBTA Communities Law is working to deliver new housing where it's needed most and to bring down the cost of housing for all residents.'
The MBTA Communities Act requires 177 cities and towns served by the MBTA to create at least one zoning district where multifamily housing is allowed by right.
The goal of the law was to reduce barriers to new housing development and relieve pressure on the expensive local housing market, though no housing is guaranteed or required to be built.
In a January ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the law as constitutional and mandatory, though the court said the compliance guidelines had not gone through the correct legal process and were, therefore, unenforceable.
Since then, the state has released new, emergency guidelines, giving noncompliant towns until July 14 to comply.
Under the Local Mandate Law, since 1980, any state law or regulation that would impose more than 'incidental administration expenses' on local governments must either be fully funded by the state or be conditional on local acceptance of the rule.
In October, the Wrentham Select Board requested the Division of Local Mandates determine whether the MBTA Communities Act violated this law. In February, DLM Director Jana DiNatale confirmed that she believed it did.
She wrote in a letter to the town's Select Board that grants the state has offered towns to help them develop new zoning and accommodate new housing development showed that the law did impose additional costs, but did not fully fund its local implementation.
However, the DLM determination, unlike the January Supreme Judicial Court ruling, did not immediately make the law unenforceable.
In his Friday decision, Super Court Judge Mark Gildea wrote that he disagreed that any of the towns had demonstrated any direct costs associated with following the law. The nine towns had listed anticipated impacts to infrastructure, public safety and other municipal services related to new housing development, but Gildea said these were speculative and indirectly, not directly, related.
'The Municipalities have neither pled specific costs for anticipated infrastructure costs, nor provided any specific timeline for anticipated construction projects,' he wrote. 'Instead, the only allegations and averments before the court are generalized comments about large-scale issues they foresee.'
Last week, the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities announced that 133 cities and towns, or about 75% of those affected by the MBTA Communities Act, had passed new zoning meant to comply with the regulations.
Zoning changes under MBTA Communities Act spurs 3K new houses - so far
Middleborough sues state over MBTA Communities: 'One size does not fit all'
Mass. AG Campbell says 'unfunded mandate' determination won't stop MBTA Communities
Read the original article on MassLive.
