Nine Massachusetts Towns Sued for Violating MBTA Communities Law
In a major legal confrontation, Attorney General Andrea Campbell has initiated lawsuits against nine Massachusetts towns—Dracut, East Bridgewater, Halifax, Holden, Marblehead, Middleton, Tewksbury, Wilmington, and Winthrop—for failing to comply with the MBTA Communities Law. This law, enacted in 2021 during former Governor Charlie Baker’s administration, mandates municipalities served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) to zone for multi-family housing near public transit. Campbell’s actions underscore a critical urgency amidst a widening housing crisis that has left many residents grappling with affordability issues. “While bringing a lawsuit is never my first choice, compliance with this law is mandatory,” stated Campbell, highlighting the necessity of action in the face of a growing housing shortage.
Understanding the MBTA Communities Law
The MBTA Communities Law aims to address Massachusetts’s pressing housing affordability issues. While 165 out of the 177 designated MBTA Communities have complied, the inaction from the towns involved in the lawsuits has raised significant concerns. Campbell warns that the legal strategy employed serves as a tactical hedge against future noncompliance while pushing these towns to face the realities of housing demand. The law, credited with initiating plans for 7,000 new homes, has stirred debate among local residents, some of whom argue that their towns simply do not have enough space to accommodate additional housing.
Legal Repercussions and Stakeholder Reactions
The lawsuit’s implications are far-reaching, prompting a rift among stakeholders in the affected towns. For instance, Holden’s Town Manager Peter Lukes expressed that the lawsuit poses “little concern” as the town plans to discuss compliance at an upcoming special town meeting. In contrast, East Bridgewater’s legal partner, John Clifford, emphasized that they are making good faith efforts to comply despite previous failures at town meetings. These differing responses reflect a complex web of priorities and attitudes towards housing policy and legal obligations.
- Residents: Concerned about local density and infrastructure.
- Town Officials: Split between compliance efforts and pushback against the law.
- Attorney General’s Office: Actively enforcing compliance with strategic lawsuits.
| Stakeholder | Before (Current Situation) | After (Projected Compliance) |
|---|---|---|
| Residents | Struggling with housing shortages and rising costs. | Potential access to more affordable housing options. |
| Town Officials | Facing lawsuits and community dissent. | Maybe working toward compliance with the law. |
| Attorney General | Initiating lawsuits to enforce compliance. | Achieving broader compliance across Massachusetts. |
The Broader Context and Ripple Effects
As the Massachusetts housing crisis escalates, this legal action reflects a broader national tendency towards stringent housing regulations aimed at increasing accessibility. Similar trends are observed across major urban centers in the US, UK, CA, and AU, where governments are compelled to address chronic affordability issues that have emerged in response to shifting economic landscapes and population growth. These Massachusetts lawsuits may well set a precedent that influences zoning laws nationwide, particularly in communities grappling with similar pressures.
Projected Outcomes
As the legal process unfolds, several key developments should be monitored:
- Potential for increased public hearings and community engagement around zoning discussions in the affected towns.
- Possibility that other non-compliant towns may face legal action, prompting a statewide compliance rush.
- Continued debates and community mobilizations surrounding the implications of increased multi-family housing, influencing future housing policy reform.
