Supreme Court Upholds MBTA Communities Act, Driving Zoning Reforms

January 13, 2025

The Supreme Judicial Court’s recent ruling on the MBTA Communities Act carries significant weight for housing affordability and local zoning laws in Massachusetts. Upholding the constitutionality of the Act, the court underscores the state’s prerogative to enforce compliance while making clear the necessity of procedural corrections. This landmark decision stands as a pivotal measure in addressing Massachusetts’ pressing housing crisis.

The MBTA Communities Act: An Overview

Legislative Intent and Objectives

The MBTA Communities Act, which became law in 2021, requires 177 municipalities that host or are adjacent to MBTA services to zone for multifamily housing by right in at least one district. This legislative measure aims to elevate housing production to satisfy growing demand and to alleviate the surging costs associated with housing across the state. However, the legislation has not been without controversy. The town of Milton has emerged as a notable opponent, challenging the requirements imposed by the Act and focusing attention on the broader implications for local zoning autonomy.

As the state contends with a dire housing shortage, the MBTA Communities Act represents a strategic effort to streamline housing development. The Act specifies that suburban communities, especially those well-served by MBTA transit services, must accommodate multifamily units “by right,” removing traditional zoning obstacles that impede housing projects. This is aimed at facilitating a significant increase in housing supply, thereby potentially tempering the inflated housing market. Yet, as with any mandate that impacts local governance, resistance has been notable, with Milton being a prominent voice in this discourse.

Controversy and Legal Challenges

The MBTA Communities Act has encountered formidable resistance from municipalities obliged to adjust their zoning laws to house more residents. The town of Milton epitomizes the legal struggle, having mounted significant challenges against the zoning requisites stipulated by the Act. This battle between state directives and local discretion underscores the complexities of housing reform efforts in Massachusetts.

One primary point of controversy revolves around local autonomy and governance. Municipalities like Milton have voiced concerns that the Act sidelines local decision-making authority, compelling communities to comply with broad state-level mandates regardless of local nuances. This friction has led to intense legal battles, putting local governments in the difficult position of balancing state-imposed objectives against community-specific needs and preferences. As the legal proceedings unfold, it remains clear that the enforcement of the MBTA Communities Act carries substantial implications for how zoning laws are approached and managed at the local level.

Constitutionality and Enforcement

Supreme Judicial Court’s Ruling

The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court’s ruling to uphold the MBTA Communities Act as constitutional marks a significant legal affirmation of the state’s role in zoning enforcement. By establishing Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s authority to mandate compliance, the court decision breathes life into the Act’s provisions, reinforcing its mandatory character. Campbell has heralded the ruling as a triumph for the Commonwealth, signaling robust state efforts to address the twin challenges of housing affordability and zoning reforms.

This ruling affirms the decision of the state to enforce zoning laws that prioritize housing production, particularly in transit-accessible areas. The court’s affirmation provides the Attorney General with the legal backing to hold municipalities accountable, ensuring that zoning adjustments occur as stipulated by the Act. This landmark decision reflects the state’s unwavering commitment to alleviating the housing crisis through decisive zoning reforms, a critical move to ensure that housing needs are met in densely populated areas. In essence, the court’s ruling lays the groundwork for enhanced regulatory measures aimed at fostering housing growth.

Implications for Non-Compliant Municipalities

The court’s decision puts non-compliant municipalities on notice, emphasizing the compulsory nature of the MBTA Communities Act and outlining the potential consequences of non-adherence. Cities and towns that fail to align with the Act’s requirements now face the prospects of legal action, and potentially, the forfeiture of certain grant funds. This clear mandate underscores the tangible repercussions for municipalities choosing to resist state directives.

The legal ramifications extend beyond theoretical compliance; they translate into concrete financial and operational consequences for municipalities that choose to flout the Act. The threat of losing vital grant funds coupled with the possibility of state-initiated legal proceedings creates a robust incentive for municipalities to review and revise their zoning laws. This pressure is intended to catalyze a broader shift in local policies, pushing more cities and towns to zone for multifamily housing “by right.” Such a transition is crucial in addressing the statewide housing deficit, paving the way for reforms that can sustain the state’s economic and social vitality.

Procedural Shortcomings and Regulatory Compliance

Identification of Procedural Errors

A notable component of the Supreme Judicial Court’s ruling involved pinpointing procedural deficiencies within the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (HLC). The court highlighted that the HLC did not adhere to particular state regulations prescribed under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), thus rendering the initial compliance guidelines “presently unenforceable.” This significant procedural lapse necessitates a thorough revision and proper re-promulgation of guidelines to align with legal standards.

The identification of these procedural errors exposes critical gaps in the initial regulatory approach, underscoring the need for meticulous adherence to established legal norms. The court’s verdict on these procedural oversights mandates that corrective measures be taken to ensure that the guidelines meet state regulation standards. This procedural ambiguity had placed the enforceability of the MBTA Communities Act under scrutiny, delaying its full implementation. Consequently, the onus is now on state agencies to meticulously revise and reissue the guidelines, ensuring they are legally robust and enforceable.

Steps for Corrective Action

In response to the identified procedural missteps, Governor Maura Healey’s administration has promptly committed to drafting new emergency regulations to establish the law’s enforceability. Governor Healey underscored the importance of the court ruling and assured that the new regulatory framework would be set in motion upon filing. This proactive stance seeks to address the procedural gaps and to deliver a comprehensive and legally sound pathway for the proper implementation of the MBTA Communities Act.

The administration’s effort to swiftly draft and file emergency regulations signals a commitment to rectifying procedural flaws to safeguard the Act’s enforceability. These measures aim to plug the regulatory loopholes identified by the court, facilitating a more streamlined and compliance-driven approach. By prioritizing the swift establishment of a robust regulatory framework, the Healey administration emphasizes the critical need to uphold the law’s objectives, thereby promoting a strategic shift in zoning policies to meet the state’s pressing housing demands. This endeavor not only aligns with the court’s directives but also showcases a commitment to addressing the fundamental housing issues plaguing the state.

Implications for Cities and Towns

Pressures to Comply

The ruling exerts significant pressure on a substantial number of the state’s cities and towns, demanding adherence to the zoning requirements mandated by the MBTA Communities Act. Municipalities that have shown reluctance or outright resistance to instituting the necessary zoning changes now face mounting pressure to comply. This judicial endorsement of the Act could drive a broader transformation in local zoning policies, compelling more towns to zone for multifamily housing “by right” to meet legal standards.

With the court’s ruling casting a spotlight on compliance, municipalities are pushed to align their zoning practices with state mandates. The ruling serves as a catalyst for wider adoption of multifamily housing zones, which are critical to increasing housing stock and easing the housing crisis. This transformative pressure could lead to a marked shift in how local governments approach zoning, encouraging more progressive and inclusive policies. The drive for compliance, fueled by the threat of legal action and the potential loss of grant funding, underscores the state’s resolve to ensure that the MBTA Communities Act meets its intended goals.

Case Study: Milton

Milton stands as a prominent case study within this broader legal and regulatory landscape, encapsulating the tensions between state-imposed mandates and local governance. Despite initially complying with the Act through a zoning plan in December 2023, a subsequent townwide referendum in February 2024 nullified this plan, thus rendering Milton non-compliant. This non-compliance prompted Attorney General Andrea Campbell to pursue legal action, emphasizing the state’s commitment to enforce compliance beyond mere financial penalizations.

Milton’s scenario illustrates the complexities and resistances at play when state-level housing mandates intersect with local autonomy. The town’s initial compliance followed by its withdrawal through a referendum showcases the push-and-pull dynamics inherent in such reforms. This legal confrontation highlights the tangible risks communities face when they oppose state-endorsed zoning changes, including the potential forfeiture of grant funds. Milton’s argument that it should not be classified as a “rapid transit community” due to the limited service of the light-rail Mattapan trolley further underscores the nuanced debates surrounding these classifications and regulatory obligations.

Broader Reactions and Support

Endorsements from Key Stakeholders

The Supreme Judicial Court’s decision has elicited substantial support from an array of stakeholders, reflecting a consensus on the necessity for such housing reforms. Tenant advocacy groups, leaders within the real estate sector, and other critical voices have expressed approval of the ruling. Influential organizations, including the Associated Industries of Massachusetts, the Metropolitan Area Planning Council, the Greater Boston Real Estate Board, and Homes for All Massachusetts, have issued statements endorsing the Act’s objectives.

These endorsements underscore a shared recognition of the pressing need to expand the housing stock to meet burgeoning demand and to combat escalating housing costs. The unified support from diverse quarters signifies broad-based agreement on the crucial role of the MBTA Communities Act in addressing the state’s housing challenges. Despite some concerns from local governments about the impact on neighborhood character and the stringent nature of state mandates, the overarching approval suggests that the benefits of zoning reforms outweigh the potential drawbacks.

Addressing Housing Affordability

The collective endorsements from key stakeholders reflect an overarching agreement on the importance of expanding the housing stock to meet the surging demand and to manage cost escalation. These positive receptions are underpinned by the understanding that reforms like the MBTA Communities Act are essential to mitigating the severe housing affordability crisis in Massachusetts. The Act’s focus on zoning for multifamily housing “by right” is seen as a critical step towards a more inclusive and accessible housing market.

While some local governments express concerns about changes to neighborhood character and the perceived imposition of state regulations, the broad endorsement highlights the critical necessity of housing reforms. Stakeholders recognize that without substantial interventions, housing shortages and high costs will continue to pose significant challenges. The MBTA Communities Act, supported by influential groups, represents a forward-thinking approach to creating sustainable solutions for housing affordability, aiming to foster a more equitable and stable housing landscape.

Future Steps and Compliance Deadlines

Recalibration of Compliance Deadlines

The court’s decision necessitates a recalibration of the existing compliance deadlines, alongside the formulation of new regulatory guidelines. With many municipalities either approaching or having already surpassed their original deadlines, forthcoming emergency regulations will establish a revised timeline for compliance. The administration’s proactive approach suggests that these new guidelines will aim to be both detailed and enforceable, providing clarity and structure to municipalities as they work towards meeting the Act’s requirements.

By resetting the compliance deadlines and reissuing guidelines, the administration seeks to address any procedural ambiguities and ensure a smoother path to compliance. This recalibration is essential for bringing municipalities back on track and aligning their zoning practices with state mandates. The emphasis will be on creating comprehensive and actionable guidelines that municipalities can follow, thus mitigating previous procedural hiccups and fostering a more cohesive approach to zoning reforms.

Ensuring Proper Implementation

The Supreme Judicial Court’s recent ruling on the MBTA Communities Act holds considerable significance for housing affordability and local zoning regulations in Massachusetts. By affirming the Act’s constitutionality, the court emphasizes the state’s authority to compel compliance, while also noting the need for procedural improvements. This landmark ruling is a critical step in tackling the housing crisis that Massachusetts is currently facing.

The MBTA Communities Act, aimed at increasing housing opportunities near public transportation hubs, mandates that cities and towns served by the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority zone a portion of their land for multifamily housing. The recent decision by the Supreme Judicial Court ensures that municipalities must adhere to these zoning requirements, reinforcing the state’s efforts to promote denser, more affordable housing close to transit services.

The ruling not only supports the state’s strategy to mitigate the ongoing housing shortage but also addresses the urgent need for more inclusive and equitable zoning laws. Local governments are now obligated to revise their zoning codes to meet the standards outlined by the Act, thereby fostering more accessible and diverse housing options for residents.

By upholding the constitutionality of the MBTA Communities Act, the court has paved the way for more effective and coordinated efforts to address housing challenges. This decision marks a significant stride toward ensuring that affordable housing is within reach for a greater number of Massachusetts residents, ultimately contributing to the state’s long-term economic and social well-being.

Subscribe to our weekly news digest.

Join now and become a part of our fast-growing community.

Invalid Email Address
Thanks for Subscribing!
We'll be sending you our best soon!
Something went wrong, please try again later