A group of 11 Winthrop residents today sued the state to block a requirement the town rezone land to allow some denser residential development, saying it will mean a "catastrophic impact" both by overburdening town's services and by setting up the potential for a literal disaster in a town only barely connected to the rest of the state, by just two roads.
The suit, filed in Suffolk Superior Court, claims the rezoning requirement for communities served by the MBTA, and enacted when Charlie Baker was governor, is an illegal "unfunded mandate," based on a determination last month to that effect by State Auditor Diana DiZoglio.
The Town will incur substantial costs to comply with the mandate, including but not limited to infrastructure improvements, public safety services, and educational services.
In addition to substantial indirect costs, there are also a bevy of expensive costs and charges the Town will occur to implement the law. In addition to stress upon the Town’s zoning and land planning resources, the Town must revise its extensive public safety plans. The Town must now consider its public safety commitments for approximately 3700 people, potentially, on top of an existing population of little more than 18,000. The Town must reconsider its evacuation plans, considering it is a town which only has two access points. The Town must consider how much additional police and fire protection to provide, including both the personnel cost in hiring more police officers and firefighters and the necessary equipment, such as fire engines and police cars.
The suit also points to the righteous wrath of an outraged Winthrop citizenry:
The Plaintiffs’ advocacy has been inexorable, to the extent that opposing political figures have resorted to invective and personal attacks. Some of the Plaintiffs are also running recall campaigns against those public officials supporting §3A implementation.
The suit seeks a judicial order declaring the rezoning requirement an unfunded state mandate Winthrop can ignore and ordering state Attorney General Andrea Campbell, who has vowed action against recalcitrant towns in a state beset by a housing crisis - including the suspension of state aid - to knock it off.
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Linkage Fees
By BostonDog
Mon, 03/17/2025 - 4:25pm
Towns can charge a one-time fee separate from permits and taxes which is intended to cover the additional cost of services the project will require. These are called linkage fees. This isn't new or uncommon so the argument that it's an unfunded mandate is invalid.
If a town really doesn't want to allow development, there's still a number of ways to block it. Through a combination of high linkage fees and requirements for expensive-to-provide things like affordable units and complex design parameters they can ensure it's too expensive to actually build dense housing.
I find it galling how
By Frelmont
Mon, 03/17/2025 - 4:50pm
I find it galling how defenders and proponents of The Act say ~ “It’s just zoning and we’re not forcing towns to build,” as if it’s not foreclosing on the affected towns’ autonomy and local democratic process (some say the democratic process is the problem,) and as if zoning isn’t meant to give towns some power against market forces to preserve itself from the steam roller of growth.
There is no near limit to the unfoundedness of the mandate, in spite of the nominal remedies.
Is there a remedy to the SJC’s bassackwards decision they arrived at by reading the law by candlelight through a mirror? Literally reasoned the intent from the wrong end.
Autonomy
By blues_lead
Mon, 03/17/2025 - 5:09pm
Towns don't have autonomy. Their authority derives from the sovereignty of the state. Towns only have zoning powers at all because the state specifically granted them those powers.
In battling the market forces, the causalities are everyone who has to pay for housing. That's anyone who's renting, and anyone who is looking to buy. The state has decided to try to protect its citizens from this battle by making it easier to build housing, because towns were (are) screwing over most residents and would-be residents through making it illegal to build housing.
MBTA services
By Mark-
Mon, 03/17/2025 - 5:47pm
Winthrop benefits nicely from MBTA services, including 19 hour/day Blue Line service less than 20 minutes away with their frequent bus connections. They should be following the same housing policies as other MBTA communities. I'm not convinced that every town that's one or two towns away from a commuter rail stop should have the same policies imposed. If your town doesn't have any transit (like Holden or Princeton), the car-free goals of transit-oriented housing will not work, and it should not be imposed in those cases. But Winthrop is not one of those places.
11 people....?
By Anonymous
Mon, 03/17/2025 - 7:05pm
11 people....?
10-citizen lawsuits
By adamg
Mon, 03/17/2025 - 11:34pm
There's something special about a group of ten citizens forming a minyan, um, filing a lawsuit in Massachusetts - there's a state law that confers on a group of ten people the right to sue to try to enforce a state law (in this case, the unfunded-mandate provision of Prop. 2 1/2) in a way that only nine people would not be allowed to.
In fact, if you look at the complaint (linked at the bottom of the story), you'll notice it starts "The Town of Winthrop ('Winthrop' or 'the Town'), by and through its verified taxpayers (collectively 'Plaintiffs') ..."
Maybe the Winthrop group of ten added another citizen just as protection in case one of them drops out or drops dead or whatever.
And I'm sure these plaintiffs are just average folk...
By CopleyScott17
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 4:52am
...who have enough extra cash lying around to hire lawyers to sue the Commonwealth. Certainly not privileged NIMBYs circling the wagons against the home-seeking hordes, no siree.
"Literal disaster"? More like ...
By sartreswaiter
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 9:33am
...Littoral disaster.
I wonder what color these 11
By Anonymous
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 9:23am
I wonder what color these 11 "people" are. It's like the nice priests in Arlington that didn't want the red line to come to their neighborhood and bring "those people."
Is this the law pertaining to areas near MBTA stations?
By necturus
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 1:11pm
I didn't think any part of Winthrop was close enough to a Blue Line station to trigger it. But then, I don't get up that way very often these days.
Nimbygo delenda est!
Buses, ferries, etc
By Oxenfree
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 2:58pm
There's a couple of buses that serve Winthrop as well as a ferry terminal there. Orient Heights is also not far at all from Winthrop.
There are different designations in the law
By Pete X
Tue, 03/18/2025 - 3:31pm
Towns are categorized as "Rapid Transit", "Commuter Rail", "Adjacent Small Town", "Adjacent Community" each with different min zoning requirements. Winthrop is an "Adjacent Community"
https://www.mass.gov/info-details/multi-family-zon...
Add comment