Comedian Bill Burr recently joked on a podcast that Marblehead is its own sovereign nation. We have a reputation for being independent and strong-willed, virtues worth celebrating. But there are decision points at which it’s necessary to carefully consider the larger context within which Marblehead exists — the forces shaping our quality of life, the future we hope to secure for our children and our role in the larger Commonwealth.
Voting at Town Meeting on the Marblehead Planning Board’s proposal for how we could comply with the state’s MBTA housing law is one such decision point. Enacted in 2021, the law requires the 177 cities and towns with access to MBTA services to set aside areas within which multi-family zoning could be built by right. (I stress “could” because this is not a building mandate; it’s a planning mandate.)
The Marblehead Planning Board was charged with creating the town’s response. It led a model process for soliciting community input, incorporating feedback and suggestions, and ultimately leveraging one of the town’s strengths — its existing density. The resulting plan is embodied in Article 36. We owe the board a debt of gratitude. And we owe the plan our vote.
For some, the fact that the state would intervene in local zoning decisions is reason enough to vote against it. At each of the three public information and listening sessions I attended, recently retired town planner Becky Curran Cutting, anticipating the mood, said repeatedly, “No one likes a mandate.”
In reality, several existing laws already override local zoning control in an effort to address longstanding housing inequities. A 2023 report published by the Boston Foundation put the problem in perspective: “In the postwar decades… it was common for municipalities to use zoning explicitly to increase or protect their socio-economic ranking by zoning for low-density housing and tightly restricting or banning apartment development.”
The state took action in 1969, enacting Chapter 40B, which imposed a streamlined permitting process on municipalities with less than 10 percent of affordable housing stock — Marblehead included.
This was followed by Chapter 40R in 2004. The Smart Growth Zoning and Housing Production Act offers financial incentives to municipalities to develop by-right residential zoning districts with minimum density and affordability requirements. Marblehead adopted two smart growth districts in 2010.
While 40B and 40R generated some successes, exclusionary zoning continues to stymie the building growth needed to meet demand. The state is 200,000 units short of housing, a fact that has led to skyrocketing home prices and rents. Employers are having a tough time luring talent. But more pressingly, seniors can’t sell their properties because they can’t find smaller, affordable options. Young families don’t have down payments for what were once considered modest starter homes. Teachers and first responders have few opportunities to live in the communities they serve.
Marblehead’s own Housing Production Plan offers a particularly stark picture: “The demographic changes occurring in Marblehead compel the expansion and diversification of its housing stock. Most concerning is the increase in aging households and decrease in younger households.” A full third of our community is considered low-income, and of that, two-thirds are spending more than 30 percent on housing.
That’s why the state is willing to enforce penalties for noncompliance with Section 3A of Chapter 40A of the Massachusetts General Laws. The attorney general has already filed suit against Milton, which rejected its designation as a rapid transit community and the resulting plan. The Supreme Judicial Court will hear the case in October. The governor has pulled grant funding promised to the town for its seawalls.
“The MBTA Communities Law was enacted to address our region-wide need for housing, and compliance with it is mandatory,” warned AG Andrea Campbell.
In another interview, she offered more blunt legal analysis: “The state trumps.”
Practically speaking, Marblehead can neither afford costly litigation nor the loss of valuable state funding. A quick glance at the 2022 Town Report lists several state grants received — from the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, Coastal Zone Management, Massachusetts Office of Travel and Tourism, Mass Historic Commission, the Seaport Economic Council, and Complete Streets.
The 2023 version we’ll receive at Town Meeting will be no different, and Marblehead is currently being considered for major state infrastructure grants totaling $14 million. There will be more funding opportunities in the future, especially as we seek assistance with vital coastal sustainability efforts, including $6.5 million in existing harbor infrastructure repairs.
Rather than add to the town’s fiscal woes, let’s turn our attention to responsibly implementing the plan when development opportunities arise — and they may not right away. Building is by right, but the details are subject to the town’s site plan review standards, use restrictions, and state and local regulations.
People have understandably expressed concerns about infrastructure capacity and traffic. Assessing those needs early can help in discussions with developers and with grant applications for state programs like HousingWorks, which supports infrastructure projects tied to housing production.
Marbleheaders may not love mandates, but we have never not answered the call when the greater good was at stake. Now is one of those times.
State Rep. Jennifer Armini represents the 8th Essex District, composed of Marblehead, Swampscott and a portion of Lynn.
Great column Jenny and I could not agree with you more. The Commonwealth needs to address this issue and all communities, including Marblehead, have a role to play in doing so. The plan we have is reasonable and will not dramatically impact the town as some opponents claim. Thank you for your leadership on this important issue.