{"id":13521,"date":"2023-08-03T18:51:05","date_gmt":"2023-08-03T18:51:05","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/?p=13521"},"modified":"2023-08-03T21:14:24","modified_gmt":"2023-08-03T21:14:24","slug":"mbta-zoning-lawsuit-addressing-housing-crisis","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/our-impact\/housing\/mbta-zoning-lawsuit-addressing-housing-crisis\/","title":{"rendered":"MBTA Zoning Lawsuit Addressing Housing Crisis"},"content":{"rendered":"\n

Lawyers for Civil Rights and Brown Rudnick File MBTA Communities Zoning Lawsuit to Challenge Suburban Reluctance to Address Housing Crisis<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

As Affordable Housing Crisis Devastates Low-Income Families and Community Groups, Plaintiffs Ask Supreme Judicial Court To Make Clear That New MBTA Communities Zoning Law Is Mandatory<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Central Massachusetts Housing Alliance (\u201cCMHA\u201d) and a low-income family searching for affordable housing have sued the Town of Holden for its refusal to comply with the Commonwealth\u2019s new MBTA Communities Zoning Law (the \u201cLaw\u201d).  A resident of Holden has also joined the challenge.  The Law seeks to address the affordable housing crisis by requiring 177 communities<\/a> with or near MBTA service (\u201cMBTA Communities\u201d) to include zoning districts in their communities where multi-family housing can be built more freely.  The complaint, filed by Lawyers for Civil Rights and Brown Rudnick LLP, contends that all MBTA Communities must comply with the Law\u2019s multi-family zoning mandate. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Massachusetts is mired in an affordable housing crisis, which disproportionately harms<\/a> communities of color.  \u201cExclusionary zoning\u201d policies that inhibit multi-family housing production suppress the Commonwealth\u2019s housing supply and ensure that low-income residents and people of color have few affordable options.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

By stating that MBTA Communities \u201cshall have\u201d at least one reasonably sized zoning district where multi-family housing can be freely built, the Law aims to reduce exclusionary zoning, boost housing supply to meet demand, and reduce housing costs.  Municipal officials from Holden claim that compliance with the Law is optional despite guidance from the Attorney General<\/a> and state legislators<\/a> that it is mandatory.  Holden\u2019s insistence on this point must be corrected to avoid a domino effect of non-compliance from other MBTA Communities. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cWe must maximize every available tool to keep Central Massachusetts families housed in their communities of choice,\u201d said CMHA CEO Leah Bradley<\/strong>.  \u201cWith the unprecedented surge in rent prices and homelessness in recent years, more Massachusetts families are becoming homeless and they are staying homeless longer.  Communities across Central Massachusetts are working with us to find solutions to the housing crisis.  We are asking the same of Holden.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

 \u201cThis lawsuit aims to support municipalities that are working to comply with the Law, by ensuring that recalcitrant towns like Holden do not shirk their obligations,\u201d said LCR staff attorney Jacob Love<\/strong>.  \u201cEvery municipality covered by this Law, especially predominantly white, affluent towns like Holden, must relinquish exclusionary zoning and contribute to the cause.\u201d <\/p>\n\n\n\n

\u201cSolving the affordable housing crisis is an urgent matter in the Commonwealth,\u201d said Rebecca MacDowell Lecaroz<\/strong>, who is leading the Brown Rudnick team working with LCR on behalf of the Plaintiffs.  \u201cThe untenable position taken by the Town of Holden must be unquestionably discredited to ensure timely compliance by all of the covered communities.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Law\u2019s\u00a0first compliance deadline<\/a>, which required towns to file a six-page form explaining how they will comply with the Law, expired six months ago on January 31, 2023.\u00a0\u00a0Seven towns initially failed to meet that deadline but, following\u00a0demand letters<\/a>\u00a0sent by LCR, only two of those towns remain non-compliant: Holden and Berkley.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The Law\u2019s\u00a0first compliance deadline<\/a>, which required towns to file a six-page form explaining how they will comply with the Law, expired six months ago on Jan. 31, 2023. Seven towns initially failed to meet that deadline but, following\u00a0demand letters<\/a>\u00a0sent by LCR, only\u00a0one\u00a0of those towns remain non-compliant: Holden;\u00a0Berkley\u00a0submitted an action plan within an hour of LCR and Brown Rudnick\u2019s filing.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

LCR and its client communities are committed to ensuring full compliance with the Law is achieved.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n

LCR and its client communities are committed to ensuring full compliance with the Law is achieved.  To that end, LCR today also sent a request to Berkley seeking public records in the town\u2019s possession regarding compliance with the Law.  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

The complaint is available here<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\nMBTA-Zoning-Complaint-Central-MA-Housing-Alliance-v.-Holden-FINAL<\/a>\n

<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Lawyers for Civil Rights and Brown Rudnick File MBTA Communities Zoning Lawsuit to Challenge Suburban Reluctance to Address Housing Crisis As Affordable Housing Crisis Devastates Low-Income Families and Community Groups, […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[9],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13521"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13521"}],"version-history":[{"count":4,"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13521\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13530,"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13521\/revisions\/13530"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13521"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13521"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/lawyersforcivilrights.org\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13521"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}