Marshfield presses appeal of MBTA Communities Act, arguing law is unconstitutional

"Marshfield is pressing forward with a legal challenge to the MBTA Communities Act, asking Massachusetts' highest court to reconsider whether the state housing law burdens towns, and whether it effectively strips local voters of meaningful choice. The town's appeal to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC), which is expected to continue into 2026, focuses on two key arguments: that the law is an "unfunded mandate" and that it disenfranchises voters by forcing municipalities to approve zoning changes without a meaningful "no" vote."

"Marshfield claimed that the law imposes financial burdens on towns without providing adequate funding to cover the costs of compliance, such as infrastructure upgrades. The town was one of several municipalities that filed lawsuits seeking to either block the mandate or require the state to provide funding. Superior Court Judge Mark Gildea dismissed the suits in May, ruling that the potential costs were too "indirect" to qualify as an unfunded mandate and that state grants could help offset expenses."

Marshfield has appealed to the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court to challenge the MBTA Communities Act on grounds that it imposes an unfunded mandate and disenfranchises local voters. The law, passed in 2021, requires cities and towns near MBTA transit stations to adopt zoning allowing more multi-family housing. Marshfield argued the mandate creates financial burdens for towns, including infrastructure upgrade costs, without adequate state funding. Superior Court Judge Mark Gildea dismissed earlier suits as too indirect and noted state grants could offset expenses. Marshfield appealed the dismissal and the SJC agreed to hear the case, which is expected to continue into 2026.

Read at Boston.com