The Massachusetts Department of Housing and Community Development’s (DHCD) so-called “Guidelines Team” pulled these utterly arbitrary and capricious so-called “Compliance Guidelines”– https://www.mass.gov/doc/data-sources-and-methodology-document-link/download — entirely out of their asses in an attempt to EXTORT so-called “MBTA Communities” into designating parts of those communities as high-density ‘affordable housing’ zoning districts.
SO, self-serving developer and Weasel’s Weasel, Carl Corrinne, Chair of the Sterling Planning Board, put this item on the 15 December 2022 Planning Board Agenda:
“Discussion regarding Sterling’s Action Plan for complying with the MBTA multi-family zoning requirement”
SEE https://www.sterling-ma.gov/planning-board/agenda/agenda-160
FIRST, that Agenda item is a GLARING MISREPRESENTATION. There is no State/MBTA ‘requirement’ that ANY so-called “MBTA Community” described in Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 40, Sec. 3A designate a high density, multi-family, ‘affordable housing’ district within its boundaries. INSTEAD, the language in Sec. 3A is carrot-and-stick EXTORTIONATE. It provides that any so-called ‘MBTA Community’ described in Section 3A(a)(1) that DOES NOT KNUCKLE UNDER to such zoning will have State funds described in Section 3A(b) cut off.
Chapter 40A, Sec. 3A in its entirety is here set forth:
“Section 3A: Multi-family zoning as-of-right in MBTA communities
Section 3A. (a)(1) An MBTA community shall have a zoning ordinance or by-law that provides for at least 1 district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right; provided, however, that such multi-family housing shall be without age restrictions and shall be suitable for families with children. For the purposes of this section, a district of reasonable size shall: (i) have a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre, subject to any further limitations imposed by section 40 of chapter 131 and title 5 of the state environmental code established pursuant to section 13 of chapter 21A; and (ii) be located not more than 0.5 miles from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal or bus station, if applicable.
(b) An MBTA community that fails to comply with this section shall not be eligible for funds from: (i) the Housing Choice Initiative as described by the governor in a message to the general court dated December 11, 2017; (ii) the Local Capital Projects Fund established in section 2EEEE of chapter 29; or (iii) the MassWorks infrastructure program established in section 63 of chapter 23A.
[ Subsection (c) effective until July 29, 2021. For text effective July 29, 2021, see below.]
(c) The department, in consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, shall promulgate guidelines to determine if an MBTA community is in compliance with this section.
[ Subsection (c) as amended by 2021, 29, Sec. 10 effective July 29, 2021. For text effective until July 29, 2021, see above.]
(c) The department of housing and community development, in consultation with the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority and the Massachusetts Department of Transportation, shall promulgate guidelines to determine if an MBTA community is in compliance with this section.”
SO, on 13 December 2022 I sent a Mass. Gen. Laws Ch. 66, Sec. 10 ‘Public Records Request’ to Sterling Treasurer Veronica Smith for all Town records showing the total of sums received by the Town of Sterling, from 1 January 2018 to present, under EACH funding source described in Section 3A(b). By letter dated 19 December 2022 William Caldwell, Town Administrator, responded by saying that the Town of Sterling had received NO such funds.
THAT MEANS THAT EVEN IF STERLING WERE AN ‘MBTA COMMUNITY’ DESCRIBED BY SECTION 3A(a)(1)—AND IT IS NOT—IT IS NOT SUBJECT TO EXTORTION UNDER SECTION 3A(b).
MOREOVER, SINCE THE LEGISLATURE, AT ANY TIME, COULD VOTE NOT TO APPROPRIATE FUNDS FOR THOSE SECTION 3A(b) PROGRAMS, WHY WOULD THE TOWN OF STERLING PLAY LAPDOG/SUCKER ANYWAY?
SECOND, as explained in my previous Blog post, the Town of Sterling IS NOT A ‘SO-CALLED’ ‘MBTA COMMUNITY’ FALLING WITHIN THE PARAMETERS SET FORTH IN SECTION 3A(a)(1).
SO YOU GOTTA WONDER, WHY ARE CARL CORRINNE AND THE OTHER STERLING PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS SO EAGER TO KISS MassDHCD ASS WHEN THEY DON’T HAVE TO???
Merry Christmas, Happy Hanukkah, and Happy New Year!
J.G.
STERLING, MASSACHUSETTS, OVERWATCH 