Judge turns back challenge to MBTA housing law
BOSTON (SHNS) – A Superior Court judge on Friday tossed a lawsuit brought by nine municipalities challenging the MBTA Communities Act, ruling that the controversial zoning-reform law is not an unfunded mandate.
Plymouth Superior Court Justice Mark Gildea granted the Healey administration's motion to dismiss the latest challenges to the 2021 law, which supporters see as a key tool to spur development of much-needed housing in more than 170 eastern Massachusetts cities and towns.
Marshfield, Middleton, Hanson, Holden, Hamilton, Duxbury, Wenham, Weston and Wrentham had each filed legal complaints against the law in recent months, contending that it should not be enforceable after the Division of Local Mandates in Auditor Diana DiZoglio's office deemed the measure an unfunded mandate.
Plaintiffs said allowing multifamily housing by right in at least one reasonably sized zone as the law requires could force them to absorb significant new infrastructure costs with no state assistance.
But Gildea concluded the possible costs are 'indirect,' which means the law is not an unfunded mandate, and that grant programs are available to help shoulder some of the burden.
'Even if [the law] was an unfunded mandate, the Municipalities have failed to allege sufficient facts concerning any anticipated amounts associated with future infrastructure costs beyond a speculative level,' Gildea wrote in a 40-page decision.
Some of the plaintiffs laid out their own issues with the law as well, such as Middleton arguing that it should not be classified as an MBTA community and therefore should not be subject to the mandatory zoning reforms.
Jason Talerman, an attorney for some of the towns, said in an email that plaintiffs are 'disappointed with the result and find the decision to be contrary to applicable law.'
Most of the 177 communities subject to the law have approved new zoning reforms, putting them in compliance, according to the Healey administration.
In January, the Supreme Judicial Court upheld the MBTA Communities Act as a constitutional law the attorney general can enforce with legal action. The high court required the Healey administration to redo the regulation-setting process.
WWLP-22News, an NBC affiliate, began broadcasting in March 1953 to provide local news, network, syndicated, and local programming to western Massachusetts. Watch the 22News Digital Edition weekdays at 4 p.m. on WWLP.com.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CNN
5 hours ago
- CNN
Pride Month marches on, despite frustration and worry from LGBTQ community over government actions
Pride Month is designed to bring attention to the LGBTQ community in the United States, and this year's events included the same parades, music, laughter and rainbow-colored displays of every kind across the nation. But Wednesday's Supreme Court ruling on gender-affirming care for transgender youth was the kind of attention many advocates didn't want and the capper to a month of discouragement. 'The decision itself does land like a punch in the gut during Pride Month, a time that's meant to celebrate liberation, joy and survival,' said Dallas Ducar, executive vice president of the Boston-based trans health provider Fenway Health. 'It showcases that while our resilience is not any weaker, the attacks are calculated.' The high court decision upholding Tennessee's ban on gender-affirming care for trans minors may grease the wheels for court approval of similar laws already enacted in two dozen other states. And it comes with concern for a community used to a summer of celebration. The annual event – marking the anniversary month of the Stonewall riots, which are considered the birth of the US gay rights movement – is now the backdrop for a wave of government actions and cultural backlash that has many LGBTQ advocates and the people affected concerned. From historic sites losing ties to LGBTQ roots and Pride performances being canceled at the Kennedy Center to adverse changes playing out in both courtrooms and social media accounts, many advocates say they're winded, but ready to continue the battle. 'Pride was made for moments like this,' said Ducar, referring to the Supreme Court decision on the Tennessee transgender care ban. 'Decisions like Skrmetti remind us of why we marched in the first place and why we still must.' As Pride enters its home stretch, here are some of the government actions taken this month that LGBTQ advocates say have taken the country backward. 'I am deeply afraid for what this decision will unleash — politically and socially,' Samantha Williams, mother of a transgender student who was one of the plaintiffs in the Tennessee case, wrote in a New York Times op-ed. 'Now that the Supreme Court has denied the rights of young people like my daughter and families like ours, what's next?' The actions affecting trans children this month go beyond the Supreme Court ruling, seeding worry for families and those in the community. Continuing his battle to ban transgender women from competing in women's athletics, President Donald Trump put California directly in his sights after the success of a teenage transgender track and field athlete. Trump said on social media 'large scale fines will be imposed' as a result, after previously threatening to withhold federal funding from the state. The ability to compete in athletics in accordance with their gender identity is protected under a state law that was passed more than a decade ago. Although Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom has expressed his own misgivings about transgender athletes, there is no sign California officials intend to change it. US Assistant Attorney General Harmeet Dhillon called the law unconstitutional, adding, 'you have an obligation to comply with the Equal Protection Clause,' she wrote in a June 2 letter to more than 1,600 California public schools. So far, the federal government has not taken the threatened action, and most California schools are on summer break. The Department of Health and Human Services is dropping the specialized support for LGBTQ youth on the government-funded 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline next month. 'Anyone who calls the Lifeline will continue to receive compassion and help,' the government said in a statement, but a program to connect LGBTQ callers with specially trained counselors is being dropped despite getting more than a million calls since it started in July 2022. A 2024 study associated with The Trevor Project – a crisis intervention organization focused on LGBTQ young people – found suicide attempts among transgender and nonbinary teenagers increased in the wake of restrictive laws passed by states. The group also said nearly 40% of LGBTQ youth surveyed in 2023 seriously considered suicide in the past year. Pride – an unapologetically boisterous event – has been met by virtual silence from the White House. 'There are no plans for a proclamation for the month of June,' said White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt on June 3. But the Department of Education announced its own plan to recognize June as 'Title IX Month,' referencing the law that protects women and girls against discrimination in education. The Trump administration has cited that law as justification for its efforts to keep transgender women from participating in women's sports. It's not a dramatic course change for Trump, who never issued an official proclamation acknowledging Pride during his first term, though he did mention it in a 2019 tweet. Since then, the administration has shortened the abbreviation to 'LGB' or 'LGB+' in government documents and websites, including for the Stonewall National Monument in New York, removing the signifier for transgender people, an affront to now-legendary transgender activists who rioted there. While conservative gay advocates like the Log Cabin Republicans – the largest GOP group 'dedicated to representing LGBT conservatives and allies' – have argued the nose-thumbing at Pride is really a swipe at progressive politics, it has been accompanied by a large change in GOP opinion on gay rights. The percentage of Republicans who say gay and lesbian relationships are 'morally acceptable' has plummeted in the past three years, now down to 38%, according to Gallup polls. Since taking over leadership of the Kennedy Center – the preeminent public performance venue in the nation's capital – President Trump has remolded its leadership, leading to event cancellations. 'NO MORE DRAG SHOWS, OR OTHER ANTI-AMERICAN PROPAGANDA,' the president wrote on social media. The Center canceled a Pride performance involving the Gay Men's Chorus of Washington, DC. Soon after, a week of events at the Kennedy Center tied to the World Pride festival were canceled or moved to other venues, the Associated Press reported. 'We are finding another path to the celebration … but the fact that we have to maneuver in this way is disappointing,' June Crenshaw, deputy director of the Capital Pride Alliance, told the AP. Trump appointed Richard Grenell, who serves in multiple administration positions, as interim director of the Kennedy Center. Grenell, who is gay, in an interview with Politico last week expressed embarrassment with many Pride activities. 'You go to a Pride parade and it's embarrassing! It's real fringe and it's too sexual. And I think that we have to start critiquing ourselves,' he said. 'By the way, this (opinion) is extremely popular with normal gays.' Trump allies also point out he nominated the highest-ranking gay public official in the country's history, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. But that unfailing support is not representative of the community, as a CNN exit poll found more than four in five LGBTQ voters cast ballots for Kamala Harris in last year's presidential election. As he has every year in June, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis – a former GOP presidential candidate – ordered flags at half-staff this month to remember the victims of the shooting at Orlando's Pulse Nightclub, a gay club where 49 people were killed in 2016. The cut-and-paste proclamation was virtually identical to past statements, but with one major exception: it cut a section noting 'the LGBTQ and Hispanic communities' had been targeted. A similar omission was made by DeSantis' office in 2019. At the time, the governor said the slight was unintentional and amended it on social media. This year when the absence was noted, no change was made, and no explanation was given. The governor's office did not respond to CNN's request for comment on the change. The Log Cabin Republicans made no comment about the absence of LGBTQ acknowledgement in the former Republican presidential candidate's statement. Instead, the group published an op-ed from senior adviser Dylan Schwartz focusing on left-wing support for Palestinian causes. In fact, there is little sign of organized backlash against the administration among gay members of the MAGA movement. The Log Cabin Republicans went from refusing to endorse Trump in the 2016 general election to now fervently backing his policies and praising what they call 'normal gays.' 'Trump is not 'targeting' our community,' Log Cabin interim executive director Ed Williams wrote in March. 'He's leading a massive course correction to reverse the radical and insane excesses that extremist, gender-obsessed elements of the Left have quietly and quickly imposed upon our government and our country, yielding no results while fostering more division.' At the beginning of Pride Month, the Trump administration took a step that surprised many in the LGBTQ community – it ordered the Navy to rename a fuel supply ship named for gay rights advocate Harvey Milk, a defense official told CNN. Milk, a member of the San Francisco city governing board who was one of the first openly gay elected officials in the country, was also a Navy veteran who was forced to resign because of questions about his sexual orientation. House Speaker Emerita Nancy Pelosi – who represents the district where Milk lived – called the decision a 'spiteful move.' Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth said plans were being discussed to change the names of all John Lewis-class ships, which are named after civil rights icons, and not the USNS Harvey Milk alone. 'We're not interested in naming ships after activists,' Hegseth said at a June 11 congressional hearing. 'It's just so petty and mean-spirited,' Kevin Jennings, CEO of LGBTQ legal advocacy organization Lambda Legal, said of the ship renaming news. 'Our community – both individually and collectively – a lot of us have had to deal with bullies our whole life.' If insulting Pride was intended to discourage progressive groups focused on gay rights, there are signs it may have done the opposite. Lamba Legal – the group that organized the legal case against the Tennessee law and dozens of others – started a drive to raise $180 million. So far, it has surpassed its goal by more than $100 million. 'Think people realize that our last line of defense is the courts,' Jennings told CNN. 'I think there are clearly judges who are ideologues, but I think most judges actually respect and value the rule of law.' While more than 30 years have passed between the Stonewall riots and the Supreme Court ruling that struck down state laws criminalizing same-sex relations, Jennings said the spirit of the Pride movement to patiently and persistently fight is not going away. 'We are going to persist until we prevail. If it takes 5, 10, 15, 20, 30 years, we are not going to quit,' he said.
Forbes
6 hours ago
- Forbes
Judge Sides With Universities, Blocks NSF's 15% Indirect Cost Cap
A federal judge has blocked the Trump administration from implementing a 15% cap on indirect ... More research costs funded by NSF. A federal judge has granted summary judgment in favor of several universities and higher education organizations that had sued the National Science Foundation over its attempt to limit the reimbursement of indirect costs associated with research grants funded by the agency. In her 52-page ruling on Friday, U.S. District Judge Indira Talwani vacated NSF's recently announced policy of capping its indirect cost payments at a standard rate of 15%, declaring it 'invalid, arbitrary and capricious, and contrary to law.' She also ordered NSF to provide written notice of her decision 'to all funding recipients affected by the 15% Indirect Cost Rate' within 72 hours. The decision represents the latest legal setback for the Trump administration, which has tried — so far unsuccessfully — to impose the 15% cap on grants funded by other federal agencies. U.S. judges have previously blocked similar funding caps at the National Institutes of Health and the Department of Energy, and last week a similar suit was brought against the Department of Defense over its move to impose a 15% cap. A judge issued a temporary restraining order against the DOD cap one day after that suit was filed. The NSF lawsuit was filed on May 5th in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts by 13 research universities and three higher education organizations: the Association of American Universities, the American Council on Education, and the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities. The 13 plaintiff schools were Arizona State University, Brown University, the University of California, California Institute of Technology, Carnegie Mellon University, the University of Chicago, Cornell University, the University of Illinois, MIT, the University of Michigan, the University of Minnesota, the University of Pennsylvania and Princeton University. At issue was a May 2 'policy notice' in which NSF indicated it was capping its indirect cost reimbursement rate at 15% for all new grants and cooperative agreements awarded to university investigators rather than paying a negotiated rate for these support costs as had been its past practice. The negotiated rates typically have exceeded 50% for the plaintiff universities, according to the lawsuit. Indirect costs — also known as facilities and administrative costs — refer to the costs of conducting research that are not attributable to any one investigation. They include items like large-scale computer systems, maintenance of equipment, facility upgrades, the operation of labs, depreciation, employment of support staff, accounting, research compliance, legal expenses, and the salaries of key administrators in charge of an institution's research enterprise. The plaintiffs contended that NSF's policy was unlawful for several reasons, including violations of federal regulations and the Administrative Procedure Act. They argued that 'the Rate Cap Policy exceeds NSF's statutory authority by reimposing, in more severe form, a categorical cap on indirect costs that Congress specifically eliminated in 1965 and has declined to reenact ever since." The government had argued that the policy was necessary to control costs, reduce administrative burdens on institutions and increase the amount of federal funds that could be used to support direct research costs. And it contended that it was legally permitted to set the flat 15% rate. In the end, the judge agreed with the plaintiffs' multiple claims about the illegality of the administration's actions. The government had agreed to voluntarily stay implementation of the 15% cap until June 20, the same day on which Judge Talwani handed down her ruling.
New York Times
6 hours ago
- New York Times
‘Are We Past Peak Harvard?': 3 Writers Mull Higher Education's Woes
Frank Bruni, a contributing Opinion writer, hosted a written online conversation with Times columnist Ross Douthat and Larry Summers, a contributing Opinion writer and a former president of Harvard University, to discuss the state of higher education in Trump 2.0 and beyond. Frank Bruni: Ross, Larry, I'm excited to get into some of the fine points of the intensely heated, bitterly partisan war over what, whom and how America's colleges and universities should teach, but for starters, I have a big picture question. When President Trump and his allies started going after Harvard and its kin, it hit me more forcefully than ever before: These institutions have amassed a truly extraordinary degree of cultural sway well beyond what most people probably intended or planned. That's a big part of why they drew Trump's gaze, a big part of why his supporters scorn them. Regardless of how this battle turns out, are we past peak Harvard — past peak Ivy — forevermore? Larry Summers: Maybe, but there are countervailing forces. Harvard's relative prestige rises with the square of the distance from Cambridge, and so a global talent competition helps it. The greatest universities are drivers of progress. The 21st century will be a center of the life sciences, and because of Harvard, M.I.T. and their affiliates, Boston and Cambridge are ground zero, creating a flywheel effect with Stanford and digital technology. If anything, the trend is toward a higher fraction of government, business, artistic elites coming from elite schools as they get better at drawing talent. Bruni: That's definitely the trend to this point. But how much will that be affected by what the Trump administration is doing substantively, in terms of funding cutbacks, and symbolically and culturally, in terms of casting a cloud over these institutions and characterizing them — or maybe I should say caricaturing them — as Maoist or Marxist indoctrination camps? I mean, I know because I've heard from them: There are definitely parents rethinking the Ivy League. Summers: The trend could break if Trump stays super-destructive, courts are super-tolerant and the universities don't adapt and settle. That is a real worry. My best guess, though, is that the need for universities as economic engines, the enforcement of law and the fact that there is low-hanging fruit for cultural correction in the universities will carry the day. I don't think there is yet evidence of leading universities losing their appeal. Yes, there is a need to walk back from crazy, as there was after the 1960s. My guess is this will happen. You will see versions of Stanford's Hoover Institution on many campuses, more emphasis on nonideological science and a big walk back on identity politics. Ross Douthat: One way to look at it is that Harvard, for reasons Larry suggests, is permanently well-suited to endure as a hub for global talent, but it needs to figure out its relationship to the United States of America. The whole post-Cold War idea that you could be a 'global university' and form students for a 'global elite' tended to wave away the reality that Harvard is still deeply bound to the government and people of the United States. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
