By CJ Kuechler

Housing stands as one of Massachusetts’ most pressing challenges. To meet growing demand and ensure affordability, the Commonwealth estimates that 222,000 units of new housing are needed by 2035. This situation prompted the creation and passage of the MBTA Communities Act in 2021.

To date, 165 MBTA communities of the 177 communities now have multifamily districts, and nearly 7,000 housing units are in the permitting, construction, or occupancy stages. Simultaneously, a handful of towns have resisted or outright rejected the compliance rules. In January, Attorney General Andrea Campbell sued nine of the twelve communities for their noncompliance, seeking a court order to declare that they must follow the law’s mandate.

What Towns are Being Sued?

Campbell’s lawsuit focuses on Dracut, East Bridgewater, Halifax, Holden, Marblehead, Middleton, Tewksbury, Wilmington, and Winthrop, all of which missed the July 2025 deadline and remain out of compliance. The lawsuit does not address the towns of Carver, Freetown, and Rehoboth, all of which have also not amended zoning rules.

Although the nine communities named in the lawsuit share a noncompliant status, there is some nuance to what led to this moment. Here is a closer look at how each of them has responded to the MBTA Communities Act to date.

• Dracut: residents have voted down proposed changes to zoning bylaws in two Town Meetings. Town Manager Kate Hodges has stated that, while the Town has aimed to comply with all the laws of the Commonwealth, that the ultimate decision rests with the voters and local self-determination should be respected.

• East Bridgewater: despite support from the Select Board and Planning Board, voters have rejected zoning plans twice. Some opponents of the law stated they wanted to keep East Bridgewater as a small town and not risk overcrowding the school system. The Town plans to bring another zoning plan to voters in May 2026.

• Halifax: residents voted against zoning at a Special Town Meeting in December 2024, and Halifax has not taken further action to propose compliant zoning or submit a district compliance application for review.

• Holden: the Town voted against the proposals to comply with the state law multiple times, as recently as March 2. Some businesses within the proposed overlay district stated that they were not consulted on how the measure would affect them.

• Marblehead: residents overturned approved zoning in July of 2025. Opponents cited concerns about the impacts of the town’s character, infrastructure, and overall costs. They have also expressed resistance against the mandate itself.

• Middleton: residents voted twice against rezoning, citing concerns over where the new housing would go and the effect on traffic. Town Administrator Justin Sultzbach has called its situation “unique” compared to others, arguing that it is the only affected community that is not near an MBTA commuter rail stop.  

• Tewksbury: residents rejected a proposed rezoning district in 2024, and in 2025, the Planning Board blocked an attempt that would have reintroduced a new proposal for a Town vote. Select Board member James Mackey said there was opposition to the proposal because of concern it would move Tewksbury toward becoming a city with high‑density zoning.

• Wilmington: residents voted against compliance three times, with some opposition claiming that the State’s side of planning has been too fluid and that it could negatively impact local businesses. Wilmington Select Board Chair Frank J. West Sr. was also critical of the State’s decision to sue without taking into consideration the local votes and Wilmington’s recent housing production, independent of the MBTA Communities Act.

• Winthrop: Town Council rejected a zoning proposal that would have achieved compliance in June 2025. Some town leaders expressed that the law was an improper infringement on local control.

What Happens to Noncompliant Towns

The noncompliant towns risk a loss of funding from state sources intended for local infrastructure and other public services.

Tewksbury, for example, will be ineligible for an Early College planning grant for $50,000, an Early College designation funding grant for $250,000 over five years, and a time-out practices implementation grant for $50,000. Holden has missed out on $25,000 worth of grants, including one for recycling, and Middleton did not receive a $2 million grant from MassWorks.

The exact other long-term consequences for the towns remain to be seen, but if they remain noncompliant, these towns will continue to lose critical funding.

What the Lawsuit Means for Housing

Some towns are active in attempting to address noncompliance. In Winthrop, Town Council rejected a motion to join a lawsuit against the state opposing the MBTA Communities Act, and in Marblehead, leaders are planning to present voters with another proposal for compliance in May. Holden held a Town Meeting on March 2 to re-vote on compliance, but residents once again voted “no,” signifying that they will be served the lawsuit.

As noncompliant towns weigh their next moves, their choices may shape not only zoning maps, but also the broader political conversation about housing affordability and local control across Massachusetts.

While AG Campbell’s lawsuit may center on these nine towns, its outcome could shape how Massachusetts enforces pro-housing laws. Campbell recognized that the MBTA Communities Act is not the sole solution to Massachusetts’ housing shortage, but it is a step toward addressing the critical need in the Commonwealth.