No one, “should be able to pick and choose which laws they want to comply with,” she said. “And I hope the court will see the significant consequences of continuing to allow Milton’s noncompliance.”
Advertisement
The case is a key test of Campbell’s ability to enforce the law — which compels cities and towns to allow more housing near public transportation and comes as dozens more communities are due to vote on zoning plans of their own this fall.
The SJC’s six justices will focus on a few fairly narrow legal questions, but the implications of their ruling may be wide-reaching and shape the state’s effort to dig out of its deep housing shortage. The law represents Massachusetts’ most pointed attempt to produce more housing in decades, and the principle behind it — compelling communities to change restrictive zoning rules that have helped fuel the shortage — is key to the state’s housing strategy moving forward.
A ruling in Campbell’s favor would make clear the state’s power to ensure compliance in the 177 communities covered by the law, which requires cities and towns with access to the MBTA to make it easier to build multifamily housing. A decision favoring Milton could spark stronger pushback in towns where residents oppose the idea and complicate the future rollout of the law.
Advertisement
The legal questions in the case — centrally, the attorney general’s ability to enforce a law of such significance — have garnered significant attention: More than 70 groups have filed or signed onto amicus briefs, otherwise known as “friend of the court” briefs, outlining arguments on both sides.
Most of those briefs favor Campbell, including one filed by a group of three former Massachusetts attorneys general. Groups from several towns that have spoken out against MBTA Communities — including Middleborough and Winthrop — submitted briefs supporting Milton’s argument that Campbell has overstepped her authority by suing Milton to comply, because the legislation passed in 2021 does not explicitly grant her the power to do so.
It’s “a separation of powers issue,” Milton’s lawyers wrote in their brief to the court.
“Allowing the AG to always pursue injunctive relief, even if the Legislature specified only some lesser remedy, will make it impossible for the Legislature to balance competing policies and interests when establishing new statutory regimes,” they wrote.
Campbell’s office believes differently. The attorney general, the state’s lawyers argue, has the authority to enforce laws unless the Legislature specifically indicates otherwise, especially when it comes to issues that are a matter of the public good, such as with the housing crisis.
The town is also taking aim at the guidelines developed by the state housing department that dictate the specific parameters of what each town’s new zoning district should look like, including where it should be and how many units it should allow. Milton’s lawyers say the guidelines are excessive, go beyond the intention of the law, and are not legally enforceable because they did not go through a proper vetting process.
Advertisement
As this relatively diverse town of 29,000 and filled with single-family homes heads to court, it has become, to many, the face of suburban resistance to new housing in Massachusetts.
Milton is also challenging the state classifying it as a “rapid transit community” — which carries a higher zoning requirement than towns served by bus or commuter rail — saying that the Mattapan Trolley that runs along the town’s northern border is too slow and small to be considered rapid.
To a large degree, the legal dispute is wrapped up in a broader debate that has intensified over who has power over what gets built where in Massachusetts: cities and towns, or state government.
The justices could take anywhere from a few weeks to a couple of months to issue their ruling.
A decision in Campbell’s favor would mean her lawsuit is allowed to proceed, with decisions on how, exactly, Milton would be made to comply likely in the hands of a lower court.
Some 75 communities have already passed zoning rules under the current guidelines — in theory paving the way for thousands of new units across the region — and the state has spent millions of dollars to help towns develop that zoning. Many more face an end-of-year deadline and are likely to vote at town meetings this fall, with considerable opposition in some places.
In Milton, where Town Meeting voted to approve a plan last fall before opponents launched a successful referendum to overturn it, town leaders have been preparing for whatever outcome may arise. The planning board has been working to design the initial framework for two new plans, one that would comply under the law’s current parameters, and another, smaller-scale rezoning that could work if the town were to win its rapid transit argument.
Advertisement
Both plans are a departure from the town’s original MBTA Communities strategy developed last year.
It was voters in East Milton who proved decisive in backing the referendum because they were worried too much of the rezoning effort was focused there. (In reality, the East Milton zoning district would have allowed for less density than several other districts in different parts of towns.)
So officials are working to defray the impact of the zoning in East Milton even further, and shift more density to neighborhoods closer to Boston’s southern border.
The political divide that emerged during the referendum is still simmering. Some in town are dug in, and do not want to consider a housing plan under the law’s guidelines even if the court rules in Campbell’s favor. Then there are those who are eager to put this dispute behind them and shed their town’s newfound reputation as the crucible of opposition to housing reform.
Material from prior Globe stories was used in this report.
Andrew Brinker can be reached at andrew.brinker@globe.com. Follow him @andrewnbrinker. Travis Andersen can be reached at travis.andersen@globe.com.