Alan Ingram
Express correspondent
In a decisive move that could have far-reaching consequences, Halifax residents voted against adopting a state-mandated multi-family housing overlay district at a Special Town Meeting Monday night.
The decision puts the town at odds with Massachusetts’ MBTA Communities law, potentially risking the loss of discretionary grant funding and inviting legal action from the state Attorney General’s office.
The law requires MBTA communities to create zoning for multi-family housing near transit stations. Halifax qualifies due to its commuter rail stop, despite the station being miles from the town center.
The proposed Article 1 would have established a 194-acre MBTA Communities Multi-family Overlay District in compliance with Section 3A of the Zoning Act. The overlay district aimed to allow multi-family housing as of right in designated areas.
According to Chair John Bruno, the Board of Selectmen reluctantly put the zoning change to a vote to give residents the opportunity to comply with state law, while expressing “serious concerns” about the mandate itself.
Selectman Jonathan Selig expressed his conflicted stance on the issue before casting his vote against the article.
“Do I feel great about this? Absolutely not,” Selig said. “But, honestly, I would feel not great about voting either way tonight, because, quite frankly, there really isn’t a great option here, given our two alternatives.”
“We are not Quincy, we are not Braintree, or Weymouth,” said Selig. “People in those communities could conceivably lean on public transportation instead of cars, but our train station is miles away from our town center.”
Selig acknowledged the potential consequences of the vote, including the loss of discretionary grants that Halifax has historically relied upon.
“We’re a small town with a small business tax base,” he explained. “But, because of this, the town has historically used discretionary grants like the ones that will be in jeopardy to help the town move forward. And there’s no doubt about it, losing those will hurt.”
Fellow Selectman Thomas Pratt echoed Selig’s concerns while maintaining his opposition to the state mandate.
“Halifax is different than Hanson, different than Middleborough, different than every other city and town in the Commonwealth,” Andrews stated. “We don’t fit in a box, and we shouldn’t acquiesce to the state from their 40,000-foot view from above.”
Pratt warned of the long-term implications of compliance. “The problem is the state will never stop asking once you’ve given in,” he said. “The long-term view to protect the town, in my opinion, is a no vote.”
The Planning Board had previously voted not to recommend Article 1, while the Finance Committee made no recommendation, citing their understanding of “both sides of the equation and the financial impacts.”
Residents at the meeting expressed strong opinions on both sides of the issue. Jeff Bolger encouraged fellow voters not to fear the consequences of rejecting the overlay district.
“I don’t think anyone should be afraid of a no vote here,” Bolger said. “We’ve got a governor who goes nationally and says, I’m going to defy federal immigration law. If she can do that, we can certainly say no to this.”
Others, like Ed Murphy, pushed for an immediate vote without further debate. “There is nothing left to debate,” Murphy asserted. “Anyone who’s been involved in this issue knows what the issue’s about.”
The rejection of Article 1 leaves Halifax in a precarious position. Town officials now face the challenge of navigating potential financial repercussions and legal challenges from the state.
Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea Campbell has previously indicated her office would seek civil enforcement against towns that fail to comply with the MBTA Communities law. The Supreme Judicial Court is currently considering action against the Town of Milton.
The meeting also saw heated debate over a citizen petition to regulate personal watercraft use on local ponds, highlighting community tensions over lake access and environmental concerns.
Petitioner Steven Goodman argued the bylaw was needed to address problems with out-of-town visitors disrespecting local waterways.
“The out-of-town groups that come have specifically said to me they come here because we don’t have any regulation,” Goodman said. “And it’s not necessarily that they’re out of town, it’s that they don’t respect the waterways.”
The proposed bylaw would require residents to obtain permits for personal watercraft use and ban non-residents from launching at town ramps.
Supporter David Mascio cited safety concerns, saying he’s witnessed jet skiers operating within swimming areas and harassing kayakers.
“The people that are doing this, they do not comply, they do not care,” Mascio said.
However, longtime resident Charles Rogers opposed the restrictions, arguing for freedom of lake access.
“I believe that the lakes are a beautiful asset to our town,” Rogers said. “They attract people to the town. That’s the reason I moved to the town, because of the lakes.”
Other residents questioned why the bylaw would require permits from local users rather than focusing on out-of-town visitors.
After lengthy debate, voters approved the personal watercraft regulations in a show of hands.