Residents rejected Article 36, which would have established a 3A Multi Family Overlay District, at the second night of Town Meeting on Tuesday.
The motion to adopt the zoning changes was rejected by a tally of 410 to 377, which was met by emphatic roars from multiple people in the crowd who were opposed to the article.
More than an hour was spent debating the article. At one point, three separate motions had been made on top of the original motion to vote on Article 36, two of which sought to postpone the article to another time, while one sought for Article 36 to be indefinitely postponed.
All three motions failed. However, later in the meeting, to the ire of many in the crowd, a motion to reconsider Article 36 was made. By the time the motion was made, multiple articles had been voted on, and many residents had left after Article 36’s rejection.
This created an uproar and momentary chaos, with multiple people shouting “This is a sham!” before the motion to reconsider was ultimately shot down and business continued as usual.
The Commonwealth mandated in 2021 that MBTA communities “shall have at least one zoning district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right and meets criteria set forth in the statute.”
The statute requires the zoning to have a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre, located not more than half a mile from a Commuter Rail station, subway station, bus station, or ferry terminal. The zoning must have no age restrictions and be suitable for families with children.
Marblehead neighbors two communities, Salem and Swampscott, that have Commuter Rail stations, and as a result the town is considered an “MBTA-adjacent community.”
With its rejection, the town is now at risk of severe financial penalties from the state, according to town officials, such as potential legal action, liability under federal and state fair housing laws, and the loss of eligibility for state grants.
The polarizing topic has created a lot of noise in town over the past several months, with both community members and town officials weighing in on its potential positive and negative impacts, as well as the consequences of the article either passing or failing.
In other Town Meeting business, residents approved increases in building construction permit and electrical installation permit fees through Articles 31 and 32, respectively.
Residents also passed Article 34 by just 13 votes, authorizing the Select Board to appoint a director of community development to lead a new Community Development and Planning Department.
Town Administrator Thatcher Kezer called it a “restructure article for the town,” and also jokingly referred to it as the “Becky Curran Cutting replacement plan.”
Cutting retired in March after a long tenure as the town planner.
Kezer explained that instead of one person handling multiple duties, the departmental duties will be split among the department’s staff and director.
The following article also dealt with the restructuring of town departments. Residents passed Article 35, which will move the town’s Assessing Department and town assessor under the supervision of the finance director.
The change comes after 334 abatements were filed by residents after some experienced drastic increases or decreases in property value during assessments earlier this year.
Residents also voted down an article that would have reverted Select Board terms back to one-year terms.
To close out Town Meeting this year, a number of articles that were expected to draw debate were indefinitely postponed, including Article 43, which would modify the gas-powered leaf blower ban to a year-round ban; Articles 44 and 45, which were related to Article 43; and Article 50, which sought to add recall provisions for any town elected officials.