The Select Board reported on a discussion with the State’s Housing Secretary Edward Augustus regarding the state’s MBTA Communities law.
Chair Dan Fox and member Erin Noonan attended a session with the Housing Authority, where they took the opportunity to discuss the town’s rejection of the 3A communities act with Augustus.
Augustus was invited to tour the Marblehead Housing Authority’s property on Broughton Road, which is being redeveloped through an agreement with Winn Development.
According to the update, Secretary Augustus was unequivocal: his Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities had never granted an exemption from compliance with the MBTA Communities Act and had and does not intend to create such a process. “It was straight out of the horse’s mouth,” Noonan said.
Fox noted that a formal letter from the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, in coordination with the Governor’s Office, is expected soon to clarify the implications of noncompliance.
Augustus said that his Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities had never granted an exemption from compliance with the MBTA Communities Act and had “no interest or plan to do so in the future,” Noonan said.
Noonan stated that while certain funding streams such as Chapter 70 (education aid) and Chapter 90 (transportation funding) are not at risk, the town has been warned that discretionary grants — including projects submitted through the state’s “one-stop” application process — may be denied.
Noonan said the eight applications that the town had submitted through the state’s Community One Stop for Growth portal would be denied.
She added that the town is still waiting for clarification on whether it would be able to compete for grants beyond the initial automatic one under the state’s Green Communities initiative.
Town administrator Thatcher Kezer said the town is actively contacting individual state agencies to determine which grant opportunities remain available, though answers have been inconsistent.
Selectboard member Jim Zisson also raised concerns about the state’s repeated message that it is “here to help” communities comply. “Honestly, what does that actually mean?” he asked, noting that Marblehead voters have twice rejected compliance plans, leaving the planning board with few options.
Fox stated that while Middleborough was able to negotiate a unique solution under Chapter 40R, board members said they have not seen comparable flexibility offered to Marblehead.
Fox acknowledged that the state may provide technical assistance in drafting a new plan, but they also expressed skepticism about whether such support would meaningfully address the political and practical challenges facing the town.
“We’re in a precarious situation,” Fox concluded, underscoring the tension between state requirements and local resistance. The board agreed to await the state’s official written response but cautioned that grant funding consequences could arrive “very, very soon.”
