The many possible ramifications of the effort by some residents to repeal Town Meeting’s MBTA Communities Law zoning compliance vote were discussed at length at Tuesday’s Select Board meeting, with the word “murky” being featured prominently.
It may take some time before the town knows whether the attempt to repeal Town Meeting’s Oct. 21 vote to bring Needham into compliance with the law will require a special election.
The group collecting signatures for a repeal vote, Needham Residents for Thoughtful Zoning, has until midday Friday, Nov. 15, to submit the required signatures from 15% of Needham’s 25,096 registered voters — or 3,765 certified signatures — to bring about an election.
Those signatures would need to be verified, a process that requires every signature to be reviewed to confirm whether each signer is a registered voter and that the signature on the petition matches the signature on file with the Town Clerk.
If the petitioners do not achieve the 3,765-signature requirement, the Town Meeting vote will stand and the zoning article that passed at Town Meeting will be submitted for a compliance review by the state.
If the signature threshold is met, the Select Board would begin the process of scheduling a townwide election that would likely be held in mid-January. State election laws require a 35-day period between the certification of the petition and the scheduling of a repeal election, and Town Counsel Chris Heep has determined that law supersedes a 14-day period articulated in the town charter.
This would push any scheduled election beyond the MBTA Law’s Dec. 31 compliance deadline.
To pass at a special election, the repeal would have to both win a majority of the vote and receive a vote total of more than 20% of all registered voters, or 5,020 votes.
Should that happen, the Select Board would need to schedule a Special Town Meeting where a new compliance plan developed and presented by the Planning Board would be considered.
It’s been nearly 50 years since the town has experienced a repeal vote on a Town Meeting decision.
What is at risk?
The consequences of holding an election include the possibility of the town losing millions in state funds. The law carries financial penalties for municipalities that are not in compliance. Most involve being ineligible for certain state funding programs.
At the Select Board meeting, Deputy Town Manager Katie King listed a number of state programs where Needham has what she described as “competitive” applications that are in progress and that could yield millions of dollars for the town.
“If the referendum happens and removes the new zoning,” said Kevin Connor, spokesperson for the state Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, “that could lead to noncompliance [with the law].”
The town manager’s office submitted a memo that King described as “not comprehensive” but still inclusive of “all sources of funding that we know for sure are at risk.”
“The memo does highlight the ones that are of most concern,” she said. “And I would say the risk to the town is in the millions and largely for projects that we need to be doing related to any housing or zoning. So, really, transportation, infrastructure projects, climate initiatives and stormwater efforts.”
Select Board member Josh Levy asked King, “If we’re out of compliance due to the repeal, are we at risk of losing access to funds during that period of non-compliance?”
“My understanding at this point is it would really fall on when the award decisions are made, and also that time period between when applications are due and when award decisions are made,” King replied. “So if we happen to be in noncompliance when particular funding decisions are made, we would lose out for that potential entire fiscal year for that grant funding. It would vary by grant opportunity.”
A possible additional complication is the outcome of a court case related to Milton voters’ repeal of that town’s MBTA compliance plan. It is awaiting a decision, possibly in early 2025. If the state Supreme Judicial Court rules that the law is flawed and the compliance process needs to be amended, it could further skew the compliance criteria.
As of this week, Town Clerk Louise Miller said the petitioners have submitted sheets which Miller estimated contained approximately 2,500 signatures, although she had not done a detailed tally.
Asked how long it would take her staff to complete the painstaking certification process, she said only, “It will take as long as it takes.” Miller said she hopes to have it completed by the first Select Board meeting following the deadline.
Save as PDF