“At this time, the Town is unable [emphasis mine] to submit an Action Plan because the Town disagrees with the classification that Milton is placed in by the Executive Office of Housing and Livable
Communities (EOHLC).” – January 14, 2025 letter from Town of Milton to Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities

Unable? Let’s try unwilling.

With a 3-2 vote, Milton decided to continue its lawbreaking ways on Friday. First, our Select Board missed the actual state-imposed deadline of February 13 to submit an action plan announcing the town’s intention to submit a compliant zoning plan before Town Meeting no later than July 14, 2025. Then, on Friday the 14th, they voted down the motion by Select Board members Erin Bradley and Ben Zoll to submit an action plan as required by the state.

Our advocates for “no” celebrated the one-year anniversary of the referendum vote to break the law with yet another vote to break the law. And virtually nothing offered by the no side has turned out to be true.

Advocates for no said the town wouldn’t get sued. We got sued by the Massachusetts Attorney General almost immediately.

Advocates for no said the AG couldn’t enforce compliance with the law. The decision in January 2025 by the Supreme Judicial Court said she could.

Advocates for no said the state couldn’t compel local zoning reforms. The January SJC decision determined the law was Constitutional.

Advocates for no said the trolley wasn’t rapid transit. The emergency regulations published in January 2025 make it crystal clear that the Mattapan High Speed Line, with its four stops in Milton, is rapid transit.

Advocates for no have been wrong on virtually everything. Their one victory, of sorts, was that the SJC ruled that the previous “guidelines” were not enforceable and that the state must go through a proper Administrative Procedures Act process to repromulgate enforceable “regulations”. Those paying attention, though, saw that the process used to develop the guidelines included extensive public comment and resulted in many changes to the original draft guidelines. To expect a different outcome now is really a stretch. In mid-April, Milton is likely to have final, enforceable, Constitutional regulations and be faced with yet another deadline – this one on July 14th.

Our no side still has no plan other than to continue to litigate, this time with “less expensive lawyers”, as one of the lead organizers of the no campaign said recently at a Select Board meeting. That always proves to be a winning strategy!

Voting no has dug a half-million dollar sized hole for the town between lost grants and legal fees, not to mention our well-earned laughing-stock reputation in the region. We are in that hole now and our elected officials can’t seem to stop digging. Will they stop? Or will voters have to stop them first?