A special town meeting, called in response to a citizen petition, was held on April 17, 2024, to discuss and vote on a single non-binding resolution: “We urge Town leaders, before recommending any major zoning proposal, to perform [and release for public review] detailed impact studies, which examine the maximum impact of such a proposed zoning proposal.”
By state law, a special town meeting can be called by citizen petitions with two hundred signatures. After the petition is delivered and the signatures are certified, the town must call a meeting within forty-five days. According to Town Manager John Mangiaratti, the direct cost for the special town meeting was approximately $7,500 for printing and mailing warrants, legal services, police details, and other expenses. In addition, he estimated that more than $20,000 worth of staff labor was required to prepare for and run the special meeting.
Speaking for the Article, Ms. Terra Friedrichs introduced zoning as a concept, and focused on ‘impact studies’ – the analysis of the effect of a zoning decision on the town’s infrastructure. Impacts include the variety of effects that a zoning decision may have. Those Ms. Friedrichs mentioned include traffic, town infrastructure (water, sewer) as well as economic impact (taxes, school services) and environmental impact (walkability, climate).
Ms. Friedrichs specifically noted Acton’s lack of affordable housing and noted the potential climate impact of zoning decisions; further noting that upcoming zoning decisions could be of historic magnitude and could result in substantial building in South Acton with a potential to displace current residents. Ms. Friedrichs noted that zoning articles will be on the Warrant for the upcoming Annual Town Meeting on May 6 and 7, 2024.
Responding for the Select Board, Board Chair Jim Snyder-Grant said that the Select Board had voted not to recommend the Article, and made the following points. “Maximum impact” was not defined, but could be interpreted as a worst case scenario, not the most likely scenario; and that the Planning Board does consider the impact of zoning decisions. Further, Mr. Snyder-Grant noted the Special Town Meeting’s impact on the town’s finances, and asserted that the timing of the Petition “…was deliberately chosen to require the extra expense of a special town meeting…”; and further asserted that the Petition’s purpose was to influence the vote at the regular town meeting.
Mr. Jason Cole, speaking for the Finance Committee, addressed both the letter and the spirit of the Petition. In general agreement with Mr. Snyder-Grant’s remarks, Mr. Cole noted the futility of a literal “maximum impact” calculation that found the total number of housing units at the maximum density per lot area for any given zone. However, he added that a draft template for impact analysis had been received and, if refined after discussion, could serve as a model that could be updated and used to integrate a diverse range of impact factors such as water, sewer, and emergency services availability. Mr. Cole closed by saying that the Finance Committee recommended the Article.
Mr. Bob Van Meter of Acton Housing For All presented a statement of opposition to the Article, echoing Mr. Snyder-Grant’s contention regarding the intent of the Article and noting that about 75% of Acton’s acreage (9000 acres out of about 12,000 total) is zoned for single-family housing, while only 3.3% (400 acres) is zoned for multi-family housing.
As is often done at Town Meeting, microphones were labeled “Pro” and “Con”, and Moderator Berry alternated calling on speakers at different microphones. Despite Moderator Berry’s reminder to meeting members to speak to the specific article and not to the zoning articles that would be considered at Annual Town Meeting in May, the line was fine and some comments strayed into the latter territory.
“Con” speakers echoed Mr. Snyder-Grant’s and Mr. Van Meter’s points, and again dismissed the utility of the worst-case scenario, noting that other constraints (such as water supply and sewer capacity) would become limiting before building was at zoning limits. Other “Con” speakers expressed dismay at the timing and process of the Special Town Meeting.
Ms. Madeline Cruz, President of Housing and Climate Justice for Acton, advocated for the Article, and for assessing the impact of zoning changes on the real estate market, foreseeing possible dislocation of current tenants if those zoning changes created new market opportunities. Another “Pro” speaker decried the imposition, by remote authority, of ill-fitting mandates on the town; possibly increasing use of the sewer system to its maximum capacity, and noting the increased burden on the electrical energy supply grid. Finally, Ms. Jane Moosbruker (in whose name the Article had been brought) said that a minimum of 10% affordable housing was insufficient – that the required minimum should be raised; adding that “good developers” would follow zoning guidelines and noting her experience with the Conservation Commision – in essence, “zone it and they will build.”
The Article was defeated by the Town Meeting voters; the vote tally was 72 (33%) for the Article and 147 (67%) against.