Winthrop’s Tree Grant Was Not “Lost” — Eligibility Was Improperly Denied
Dear Editor,
Readers of the Winthrop Transcript were recently told that Winthrop lost eligibility for a state tree-planting grant due to non-compliance with the MBTA Communities Law (M.G.L. c. 40A §3A). That claim requires clarification—because it is incorrect.
The grant at issue, administered by the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs (EOEEA), is not a 3A-related program. It has no connection to zoning, housing density, or by-right multi-family development. Its purpose is purely environmental: planting trees to reduce urban heat islands, improve air quality, and protect public health. EOEEA’s ad hoc conditioning of eligibility for this grant on compliance with an unrelated housing statute is not authorized by law. Nor does EOEEA have the authority to make law. Trees, quite plainly, bear no relationship to unlimited-occupancy development or to addressing a purported “housing crisis.”
The selective administration of the Cooling Corridors grant makes this denial even more troubling. In the same grant cycle, Greenfield—an MBTA-exempt community not subject to §3A—received $95,240. Boston, an MBTA community that has not complied with §3A and has effectively self-exempted, received $136,600, exceeding the program’s stated $100,000 cap. Winthrop, meanwhile—an officially designated environmental justice community disproportionately burdened by air and noise pollution from Logan Airport—received nothing. This is not neutral enforcement; it is arbitrary and inconsistent application untethered from environmental goals or legislative intent.
Context matters. Massachusetts is experiencing a significant contraction in state grant funding, with local aid and environmental programs increasingly squeezed. EOEEA’s FY26 budget was sharply reduced, consistent with cuts across most state agencies following Governor Maura Healey’s $130.2 million in line-item vetoes prior to final enactment. Communities statewide are now feeling the effects, reflected in a surge of override votes—approximately 170 between 2023 and 2025—and even fire stations struggling to fund baseline, acceptable working conditions. Against this backdrop, the incentive to justify withholding municipalities’ own tax-funded grants, even through contrived reasoning, is difficult to ignore.
This is not an isolated incident. Similar mischaracterized grant denials have been reported in Holden and Marblehead, raising serious concerns about a broader pattern of agency overreach and continued disregard for the Administrative Procedure Act.
The bottom line is simple: Winthrop did not “lose” a tree grant—it was improperly denied eligibility. Residents should know the matter is being actively addressed, and the Town remains vigilant in protecting Winthrop’s legal rights, environmental health, and fiscal interests.
Diana Viens