By Senator Lydia Edwards
First, the good news. Residents of Winthrop are passionate and deeply care about the town’s future. You can see the passion in the number of people running for local office, in the letters to the editor, and if you care to look online, you can find a “spirited” debate.
Second, the bad, or rather interesting, news. Zoning reform will likely remain a heavily debated topic for the foreseeable future. Even after the SJC’s decision finding the MBTA Communities Act to be constitutional and affirming the Attorney General’s enforcement powers, and despite the Superior Court dismissing claims that the law is an unfunded mandate, there is likely to be a statewide debate.
Two campaigns for ballot initiatives addressing zoning are busily collecting signatures to present zoning reform directly to the people. The first one would repeal Section 3A of the MBTA Communities Act, undo all local zoning created under the law (unless a pending building permit exists), and prohibit the state from favoring cities that comply with the law. The second ballot initiative would remove zoning authority from the state and transfer it to local cities and towns.
While some who are tired of the conversation may find a prolonged debate to be devastating, I wonder if it’s an opportunity for both sides of the 3A debate to locally waive their “white flags” and also be fiscally responsible.
Hear me out.
It’s painfully obvious that debate around 3A has seeped into almost every form of discourse in the town. There are proxy wars over the topic online, in the recall debate (now pending at the SJC), in how we judge candidates, and in some cases, how we judge our neighbors. Here is a hot take: good people who love Winthrop do not like 3A and find it to be an abhorrent overreach, and good people who love Winthrop do like 3A or want us to comply to qualify for state funds. And I would venture to guess there are a great number of people who don’t know what 3A is and are more concerned with the rising costs of goods. Finally, let’s not forget the number of people who have completely turned off from the topic because of how nasty things have become.
So what am I suggesting? I suggest we get as much money as we can while the opportunity is available. Ultimately, these ballot questions will be the decision-makers as to whether 3A is here to stay. However, that decision won’t be made until November 2026. Do we really want to go another year debating whether we should pass a plan, how much not passing a plan will cost us, and what our plan B is if we don’t get the state money? I am already hearing that this upcoming municipal election in November 2025 will be another proxy war regarding 3A. We have plenty of issues to concern ourselves with beyond 3A, but I fear that will be the only issue that’s debated.
The fact of the matter is, we can pass a compliant plan, qualify for state money, and reform or rescind 3A. If, in November 2026, the voters overturn 3A, we will still keep the money, and any plan we passed will be undone.
All the anti- and pro-3A energy doesn’t have to be wasted on proxy wars. Instead, go collect signatures! Also, you can advocate for carveouts for 3A, similar to the ones Rep. Turco proposed. I co-sponsored the carve-out that acknowledged Winthrop for having already met its 40B requirements.
Look – it is just a suggestion and hopefully one that leads us back to a more peaceful conversation about the future of Winthrop. Personally, I agree with both sides: Winthrop is worth fighting for. But let’s also agree we can walk and chew gum at the same time – we can remain competitive for state funds and fight for the right kind of zoning for Winthrop.Lydia Edwards is a State Senator representing the 1st Suffolk and Middlesex district and has served in that position since 2022