On Monday, March 2, Holden voters overwhelmingly rejected the proposed MBTA Communities Act zoning overlay at a Special Town Meeting, with 520 residents voting against the measure and 257 voting in favor of it.

The proposal would have created a multifamily zoning overlay district bringing the town into compliance with the state’s MBTA Communities Law. These overlay districts included The Halstead site on Newbury Drive and 2077 Main St., commonly referred to as the Trap Rock site. The law requires designated municipalities to adopt zoning that allows multifamily housing as of right. It does not mandate that housing be built but requires towns to establish zoning capacity and submit a compliance application to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities.

The vote followed months of debate, more recently centering on concerns raised by Ryan MacKay, owner of Lilac Hedge Farm, whose property borders the proposed overlay district.

Addressing criticism that he became involved too late, MacKay said he was not made aware of the proposal early in the process. 

He told residents at the meeting, “The truth is simple, I was never notified. Had I been given the courtesy of a notice, there is no question I would have been at the first meeting fighting.”

MacKay argued that high-density housing near his pasture would jeopardize his farm’s operations and insurance coverage.

“You cannot run a farm with 100 mature, 1,500-pound cows and multiple bulls, next to an apartment complex just yards away,” MacKay said, adding that “it’s a risk no provider would take.”

His wife, Rachel MacKay, echoed those concerns, describing the pasture bordering the proposed zoning district as “the heartbeat of our operation.” She said putting that land at risk “effects the nearly 100 staff members that Ryan employs” and added that “if only proper notice had been provided early on, all of this could have been prevented.”

However, a member of the MBTA working group that identified the two tracts that would make up the overlay district, clarified that a wooded area 210-feet wide to 439-feet wide separates the pasture from the Trap Rock property line. However, that point was not enough to sway the vote.

Members of the town’s MBTA Communities Act working group also disputed the claim that concerns were ignored. Linda Long-Bellil, chair of the working group, said the group sought additional information from MacKay about his insurance concerns.

“Regarding Lilac Hedge Farm – we asked the owner, Mr. MacKay, whether we could get more information about his insurance company’s underwriting standards so we could address their concerns by modifying the parcel, but he showed no interest in working with us,” Long-Bellil said following the vote.

The owner of the Trap Rock property, Drew Forrest, also weighed in before the meeting, submitting a statement to be read publicly. In it, he warned residents that approval of the overlay would likely lead to construction.

“If our land is zoned for high density development, these units will be built,” Forrest wrote. “If this zoning passes, the legal barrier is gone... It is no longer a question of if, but when.”

But Long-Bellil also counters that concern. “The Trap Rock website says that they are able to work the quarry for decades to come,” said Long-Bellil. “He has complete control of his land. While the overlay makes the property more valuable, he doesn’t have to sell it to anyone at any time.”

Long-Bellil also explained, concerning threats of eminent domain that were raised, that the state only pursues that option for public infrastructure or economic development projects.

Supporters of the overlay framed the vote as a matter of preserving local control. One resident, who described themself as a concerned resident, said that adopting the proposal would allow the town to retain authority over the zoning framework.

“At the Special Town meeting, it was explained that if the voters approved the plan that was proposed, it could be changed in the future in a way that enabled us to keep local control rather than risk having that control taken away from us as a result of a lawsuit,” the resident said.

With the result of the vote, attention now shifts to the state.

In a statement issued after the vote, Attorney General Andrea Joy Campbell said enforcement of the MBTA Communities Law will continue.

“Courts have consistently ruled that compliance with the MBTA Communities Law is mandatory and that my office has the authority to enforce it,” Campbell said. “Massachusetts has an urgent housing crisis and every municipality must do their part to help solve it. I will continue working to ensure all MBTA Communities, including Holden, meet their legal responsibility… my office remains ready to assist any town working to come into compliance with the law.”

In the town of Milton, opposition to the MBTA Communities act resulted in legal consequences. When voters rejected a zoning plan in 2024 that would have met the law’s requirements, the Attorney General sued the town to force compliance. Milton Town officials reported that more than $250,000 in legal fees were spent fighting the lawsuit. The fight against the state was unsuccessful.

According to the Attorney General’s Office, Holden had already been named as a defendant in a lawsuit filed in January against the nine remaining municipalities out of compliance. The office said it had not yet served Holden in order to allow the town meeting process to unfold. Now that the vote has failed, the Attorney General’s Office confirmed it will move forward with the case against Holden. However, as of press time, no complaint had yet been served to the Town of Holden.

The lawsuit seeks to push towns toward compliance, requiring the adoption of a zoning district where multifamily housing is permitted as of right. The state is not seeking financial penalties but is pursuing declaratory and injunctive relief to enforce the statute. 

For now, Holden remains out of compliance with the MBTA Communities Act. What comes next will likely be determined in court, as town officials and state authorities navigate the legal and planning implications of Monday night’s vote.