SAUGUS — Some town officials are asking the attorney general’s office to review a decision by Town Counsel John Vasapolli to require a two-thirds supermajority vote on the proposed Cliftondale Square Zoning Overlay District, which failed by three votes at Town Meeting Monday evening.
The overlay was brought forward by Precinct 2 Town Meeting member Joe Vecchione, and generated nearly three hours of discussion and debate during the third and final session of Annual Town Meeting Monday. 23 Town Meeting members voted in favor, with just 18 against. However, the overlay failed to achieve the two-thirds vote Vasapolli deemed necessary for passage.
But, in a statement Tuesday, Vecchione indicated he believed that decision may have been incorrect, citing a state law passed in 2021 that reduced the threshold necessary to make zoning changes allowing multi-family or mixed-use development “by-right” to a simple majority.
“I reached out again today to the Office of Community Development (with Counsel Vasapolli cc’d) asking for the attorney general or applicable party to review the article to make a final determination on whether the vote should have been simple majority or not,” Vecchione said. “I think it’s a fair ask given the majority support of Town Meeting and clearly meeting the purpose and intent of what the Zoning Act of 2021 sought to achieve.”
In his statement, Vecchione cited Chapter 40A Section 5, which allows for a simple-majority vote to permit multi-family housing or mixed-use development by right in an “eligible location.” Eligible locations are defined under the statute as “areas near transit stations, including rapid transit, commuter rail, and bus and ferry terminals; or areas of concentrated development, including town and city centers, other existing commercial districts in cities and towns, and existing rural village districts.” Cliftondale Square, with a bus stop along Lincoln Avenue, would be defined as an eligible location under the statute.
Board of Selectmen Chair Anthony Cogliano said he would forward the bylaw to the attorney general for review.
Vecchione said he first asked Vasapolli for an opinion on the article in mid-April, at which time he was told the article would require a simple-majority vote. Later, Vasapolli contacted Vecchione to amend his decision, citing the fact that the article combined amendments that require a two-thirds majority with those that need just a simple majority.
“I reached out a month before Town Meeting to settle the voting threshold, either way, prior to Town Meeting,” Vecchione said. “The flip-flopping, lapses in communication, lack of concise and clear reasoning, and fact that the final decision came merely hours prior to Town Meeting despite proactively reaching out a month prior, to say I’m disappointed would be an understatement.”
“I think overall, we need to do better as a town as it relates to communication with its residents and representatives. That starts from the top-down,” he added.
Reached by phone Wednesday, Vasapolli said the statute is “pretty clear” with regards to the issue. He said the law dictates that amendments to zoning bylaws requiring a two-thirds majority vote, combined with those requiring a simple majority, still call for a supermajority.
“Any amendment that requires a simple-majority vote shall not be combined with an amendment that requires a two-thirds majority vote,” the law reads.
Vecchione’s proposal amended the town’s zoning bylaws by permitting new uses like breweries and distilleries, and altering dimensional, density, and signage requirements — all of which require a two-thirds majority. Although it contained other changes that only require a simple majority under the statue, Vasapolli deemed a supermajority necessary for the proposal.
Had the article simply amended the zoning to permit multi-family housing or mixed-use development, and not included all the additional changes, Vasapolli said it would have only required a simple majority.
“He did a lot of work, I respect him for it,” Vasapolli said.
