Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the State Property Zoning Exemption topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mass. bill would require public‑private state building projects to follow local zoning, bar bond‑backed projects
Summary
Representative Daniel J. Hunt filed House Bill 3359 on Jan. 14, 2025, proposing to amend Chapter 7C to prevent the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance from approving public‑private building projects that are exempt from local zoning or that would be financed by bonds.
Representative Daniel J. Hunt filed a bill on Jan. 14, 2025, that would change state rules governing state property projects carried out as public‑private partnerships. The bill, House No. 3359, would amend Section 4 of Chapter 7C of the Massachusetts General Laws to require that the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (DCAMM) not approve any building project that is also a public‑private agreement unless the project is subject to local zoning ordinances, and to bar approval of such a project if it would result in the issuance of a bond.
If enacted, the proposal would remove a statutory exemption that has allowed certain state property projects to proceed without local zoning review, and it would prevent DCAMM from approving public‑private building projects that involve bonded financing. The bill’s text specifically cites Section 3 of Chapter 40A and states the new paragraph is to apply “notwithstanding section 3 of chapter 40A, or any other general or special law to the contrary.”
The measure was presented to the House and listed under the committee assignment “State Administration and Regulatory Oversight.” The filing notice also notes a similar matter, House No. 3059, was filed in the 2023–2024 session.
The bill, as filed, is a legislative proposal and does not record any debate, committee action, votes or formal direction in the provided text. The filing itself is the only official action in the transcript excerpt; no committee hearings or stakeholder positions are noted in the document.
Who would be affected is not specified in the filing, but the text names DCAMM as the approving authority and restricts approvals tied to public‑private agreements and bond issuance. The filing does not quantify how many projects, dollars or municipalities might be affected, nor does it specify implementation details or transition rules.
Next steps under the House’s normal process would be referral to the named committee and possible public hearings, amendments and votes; those steps are not recorded in the filing. A similar bill listed from the prior session indicates this topic has been raised previously, but the filing does not report prior committee findings or outcomes.
