Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Training topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Panel urges required training for planning and zoning boards; bill to allow associate members broader voting authority also supported
Summary
Planners, municipal officials and training organizations told the committee that standardized, accessible pre‑service and continuing education for local land‑use board members would reduce illegal or delayed decisions and speed housing production; a second bill would let associate planning‑board members act on any matter before the board.
State planning and municipal experts urged the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government to approve both a training requirement for local land‑use boards and a technical fix allowing associate planning‑board members to act on the same matters as full members.
Catherine Lacey, senior planner at the Massachusetts Housing Partnership, testified in support of H.2299, saying accessible, comprehensive training is “good for our cities and towns” and can prevent delays or illegal decisions that block housing projects. MHP described repeated examples where well‑supported projects were held up by boards that lacked familiarity with the subdivision control law or Chapter 40A, the Zoning Act. Lacey said MHP’s Housing Institute and other trainings routinely draw hundreds of participants seeking baseline knowledge about getting housing built.
Planning professionals and trainers described an existing statewide infrastructure of education that could be expanded. Ralph Wilmer, legislative and policy officer for the Massachusetts chapter of the American Planning Association and chair of the Citizen Planner Training Collaborative, told the committee the collaborative has two dozen modules and has provided hundreds of trainings annually. He described H.2299’s key features: a requirement that new members complete an educational program within 60 days of appointment and periodic refresher training. He said the training would help municipalities that lack professional planning staff and reduce legal vulnerabilities from uninformed votes.
Jeff Lacey, a professional planner and longtime planning‑board participant, testified for H.2300, a technical bill that would allow associate planning‑board members (appointed to cover absences or conflicts) to act on any matter before a planning board. He said the lack of explicit authority for associate members currently can handicap a board when seeking a quorum or voting on typical planning matters. Zoning boards of appeal already have equivalent associate‑member language, he noted.
Witnesses and legislators discussed implementation details: training should be low‑cost and offered online, using existing curricular material, and the committee requested follow‑up on funding and delivery (for example, an online module similar to mandatory ethics trainings). No committee votes were recorded at the hearing.
