Massachusetts Attorney General Intervenes to Back Cambridge in Inclusionary Zoning Lawsuit

Massachusetts Attorney General Andrea J. Campbell formally intervened Thursday in a lawsuit challenging Cambridge’s inclusionary zoning policy, warning the case could have sweeping implications for housing policy across the state.

The lawsuit, filed in December by developer Patrick W. Barrett III, alleges the city’s ordinance — which requires developers to designate a portion of units in large residential projects as income-restricted — violates the Fifth Amendment by taking private property.

Barrett, who owns properties between 345 and 365 Columbia St. in Cambridge and plans to build a condominium complex, argues the policy makes development financially unfeasible. Under the city’s rules, 20 percent of the residential floor area in his proposed project would have to be income-restricted. He alleges complying with the requirement would cost more than $11 million.

Campbell moved to intervene ahead of a February hearing, citing the state’s interest in preserving municipalities’ authority to require affordable housing. Her office argues that inclusionary zoning falls within cities’ legal powers and is a key tool in addressing Massachusetts’ housing shortage.

State law allows the attorney general to intervene when the legality of a local ordinance is challenged, particularly when the outcome could affect other communities. While the office often files amicus briefs in such cases, formal intervention allows the state to participate directly in defending the policy as the case proceeds.

A ruling in Barrett’s favor would apply immediately only to his development but could set a precedent for similar challenges in more than 140 municipalities across Massachusetts that have adopted inclusionary zoning policies.

Campbell filed to intervene shortly before a February hearing, which was postponed due to a snowstorm. A judge approved her motion without objection at the start of Thursday’s rescheduled hearing.

In her filing, Campbell argued the lawsuit is deficient on several grounds, including that Barrett has not clearly identified a specific property that was taken and has failed to demonstrate the reasonable investment-backed expectations required to support a constitutional claim.

Barrett, however, contends the policy makes large-scale residential development in Cambridge financially unworkable as construction costs rise. He argues that requiring below-market units would significantly increase project costs.

The lawsuit comes amid ongoing debate over how Cambridge should expand its affordable housing supply. City officials have relied on inclusionary zoning — first adopted in 1998 — to increase income-restricted units in new developments, arguing that market-rate construction alone does not produce enough affordable housing.

With Campbell’s intervention approved, the case will now move into discovery, with both sides set to exchange evidence and conduct depositions through November.

—Staff writer Adelaide L. D. Roger can be reached at [email protected]. Follow her on X @adelaidelrg.