Thursday, June 14, 2007
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruled today, in Boothroyd et al vs. Zoning Board of Appeals et al, that a municipal zoning board of appeals may consider regional needs as a reason to override local zoning laws -- something that Amherst's ZBA did, and which a group of Amherst residents argued is impermissible under applicable state statutes. I mention this because I assume, based on what I've been hearing recently, that the citizens of Massachusetts have an important and inalienable right to now vote on whether to accept or reject this SJC ruling. That principal seemed awfully important to an awful lot of people, as recently as a few hours ago. I should hope that they won't let one small setback diminish their enthusiasm for securing that cherished right. Why, if homosexuals gave up that easily, would they have the rights they have now?
|
 |
|
|
|
 |
| Adam Reilly's news and notes from Massachusetts' always interesting political scene. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| July, 2008 (6) |
| June, 2008 (18) |
| May, 2008 (23) |
| April, 2008 (22) |
| March, 2008 (25) |
| February, 2008 (14) |
| January, 2008 (59) |
| December, 2007 (43) |
| November, 2007 (19) |
| October, 2007 (31) |
| September, 2007 (32) |
| August, 2007 (21) |
| July, 2007 (18) |
| June, 2007 (27) |
| May, 2007 (36) |
| April, 2007 (27) |
| March, 2007 (53) |
| February, 2007 (36) |
| January, 2007 (43) |
| December, 2006 (49) |
| November, 2006 (38) |
| October, 2006 (27) |
| September, 2006 (35) |
| August, 2006 (21) |
| July, 2006 (18) |
| June, 2006 (52) |
| May, 2006 (31) |
| April, 2006 (29) |
| March, 2006 (57) |
| February, 2006 (27) |
| January, 2006 (18) |
| December, 2005 (1) |
| November, 2005 (12) |
| October, 2005 (28) |
| September, 2005 (7) |
| March, 0200 (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 del.icio.us/OnTheDownload
|
|
|