>So last May, at a special town meeting, Rockport adopted new zoning bylaws that would put it into compliance with the Baker administration’s new rules aimed at increasing multifamily housing in the 175 cities and towns that are served by the MBTA.

>The plan, which passed...called for a 12-acre “transit-oriented village” near the Railroad Avenue commuter rail station

Yay! More housing! This is what we wanted. Public transportation is added benefit. Sounds great.

>the losing side filed a 10-taxpayer suit ... charging the administration’s regulations — and the entire Housing Choice law — are “unconstitutional.”

It's not unconstitutional, it non-constitutional. As in, nothing to do with the state constitution.

>The new rules, finalized in August, are expected to create an estimated 283,500 new units of housing statewide

>In the suit, the Rockport taxpayers allege that in adopting the law the Legislature “has attempted to coerce the municipalities to adopt MBTA zoning districts which it, itself, is not constitutionally empowered to draw. The coercion comes in the form of a statutory denial of access to specific grant programs.”

>MBTA communities that don’t comply will be shut out of the Housing Choice Initiative grant program, MassWorks, which provides grants for infrastructure, and the Local Capital Projects Fund.

Isn't this the same kind of coercion used by the Federal government to get states to have a 21 year drinking age in exchange for federal highway money?