Supreme Judicial Court - Mass Cases

and the Tr;.al CourL erred in upholding t.he HAC
E. -
The HAC erred iri sLrikinq . Condition 42 .-
-. Monitoring
. . . __ Aqent.
The Board's Ilecision also requires Board approval
of Che project's Monit.orj.ng AyenL, the entity
responsible (among other tasks) for conductinq cost
certi ficatiori lo ens~ire compliance with profiC
limiCations, affordability restrictions, and other
rcgulatory aspects UT the project. RA Vo1.3., 77. 'l'he
HAC stnick this conditi-on, stating t.hat "appointmcnL
of the Monitoring Agent [is] wit.hin the province of
Massllousiny, but further, MassHousing's responsibility
to supervj.se the work of the Monitoring Agent
should no% be diluted by gi-ving thc Board vet.o power."
RA V ol. 1, 466.
'The Board was well wi.thin j.ts authority Lo
require approval of Lhe project's rrwriiloring agent.
As discussed above, the Lnspector General has
specifically rioLed t.he failure of designated
monitoring agent.s to identify abuses of (;.I.,. c.4OU:
"In the opinion of this Office, many
rauriicipal.itics havc a false sense oi security
t.hat effective cost certi.ficatinn monitoring and
enforcement is being conducted by Ihe subsidizing
agencies or1 their behalf. The rea1it.y is that.
developers are takinq advaritage of a weak
ovcrsiyht system and arc enriching themse1.ves at
the expense of the municipalities and t-heir
41