THE BUNKER HILL monument in Charlestown is a symbol of democracy’s promise, but it may soon be overshadowed – literally — by a colossal monument in nearby Everett to democracy’s failings.

That’s because Beacon Hill legislators have been busy working behind the scenes on a stealth budget amendment that would override current zoning of 43 acres of waterfront in Everett. Their goal: to clear the way for a soccer stadium sought by Robert Kraft and the Wynn casino organization that cannot be built there under current law without undertaking a public review process. “Cannot,” that is, unless you happen to be a sports or entertainment mogul.

As it stands now, state law restricts this piece of land to water-dependent industrial uses, which range from traditional port activities to the types of facilities needed to build and maintain offshore wind. These restrictions help preserve maritime uses that support our economy and clean energy goals, and they are becoming increasingly rare in Massachusetts. Which makes this backroom deal all the more concerning, and transparency all the more important.

The effort resurrects Rep. Dan Ryan’s similar proposal from last year, which passed in the House as an amendment to an economic development bill but was omitted in the final version. Ryan’s amendment was rejected at least in part because of the troubling optics of removing the protections of current law based on a backroom deal for local power brokers with no opportunity for public scrutiny or input.

Since that first attempt, the Legislature has had over a year to introduce a standalone bill, hold hearings, and hear from affected communities. Those communities include not only Everett, but also Charlestown and Somerville, all of which suffer from endless gridlock on the roads that would provide stadium access: Route 99, Sullivan Square, and Rutherford Avenue. Whether by inadvertence or design, elected officials didn’t seize their chance to engage the public.

A public legislative process to assess the stadium’s impact on the environment and on communities long overburdened by pollution would have been an opportunity both to develop mitigation measures and advance the Healey administration’s stated commitment to environmental justice. It also could have brought much-needed attention and potential solutions to what is already a transportation nightmare (notably one traceable in part to Wynn’s casino), including improvements to road circulation and to Sullivan Square Station, one of the busiest (and certainly the ugliest) station on the failing T’s Orange Line.

Oddly, at the same time he is supporting the stadium, Ryan is opposing Boston’s recently adopted “PLAN: Charlestown” out of legitimate concern that this same transportation infrastructure cannot bear the traffic generated by additional growth.

The proposed stadium (full disclosure: I’m a soccer fan) may indeed be the highest and best use for this site – now a derelict and contaminated power plant site. But that should be decided in an open and transparent process that includes the voices of all affected communities, weighs competing opportunities like clean energy, advances a sound vision for our shared waterfront, and includes enforceable measures to address any unavoidable impacts – like congestion and air pollution.

It now appears likely that the Legislature will codify this backroom deal as part of a supplemental budget. If so, Gov. Maura Healey should honor her stated commitment to transparency and environmental justice by using her line-item veto so that communities can be heard and the change in law is fully considered.

If she does not, commuters stuck in gridlock at the nexus of Everett, Somerville, and Boston, or breathing the foul air that traffic generates, can thank the elected officials beholden to Kraft and Wynn for still more of the same, and for ignoring them in passing the law that made it so.

Bradley Campbell is the president of the Conservation Law Foundation.