Tag: rent control

  • Brookline’s rent control bid advances through state legislature

    Brookline’s rent control bid advances through state legislature

    The Massachusetts State House. Photo via Wikimedia Commons

    Brookline’s push to reestablish a cap on rent increases cleared another hurdle this month, with the town’s home rule petition winning initial approval in the Massachusetts Senate, a  procedural step before a final vote in that chamber in April.

    If approved, the bill would move to the House, bringing the town one step closer to regaining the authority to enact rent stabilization for the first time since 1994, when Massachusetts voters approved a statewide ballot question banning rent control as it previously existed.

    Because of Chapter 40P of the Massachusetts General Laws , enacted through that 1994 ballot question, Brookline must obtain authorization from the Legislature through a home rule petition before adopting rent stabilization locally. If approved, it would become the first Massachusetts municipality to implement rent regulation in more than three decades.

    The proposal reached Beacon Hill after a November 2023 Special Town Meeting vote, when members approved a warrant article 112–107, with 13 abstentions, directing the town to seek state authorization.

    Alec Lebovitz, a Town Meeting and Advisory Committee member who was one of the article’s original petitioners, said the policy was crafted in response to sharp rent increases threatening to displace residents.

    “I can remember speaking to one young woman who rents a home with her partner and her daughter,” Lebovitz said. “She was facing, at that time, an increase in her rent, $800 a month. No repairs had been made to the house. Nothing had changed, except that the landlord determined he could charge that much.”

    Under the proposal, Brookline could cap annual rent increases at the Consumer Price Index plus 3%, or 7%, whichever is lower. Newly constructed units would be exempt for 15 years, along with owner-occupied properties with four units or fewer.

    “We were very deliberate when we crafted our home rule petition to try and build more flexibility to avoid creating that disincentive,” Lebovitz said, referring to concerns about discouraging new housing development.

    The Brookline petition is advancing as voters prepare to consider a separate statewide initiative petition  that would repeal Chapter 40P and establish a framework for rent stabilization to be imposed on every municipality in the commonwealth.

    That proposal would limit annual rent increases for most covered units to the Consumer Price Index or 5%, whichever is lower, including after tenant turnover. It would exempt owner-occupied buildings with four or fewer units and housing constructed within the past 10 years.

    Under the state’s initiative process, proponents may negotiate with lawmakers before the measure appears on the ballot. Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes for All, told The Boston Globe earlier this month  that the group would consider dropping the measure if lawmakers passed a “strong” rent control policy.

    The prospect of that more sweeping measure is shaping debate over authorizing individual municipalities like Brookline to adopt more limited policies.

    “I support communities voting, by community, for if they want rent stabilization,” said Sen. Cindy Creem, D-Newton, who filed Brookline’s home rule petition in the Senate and said affordability is the top concern she hears from constituents.

    “I think it makes more sense to do that versus the broad issues in the ballot,” Creem said. “What Brookline is doing is more realistic.”

    Rep. Tommy Vitolo, D-Brookline, said he views his role on home rule petitions as advancing the will of the Town Meeting.

    “If Town Meeting says they want it, it’s now my job to try to make it happen,” Vitolo said.

    However, while acknowledging that rent caps could help current tenants, he warned of long-term tradeoffs.

    “It will certainly improve the housing affordability situation for the people who have housing,” Vitolo said. “It’s not clear that the folks who want to move in but now can’t find a place will feel quite as good about it.”

    Vitolo said rent stabilization does not address what he sees as the underlying cause of rising costs.

    “The problem with housing prices is that supply isn’t meeting demand. We need more housing,” he said.

    Rep. Kevin Honan, D-Boston, who chaired the Legislature’s Committee on Housing for 17 years, came out more decidedly in favor of Brookline’s petition.

    “I would be supportive of that,” Honan said. “The cost of housing is out of control.”

    Honan said the proposal strikes a balance by allowing rent increases while offering predictability.

    “That’s still a rent increase that would allow a property owner to maintain the property and make a profit,” he said.

    Asked about concerns that rent stabilization could deter new housing construction, Honan said he didn’t anticipate that problem in high-demand communities like Brookline.

    “Many of these communities are so desirable to live in that production will continue,” Honan said.

    Doug Quattrochi, executive director of MassLandlords, a statewide landlord trade association that counts Brookline property owners among its ranks, said his organization opposes any rent caps that do not compensate property owners.

    “An uncompensated cap is a nonstarter,” Quattrochi said.

    He argued that Chapter 40P allows rent regulation only if landlords are reimbursed for the difference between market rent and the controlled rate, and said limiting rent without compensation amounts to taking private property without payment.

    Quattrochi acknowledged that no municipality in the country currently operates a compensated rent control system and that such an approach would require significant local budget overhauls.

    “We would never argue against teachers, firefighters, or police budgets. It’s all super important,” Quattrochi said. “But towns also fund discretionary projects like dog parks and conservation. At the end of the day, if you want rent-burdened people to remain in your community, someone has to decide how to pay for it.”

    Quattrochi noted that the landlord advocacy group Housing for Massachusetts coalition has already filed suit challenging the statewide initiative petition, arguing that repealing Chapter 40P’s compensation requirement through an initiative petition violates a clause in Article 48 of the state Constitution  prohibiting initiative petitions that aim to contravene “the right to receive compensation for private property appropriated to public use.” 

    He said Brookline’s home rule petition would likely face similar legal challenges if enacted without compensation.

    “This rent control stuff is not going to happen,” he said. “Option one, compensation, is the bottom line; option two is we’re suing.”

    Correction: A previous version of this article misspelled the name of MassLandlords director Doug Quattrochi. The article has been updated.

  • MA rent control opponents say initiative would hurt small landlords

    Advocates for small property owners describe the rent control proposal likely headed for next fall’s ballot as the most “restrictive and aggressive” the state has seen to date, and say it would be detrimental to small landlords.

    Small property owners – who provide more than 65% of Massachusetts’ rental housing, according to the Small Property Owners Association – operate on tight margins, so they’re typically only a few missed bank checks away from bankruptcy or losing their business, according to Amir Shahsavari, the organization’s vice president.

    He said if these “mom and pop” businesses no longer exist, tenants will be in a “tough predicament” if properties are then taken over by larger corporations. That’s because they will no longer have a person to connect with immediately if there are issues in their building – a benefit usually provided by smaller landlords.

    In addition, operating costs like utilities, insurance and particularly property taxes – which Boston Mayor Michelle Wu recently said are expected to increase by 13% in January – have risen in recent years, which factors into rents. However, if caps are put in place, advocates are concerned property owners will not be able to adapt to these costs.

    “On one hand, we appreciate the pressures that renters have when they say that rent is increasing,” Shahsavari said. “But what people miss in this story is that operating costs are also going up exorbitantly for the property owner, too.”

    “If (small property owners) can’t increase rents, what’s going to happen is they have to exit the market,” added Tony Lopes, a SPOA board member. “We can’t afford to supply this housing at a loss every month.”

    The initiative seeks to limit annual rent increases for most residential units by either the amount of the Consumer Price Index increase or 5% – whichever value is lower – during a 12-month period. It would set base rents as of Jan. 31, 2026, but residents would not vote on the measure, which would apply to every municipality, until next November.

    What must happen for the question to make the ballot

    To reach the ballot, it must still go through a process that includes certification of more than 124,000 signatures, legislative review and likely another round of signature gathering if lawmakers don’t approve the proposal.

    To account for small property owners, the measure includes a provision to exempt owner-occupied buildings with four or fewer units. Noemi Ramos, executive director of the New England Community Project, said because of this, the notion that the measure will impact small landlords is “out the window.”

    But Shahsavari said the provision is “misleading” because property owners with four units or fewer are a minority among the small property owner community. Because of the tight limit, those who exceed this amount – which he said is the “vast majority” of small property owners – would be categorized with companies that operate on a much larger and commercialized scale.

    Instead, he said the definition of a small property owner depends on a business structure’s size, scope and reach, rather than the number of units an owner manages.

    “What one small owner can handle might be different from the capacity that another owner would have,” Shahsavari said. “It ultimately comes down to the degree to which the owner can manage his or her business in a hands-on way without expanding too far out to the point where they really become a conglomerate.”

    Ramos said Homes For All Massachusetts, the statewide coalition behind the ballot initiative, decided to use four units as the cut-off after speaking with small property owners and deciding “what are our values when we think about how we define small landlords.”

    “I remember asking a developer in the (city of Boston’s Rent Stabilization Advisory Committee), ‘How do you define a small landlord?’ and they said, ‘Fifty units or less,’” Ramos said. “When you think about 50 units, that’s a business. That’s no longer a small landlord.”

    Developers say threat of rent control has ‘chilling effect’

    Another provision in the initiative addresses development by exempting units where the “first residential certificate of occupancy” is under 10 years old, or 10 years from when the certificate of occupancy is validated

    Tamara Small, CEO of the NAIOP Commercial Real Estate Development Association of Massachusetts, said the “threat of the (rent control) question” is already having a chilling effect on investment and development. If put in place, she said the measure would also lead to decreased quality of housing and repairs, which would result in either subpar conditions or units being taken off the market.

    Antonio Ennis, a Dorchester community organizer at City Life / Vida Urbana, disagrees. He said landlords should always factor in money for property repairs and keeping buildings up to code. Ennis, a small property owner who occupies one unit and rents out two others in a three-decker, would not be affected.

    Developers and property owner advocates say the primary solution to solving the state’s housing crisis is increased development, which they say rent control hinders.

    “If rent control is in place in the market, investors do not go to that market. They go elsewhere,” Small said. “Without those investment dollars, projects are not built.”

    “No financial decisions and investments are made on a 10-year time horizon,” added Conor Yunits, committee chair for an opposition group for the measure called Housing for Massachusetts.

    Mark Martinez, staff housing attorney for the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, pointed out that despite not having rent control for more than 30 years, Massachusetts remains behind in terms of housing production.

    “This isn’t a development policy. This is a stabilization policy,” he said. “Judging a stabilization policy based off whether it’s going to spur development doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”

    He said the measure is a “commonsense” policy, but not the only measure that needs to be taken to solve the housing crisis.

    “It’s going to take a decade, if not longer, to build all the housing that we need,” Martinez said. “But in the meantime, families need to be able to stay around.”

    Small pointed to cities like Austin and Phoenix as models for Boston to solve its housing crisis. In both cities, an increased housing supply resulted in lower rent growth and prices.

    How high are rents in Massachusetts?

    Massachusetts historically has some of the nation’s highest rents, and recent reports have ranked it as the state with the second highest cost of living. In May, the Consumer Affairs Journal of Consumer Research ranked Massachusetts as the fifth worst state for renters due to a lack of affordability and availability.

    “This is a statewide issue, and we’re continuing to see the crisis intensify,” said Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes For All Massachusetts. “We can’t wait while corporate landlords come into our cities and towns and hike up the rent and displace our communities.”

    Over 40% of state residents who rent are “cost-burdened,” as of 2022, meaning they pay above 30% of their incomes on housing, according to data from Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. In some areas, such as Springfield, Boston, Cambridge, Newton and Barnstable, it’s more than 50% of renters.

    Residents paying over 50% of their income on housing are classified as “severely cost burdened,” according to the Healey administration’s “A Home for Everyone” initiative. The percentage of renters in Massachusetts who fall into this category ranges from about 20%-30%, depending on the area.

    When families have to spend an excess amount of their income on housing, they have less money for needs such as food, transportation and childcare. They’re also unable to “save money for opportunities that could provide a pathway to higher income, as well as wealth-building,” which includes education, job training or homeownership, according to the initiative.

    “Rent is often the first place people put their money toward,” said Chelsea Sedani, director of advocacy at the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center. “If you don’t have that, it makes a lot of other things very challenging.”

    Rent control advocates say measure would help economy in other ways

    Decreased rents could have an effect on the larger economy as well, because they could potentially increase purchasing power.

    “If we alleviate the pressure that people are feeling around housing costs, we’re going to make it easier for them to spend in other areas of their lives,” Sedani said.

    The last time Massachusetts had a rent control measure in place was in 1994 – but voters overturned it. Many opponents cite this as another reason the measure should not be implemented.

    However, state Sen. Patricia Jehlen, D-Somerville, pointed out that Boston, Brookline and Cambridge voted in favor of keeping rent control before it was outlawed statewide in 1994. She said Massachusetts needs to not just create more housing but to preserve “naturally occurring affordable housing.”

    “People are not going to stay in Massachusetts if we just count on building new housing,” she said. “It’s not fast enough and not cheap enough.”

    High rents make it difficult for residents to plan and save money long term, so rent caps would provide predictability that would keep people in their homes longer, Martinez said.

    Although both supporters and opponents presented different ways on how to approach the housing affordability crisis, they agreed on one solution: increasing the supply of housing.

    “Supply, supply, supply,” Yunits said. “That’s really all there is. We’ve got to build.”

  • Small landlords push back against rent control ballot proposal

    Advocates for landlords describe the rent control proposal likely headed for next fall’s ballot as the most “restrictive and aggressive” the state has seen.

    Advocates for small rental property owners describe the rent control proposal likely headed for next fall’s ballot as the most “restrictive and aggressive” the state has seen to date and say it would be detrimental to small landlords.

    Small property owners operate on tight margins, so many are typically only a few missed bank checks away from bankruptcy or losing their business, said Amir Shahsavari, president of the Small Property Owners Association.

    He said if these “mom and pop” businesses no longer exist, tenants will be in a “tough predicament” if properties are taken over by larger corporations because they will no longer have a person to connect with immediately if there are issues in their building, a benefit usually provided by smaller landlords.

    In addition, operating costs, like utilities, insurance and property taxes have risen in recent years, which factors into rent pricing. However, if caps are put in place, advocates are concerned property owners will not be able to adapt to these rising costs.

    (New Bedford’s residential tax rate has been dropping from year to year, but the average tax bill has gone up because property values have increased.)

    “On one hand, we appreciate the pressures that renters have when they say that rent is increasing,” Shahsavari said. “But what people miss in this story is that operating costs are also going up exorbitantly for the property owner, too.”

    “If [small property owners] can’t increase rent rates, what’s going to happen is they have to exit the market,” said Tony Lopes, a SPOA vice president. “We can’t afford to supply this housing at a loss every month.”

    The initiative seeks to limit annual rent increases for most residential units in Massachusetts by either the Consumer Price Index increase or 5% — whichever value is lower — during a 12-month period. It would set base rents as of Jan. 31, 2026, but state residents would not vote on the measure, which would apply to every municipality, until next November.

    To reach the ballot, it must still go through a process that includes certification of more than 124,000 signatures, legislative review and likely another round of signature gathering if lawmakers do not approve the proposal.

    Effect on small property owners

    The rent control proposal would exempt owner-occupied buildings with four or fewer units from the measure. Noemi Ramos, executive director of the New England Community Project, said because of this, the notion that the measure will impact small landlords is “out the window.”

    But Shahsavari of SPOA said this provision is “misleading” because property owners with four or fewer units are a minority among small property owners. Because of the tight limit, those who exceed this number — which he said is the “vast majority” of small property owners — would be categorized with companies that operate on a much larger and commercialized scale.

    The SPOA says small property owners provide 65% of the rental housing in Massachusetts. Shahsavari said he doesn’t define a small property owner based on the number of apartment units an owner manages, but on the business’s structure, size, scope and reach.

    “What one small owner can handle might be different from the capacity that another owner would have,” he said. “But it does ultimately come down to the degree to which the owner can manage his or her business in a hands-on way without expanding too far out to the point where they really become a conglomerate.”

    Ramos said Homes For All Massachusetts, the statewide coalition behind the ballot initiative, decided to use four units as the cut-off in the provision after speaking with small property owners and deciding “what are our values when we think about how we define small landlords.”

    “I remember asking one of the developers in the [city of Boston’s Rent Stabilization Advisory Committee], ‘how do you define a small landlord?’ and they said ‘50 units or less,’” Ramos said. “When you think about 50 units, that’s a business. That’s no longer a small landlord.”

    Another provision in the initiative addresses development — another industry opposed to the bill — by exempting new apartment units for 10 years. (The provision would apply to apartment buildings that open after the measure’s approval and also those that have been built within the last 10 years.)

    Tamara Small, CEO of the NAIOP Commercial Real Estate Development Association of Massachusetts, said the “threat of the [rent control] question” is already having a chilling effect on investment and development. If implemented, she said the measure would also lead to decreased quality of housing and repairs, which would result in either sub-par conditions or units being taken off the market.

    Antonio Ennis, a community organizer for Boston’s Dorchester neighborhood at City Life / Vida Urbana, disagreed with quality concerns and said landlords should always factor in money for property repairs and keeping buildings up to code. Ennis, a small property owner who occupies one unit and rents out two other units in a triple decker in Dorchester, would not be affected by the ballot measure.

    Developers and property owner advocates said the primary solution to solving the state’s housing crisis is increased development, which they said a rent control measure would hinder.

    “If rent control is in place in the market, investors do not go to that market. They go elsewhere,” Small said. “Without those investment dollars, projects are not built.”

    Small pointed toward cities like Austin and Phoenix as models for Boston to solve its housing crisis. In both cities, an increased housing supply resulted in lower rent growth and prices.

    “No financial decisions and investments are made on a 10-year time horizon,” said Conor Yunits, committee chair for an opposition group for the measure called “Housing for Massachusetts.”

    The National Low Income Housing Coalition stated that Massachusetts needs to create 183,000 homes for low-income households statewide, according to its 2025 Massachusetts Housing Profile. 

    Mark Martinez, staff housing attorney for the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, pointed out that despite not having rent control for over 30 years, Massachusetts is still behind in terms of housing production.

    “This isn’t a development policy. This is a stabilization policy,” he said. “Judging a stabilization policy based off of whether or not it’s going to spur development doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.”

    He said the measure is a “common sense” policy, but not the only measure that needs to be taken to solve the housing crisis.

    “It’s going to take a decade, if not longer, to build all the housing that we need,” Martinez said. “But in the meantime, families need to be able to stay around.”

    New Bedford’s City Council voted in 2023 to introduce a non-binding ballot question that would’ve asked voters if they supported “an ordinance stabilizing rent,” but Mayor Jon Mitchell vetoed it. Councilor Shane Burgo, who spearheaded the measure, said this fall that he still supports the idea.

    Rents in Massachusetts

    Massachusetts historically has some of the nation’s highest rent prices, and recent reports have ranked it as the state with the second highest cost of living. In May, the Journal of Consumer Research ranked Massachusetts as the fifth worst state for renters due to a lack of affordability and availability.

    “This is a statewide issue, and we’re continuing to see the crisis intensify across the state,” said Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes For All Massachusetts. “We can’t wait while corporate landlords come into our cities and towns and hike up the rent and displace our communities.”

    More than 50% of New Bedford residents who rent are “cost-burdened,” as of 2024, meaning they pay above 30% of their income on housing, according to data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

    Residents paying more than 50% of their income on housing are classified as “severely cost burdened,” according to the Healey administration’s “A Home for Everyone” initiative. About 25% of renters in New Bedford fall into this category.

    When families have to spend an excess amount of their income on housing, they have less money for needs such as food, transportation and child care. They are also unable to “save money for opportunities that could provide a pathway to higher income as well as wealth-building,” which includes education, job training or homeownership, according to the initiative.

    “Rent often is the first place people put their money towards,” said Chelsea Sedani, director of advocacy at the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center. “If you don’t have that, it makes a lot of other things very challenging.”

    Decreased rents could have an effect on the larger economy as well because they could potentially increase purchasing power.

    “If we alleviate the pressure that people are feeling around housing costs, we’re going to make it easier for them to spend in other areas of their lives,” Sedani said.

    The current proposal would require rent control for all of the state’s 351 municipalities, including New Bedford. 

    Massachusetts voters banned rent control in 1994 through a ballot proposal launched by SPOA. Many opponents cite this vote as another reason the new proposal should not be implemented.

    Sen. Patricia Jehlen, D-Somerville, pointed out that Boston, Brookline and Cambridge — the only communities in Massachusetts with rent control in 1994 — voted against outlawing it then. She said Massachusetts needs to not just create more housing but to preserve “naturally occurring affordable housing.”

    “People are not going to stay in Massachusetts if we just count on building new housing,” she said. “It’s not fast enough and not cheap enough.”

    High rent prices make it difficult for residents to plan and save money long term, so rent increase caps would provide predictability that would keep people in their homes for longer, Martinez said.

    Martinez grew up in rural western Massachusetts, which he said used to be the “affordable part of the state. Now, “there’s not an affordable part of Massachusetts anymore,” he said.

    Although both supporters and opponents presented different ways on how to approach the housing affordability crisis, they agreed on one solution: increasing the supply of housing.

    “Supply, supply, supply,” Yunits said. “That’s really all there is. We’ve got to build.”

    Crystal Yormick is a Boston University journalism student and a frequent contributor to The New Bedford Light. Email her at cyormick@newbedfordlight.org.

  • Rent control measure advances toward 2026 ballot as housing debate intensifies

    The responses grew louder each time Dorchester resident Antonio Ennis started a new chant in the small meeting room inside Church on the Hill. “What do we want?” Ennis called out, rousing the crowd.

    “Rent control!” dozens of Massachusetts residents roared back.

    “When do we want it?” Ennis prompted.

    “Now!” the crowd shouted back.

    “And if we don’t get it?” Ennis questioned.

    “Shut it down!” their voices boomed, echoing off the walls.

    The gathering, held just across the street from the Statehouse, brought together supporters of a proposed ballot initiative to limit annual rent increases to 5% or the rate of inflation, whichever is lower. The campaign group Keep Massachusetts Home said they collected more than 124,000 signatures from voters statewide, moving the initiative closer to appearing on the 2026 statewide ballot.

    If approved by voters, the measure would reverse Massachusetts’ decades-long ban on rent control, which has been in place since 1994. Supporters say the proposal would protect tenants from displacement amid rising housing costs, while opponents worry it could worsen the state’s housing shortage by discouraging new construction and investment.

    Ennis became involved with the campaign through one of its coalition partners, City Life/Vida Urbana, a nonprofit organization committed to building working-class power, according to its mission statement.

    After the economy crashed in 2009, Ennis said he fell into foreclosure on his home. He found City Life, which helped him fight the foreclosure and ultimately regain the property. Ennis said he hopes the rent control measure will help stabilize communities and mitigate rent increases that some residents cannot absorb on top of other living expenses.

    “It’s the only shot right now at allowing people to not have to choose between a rent increase and their medical bills, the food in their refrigerators, the clothes on their backs, their health care and children,” said Ennis.

    While proponents of the ballot initiative argue that rent control is needed as an urgent tool to prevent displacement, some housing groups in Newton are unsure whether the measure would best address problems facing renters in Massachusetts.

    Luke Mann-O’Halloran, a member of the Newton for Everyone’s steering committee, said the organization works to promote housing for Newton residents of all backgrounds, levels of income, abilities, ages and ethnic backgrounds.

    While Newton for Everyone has not taken a stance on this measure, Mann-O’Halloran said rent control in general aligns with the group’s interest in ensuring renter security.

    “If you own your home, you typically have a 30-year fixed-rate mortgage. I know exactly how much I will have to pay for my house every month for the next 25 years,” said Mann-O’Halloran.

    He said renters do not always have the same security as homeowners, which he said is unfair because “everyone needs a place to sleep at night.”

    While renters facing displacement due to steep rent increases are a significant issue, Mann-O’Halloran said Newton for Everyone is more focused on addressing the statewide housing shortage.

    “I think of rent control as more of a management thing as opposed to fixing the shortage,” said Mann-O’Halloran.

    Mann-O’Halloran said it is important to get the details of a rent control policy right because it could discourage the construction of new market-rate housing. While affordable and subsidized housing is important, he said, it relies on public or nonprofit funding, whereas market-rate housing does not and can help lower rents overall.

    Newton has a higher rate of home ownership than the rest of the commonwealth, and most of its housing stock consists of single-family homes, which are typically owned, said Mann-O’Halloran.

    “But that doesn’t mean renters aren’t as important a part of our community as everybody else,” said Mann-O’Halloran.

    Mann-O’Halloran said Newton for Everyone encourages construction of new housing close to public transportation and village centers, where residents can access amenities by walking or a short bike ride.

    While housing advocates like Newton for Everyone emphasize renter security and long-term affordability, real estate industry groups worry the proposal could have statewide consequences for housing development.

    Tamara Small, CEO of NAIOP Massachusetts, stated in an interview that the measure would be one of the most restrictive forms of rent control in the United States and there is confusion about what is actually being proposed.

    “Some reporters have said, ‘Oh, it’s capped at 5%,’ but that’s not the case,” said Small. “It’s the annual increase in the consumer price index or 5%—whichever is lower.”

    Small said the CPI has exceeded 5% only twice in the past 20 years and has averaged about 2.5%, meaning annual rent increases would usually be capped at roughly that level. She also raised concerns about the rent cap being implemented based on the market prices from January of 2026, even though voters will not vote on the measure until later that year.

    Small said that rent caps can make it harder for landlords to fund repairs and upgrades, leading to a decline in housing quality. She emphasized that the proposal includes few exceptions and would apply to most rental properties, including multifamily buildings, owner-occupied properties and short-term rentals like Airbnbs.

    “This is not an opt-in proposal. This would take effect in all 351 communities in Massachusetts, whether or not they want it,” said Small.

    Small pointed to Gov. Maura Healey’s statement about how Massachusetts needs 222,000 units of housing to be produced in the next 10 years to address the housing shortage. However, Small said that the housing crisis will get worse due to lack of investor interest if rent control is implemented.

    “We get calls from investors all over the world who say, if rent control is in place, we will not invest there,” said Small. “Without investment, housing is not produced.”

    Despite concerns from various groups, Keep Massachusetts Home celebrated their submission of over 124,000 signatures in support of the ballot initiative to the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s Office.

    These signatures must still be certified before the measure can officially appear on the 2026 statewide ballot.

    “As responsible landlords, we want long-term tenants. We want to build and stabilize our communities,” said Ennis. “And we need rent control—yesterday. Every day that we wait, a family is being displaced.”

  • Owners push back against proposed rent control ballot question

    Advocates for small property owners describe the rent control proposal likely headed for next fall’s ballot as the most “restrictive and aggressive” the state has seen to date and say it would be detrimental to small landlords in the industry.

    Small property owners — who provide over 65% of rental housing in Massachusetts, according to the Small Property Owners Association — operate on tight margins, so they are typically only a few missed bank checks away from bankruptcy or losing their business, said Amir Shahsavari, vice president of SPOA. 

    He said if these “mom and pop” businesses no longer exist, tenants will be in a “tough predicament” if properties are taken over by larger corporations because they will no longer have a person to connect with immediately if there are issues in their building, a benefit usually provided by smaller landlords.

    In addition, operating costs, like utilities, insurance and particularly property taxes — which Boston Mayor Michelle Wu recently said are expected to increase by 13% in January— have risen in recent years, which factors into rent pricing. However, if caps are put in place, advocates are concerned property owners will not be able to adapt to these rising costs accordingly. 

    “On one hand, we appreciate the pressures that renters have when they say that rent is increasing,” Shahsavari said. “But what people miss in this story is that operating costs are also going up exorbitantly for the property owner too.” 

    “If [small property owners] can’t increase rent rates, what’s going to happen is they have to exit the market,” said Tony Lopes, a SPOA board member. “We can’t afford to supply this housing at a loss every month.” 

    The initiative seeks to limit annual rent increases for most residential units by either the Consumer Price Index increase or 5% — whichever value is lower — during a 12-month period. It would set base rents as of Jan. 31, 2026, but state residents would not vote on the measure, which would apply to every municipality, until next November. 

    To reach the ballot, it must still go through a process that includes certification of more than 124,000 signatures, legislative review and likely another round of signature gathering if lawmakers do not approve the proposal.

    To account for small property owners, the measure includes a provision to exempt owner-occupied buildings with four or fewer units from the measure. Noemi Ramos, executive director of the New England Community Project, said because of this, the notion that the measure will impact small landlords is “out the window.” 

    But Shahsavari said this provision is “misleading” because property owners with four units or less are a minority among the small property owner community. Because of the tight limit, those who exceed this amount — which he said is the “vast majority” of small property owners — would be categorized with companies that operate on a much larger and commercialized scale. 

    Instead, he said the definition of a small property owner depends on a business structure’s size, scope and reach rather than the amount of units an owner manages. 

    “What one small owner can handle might be different from the capacity that another owner would have,” he said. “But it does ultimately come down to the degree to which the owner can manage his or her business in a hands-on way without expanding too far out to the point where they really become a conglomerate.” 

    Ramos said Homes For All Massachusetts, the statewide coalition behind the ballot initiative, decided to use four units as the cut off in the provision after speaking with small property owners and deciding “what are our values when we think about how we define small landlords.” 

    “I remember asking one of the developers in the [city of Boston’s Rent Stabilization Advisory Committee], ‘how do you define a small landlord,’ and they said ‘50 units or less,’” Ramos said. “When you think about 50 units, that’s a business. That’s no longer a small landlord.” 

    Another provision in the initiative addresses development — another industry opposed to the bill — by exempting units where the “first residential certificate of occupancy” is under 10 years old or 10 years from when the certificate of occupancy is validated 

    Tamara Small, CEO of the NAIOP Commercial Real Estate Development Association of Massachusetts, said the “threat of the [rent control] question” is already having a chilling effect on investment and development. If put in place, she said the measure would also lead to decreased quality of housing and repairs, which would result in either sub-par conditions or units being taken off the market.

    Antonio Ennis, a community organizer for the Dorchester neighborhood at City Life / Vida Urbana, disagreed with quality concerns and said landlords should always factor in money for property repairs and keeping buildings up to code. Ennis, a small property owner who occupies one unit and rents out two other units in a triple decker in Dorchester, would not be affected by the ballot measure. 

    Developers and property owner advocates said the primary solution to solving the state’s housing crisis is increased development, which they said a rent control measure would hinder.

    “If rent control is in place in the market, investors do not go to that market. They go elsewhere,” Small said. “Without those investment dollars, projects are not built.”

    “No financial decisions and investments are made on a 10-year time horizon,” said Conor Yunits, committee chair for an opposition group for the measure called Housing for Massachusetts. 

    Mark Martinez, staff housing attorney for the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute, pointed out that despite not having rent control for over 30 years, Massachusetts is still behind in terms of housing production. 

    “This isn’t a development policy. This is a stabilization policy,” he said. “Judging a stabilization policy based off of whether or not it’s going to spur development doesn’t make a whole lot of sense.” 

    He said the measure is a “common sense” policy but not the only measure that needs to be taken to solve the housing crisis. 

    “It’s going to take a decade, if not longer, to build all the housing that we need,” Martinez said. “But in the meantime, families need to be able to stay around.” 

    Small pointed towards cities such as Austin and Phoenix as models for Boston to solve its housing crisis. In both cities, an increased housing supply resulted in lower rent growth and prices. 

    Rents in Massachusetts

    Massachusetts historically has had some of the nation’s highest rent prices and recent reports have ranked it as the state with the second highest cost of living. In May, the Consumer Affairs Journal of Consumer Research ranked Massachusetts as the fifth worst state for renters due to a lack of affordability and availability. 

    “This is a statewide issue, and we’re continuing to see the crisis intensify across the state,” said Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes For All Massachusetts. “We can’t wait while corporate landlords come into our cities and towns and hike up the rent and displace our communities.”

    Over 40% of state residents who rent are “cost-burdened” as of 2022, meaning they pay above 30% of their income on housing, according to data from Harvard University’s Joint Center for Housing Studies. In some areas, such as Springfield, Boston, Cambridge, Newton and Barnstable, this number reaches over 50% of renters.

    Residents paying over 50% of their income on housing are classified as “severely cost burdened,” according to the Healey administration’s A Home for Everyone initiative. The percentage of renters in Massachusetts who fall into this category ranges from about 20-30%, depending on the area. 

    When families have to spend an excess amount of their income on housing, they have less money for needs such as food, transportation and childcare. They are also unable to “save money for opportunities that could provide a pathway to higher income as well as wealth-building,” which includes education, job training or homeownership, according to the initiative. 

    “Rent often is the first place people put their money towards,” said Chelsea Sedani, director of advocacy at the Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center. “If you don’t have that, it makes a lot of other things very challenging.”

    Decreased rents could have an effect on the larger economy as well because they could potentially increase purchasing power. 

    “If we alleviate the pressure that people are feeling around housing costs, we’re going to make it easier for them to spend in other areas of their lives,” Sedani said.

    The last time Massachusetts had a rent control measure in place was in 1994 — a measure that voters themselves overturned. Many opponents cite this as another reason the measure should not be implemented. 

    However, Sen. Patricia Jehlen, D-Somerville, pointed out that Boston, Brookline and Cambridge voted in favor of keeping rent control before it was outlawed statewide in 1994. She said Massachusetts needs to not just create more housing but to preserve “naturally occurring affordable housing.” 

    “People are not going to stay in Massachusetts if we just count on building new housing,” she said. “It’s not fast enough and not cheap enough.”

    High rent prices make it difficult for residents to plan and save money long term, so rent increase caps would provide predictability that would keep people in their homes for longer, Martinez said. 

    Martinez grew up in rural western Massachusetts, which he said used to be the “affordable part of the state. Now, “there’s not an affordable part of Massachusetts anymore,” he said.

    Although both supporters and opponents presented different ways on how to approach the housing affordability crisis, they agreed on one solution: increasing the supply of housing. 

    “Supply, supply, supply,” Yunits said. “That’s really all there is. We’ve got to build.” 

  • Rent control could soon be in the hands of Massachusetts voters 

    A measure that would slap restrictions on rent hikes across the state is hurtling toward the 2026 statewide ballot, pitting rent control advocates against Massachusetts’ largest real estate associations.

    The ballot question — which would tie rent increases to rises in cost of living with a strict cap of 5 percent — has gained traction amid an affordability crisis rocking renters throughout the commonwealth. 

    “Our communities are getting squeezed everyday by the corporate landlords who are coming in, buying up buildings and doubling the rent,” said Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes for All Massachusetts, at a rally Tuesday. “We will not let that continue, and we are ready for change, for real change, for real affordability.” 

    Homes for All Massachusetts, the organization spearheading the campaign, claims to have collected 124,000 signatures, far exceeding the 74,574 needed to continue pushing the measure forward. 

    Supporters of the campaign — dubbed “Keep Massachusetts Home” — marked the cleared hurdle with a celebratory rally Tuesday, before shuttling more than 90,000 certified signatures to Secretary of State William Galvin’s office. 

    “Without stable, affordable housing, individuals struggle to secure jobs, maintain their health, and engage in community life,” Shanique Rodriguez, executive director of the Massachusetts Voter Table, said Tuesday. “But today we get one step closer to change, one step closer to truly affordable housing for all.”

    In Greater Boston, housing prices remain exorbitant, future unit construction is predicted to decline and the road to homeownership is steeper than ever before, according to a new housing report published by The Boston Foundation. 

    “How do you find affordable housing if you live in Massachusetts? You move to Texas,” said Steve Revilak, a Town Meeting member and member of Equitable Arlington. 

    The Arlington housing market — which boasts an average rent of $2,358 — has historically been friendlier toward “nuclear” families looking to buy than individual renters, said Revilak. “There are two classes of people today. You either own property or you don’t,” he said. “And the ones who own property, the houses print money like ATMs.”

    As landlords continue to hike prices to keep up with soaring market rates, proponents of rent control say the measure could alleviate the growing cost burden heaped on renters. 

    A recent Suffolk University/Boston Globe poll found that three out of five Massachusetts residents would back a law instituting statewide rent control. 

    However, the question still faces staunch opposition. 

    NAIOP, a trade association representing the real estate industry, claims the stringent measure would hinder housing production, hurt landlords and slacken property maintenance.

    “Every community in Massachusetts would be impacted by this,” said Conor Yunits, chair of the Housing for Massachusetts campaign committee. “Even those who don’t want it or haven’t asked for it. That’s a huge change.” 

    In 1970, the state Legislature passed a law to allow Massachusetts’ 351 municipalities to opt to allow rent control. Five communities – Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, Lynn and Somerville — adopted the measure. 

    Statewide ban

    In 1994, residents narrowly voted to ban rent control statewide. 

    In past years, bills calling for rent control have repeatedly stalled at Beacon Hill, where most legislators double as landlords, according to the Boston Globe. 

    Major real estate associations in Massachusetts, including NAIOP, say the solution to the housing affordability crisis lies in increasing construction to meet skyrocketing demand, not in lowering the ceiling for rent hikes. 

    “Historically and across the board, rent control stifles new housing production,” said Yunits. 

    In St. Paul, MN, voters approved a ballot initiative to enforce a 3 percent cap on yearly rent increases in 2021 — one of the most aggressive rent control measures in the country at the time. 

    Housing production rates subsequently fell in following years, with 80 percent fewer units being constructed in the city in 2024 compared to the previous three-year average. The St. Paul City Council voted to roll back the measure earlier this year. 

    “In the long-term, [rent control] is devastating for investment in property maintenance,” said Yunits. “It’s devastating for the creation of new units.”

    Revilak said rent control is unlikely to fix the state’s housing shortage, an issue that is decades in the making and will likely take decades to solve. 

    However, most cost-burdened residents aren’t looking to wait another 20 to 30 years for some fiscal relief, he said. 

    “In the U.S., we have a history of passing questionable policies to benefit people at the upper end of the income spectrum,” said Revilak. “This is passing a questionable policy that will benefit people at the lower end of the income spectrum.” 

    “I don’t think this will be the end of it,” he added. “But I think it’s the right thing to do at this time.” 

    Landlords face costs

    If passed, the measure would ensure rent hikes do not exceed an annual increase in Consumer Price Index or 5 percent — whichever is lower. 

    According to NAIOP, CPI growth in 2024 was 2.9 percent. In the past two decades, the average annual CPI increase has been 2.5 percent. 

    “Think about a landlord or property owner who is only allowed to raise their rent 2.5 percent, but their insurance has gone up 10 percent, their utilities have gone up 7 percent and their property taxes have gone up 3 percent,” said Yunits. “Ultimately, they can’t justify maintaining or investing in that property.” 

    Revilak acknowledged the ballot question — as it’s written — does not accommodate for “extenuating circumstances.” 

    If a serious issue were to arise within a property, whether it be a failed boiler system or deteriorating plumbing, the law would prohibit landlords from raising rents beyond the imposed limit to pay for a fix, he said. 

    “If they find themselves in a position where they can’t maintain their properties, they don’t really have an out except for basically condemning them,” said Revilak. 

    Anthony Ennis, a landlord from Dorchester, said it’s the landlord’s responsibility to ensure money is stored away and available for utility issues and fixes. “That’s all part of the rent being paid in security deposits,” said Ennis. “You’re obligated to make it habitable for people to be able to live sensibly and not like animals.” 

    Ennis is a member of City Life, a non-profit providing free guidance for renters and owners being forced from their homes and one of the more than 40 groups supporting the ballot question campaign.

    He said the organization helped him fight to keep his Dorchester home after he fell into foreclosure in 2009. “Going through all of that, I noticed a lot of fear,” he said. 

    For those unable to absorb climbing prices, Ennis believes rent control is their “only shot.” 

    “Allow people to not have to choose between a rent increase and medical bills, a rent increase and the food in their refrigerator, a rent increase and the clothes on their back, their health care, their children,” he said. 

  • At-Large council candidates differ on policing, housing and school reform

    At-Large City Council panel: (from l to r) Marvin Mathelier, Julia Mejia, Erin Murphy, Will Onouha, Henry Santana, Alexandra Valdez, Frank Baker and Ruthzee Louijeune. Photo by Jacqueline Manetta.

    A forum for candidates running for at-large seats on the Boston City Council revealed stark differences in how the candidates would approach education, public safety, housing and other issues.

    The June 16 forum at Suffolk University — organized by a group of Democratic ward committees— drew eight of the nine candidates seeking four seats: incumbents Ruthzee Louijeune, Julia Mejia, Henry Santana and Erin Murphy, and challengers Will Onuoha, Marvin Mathelier, Alexandra Valdez and Frank Baker. Yves Mary Jean, who did not attend the first candidates’ forum, did not attend this one either. The event was moderated by UMass Boston professor Travis Johnston.

    On issue after issue, Onuoha and Baker – often joined by Murphy – voiced opinions in polar opposition to the rest of the field.

    Education

    The question of whether Boston School Committee members should be elected or appointed by the mayor, as they are now, elicited strong reactions from the candidates. Only Valdez, Baker, and Onuoha said they do not support having an elected committee.

    “Our kids matter far too much for us to start playing politics with education,” Onuoha said.

    Mejia quickly countered him.

    “To say that Black and brown people are under-educated or unable to decide what democracy looks like, I take offense to that,” Mejia said, “because we’re in a moment right now that we have to understand that people want more democracy, not less.”

    Baker, Murphy and Onuoha said they do not support the state’s decision to drop the MCAS as a graduation requirement.

    The candidates agreed on other school issues, including expanding early education programs to infants and imposing a bell-to-bell ban on cellphones in schools.

    Asked how they would address inequities in education, the candidates offered different ideas. Murphy emphasized tackling chronic absenteeism and boosting support for mental health, music and art. Valdez and Frank called for more space for pre-K students. Louijeune, the current councilpresident, highlighted poverty and the need for affordable child care.

    Mejia stressed supporting early childhood education practitioners. Onuoha said he would advocate for helping parents who are struggling with housing. Mathelier and Santana said they would focus on transportation and housing, as 10 percent of students have been homeless during the school year.

    Pictured at the forum (from l to r) Travis Johnston, the moderator, Marvin Mathelier, Ruthzee Louijeune, Henry Santana, Alexandra Valdez, Erin Murphy, Julia Mejia, Frank Baker and Will Onouha. Photo by Jacqueline Manetta.

    Public safety

    Onuoha, Murphy, Baker and Valdez said they would not want police to stop working with the Boston Regional Intelligence Center (BRIC), a federally funded counterterrorism agency that aims to prevent crime through data-gathering and analysis.

    Onuoha, a Mission Hill native, said growing up in a neighborhood directly impacted by street gangs in his youth is part of why he supports BRIC’s work. Louijeune mentioned a deportation that resulted from the center’s intelligence sharing, but Baker said that example is outdated and is not a reason to stop working with it.

    Murphy, Onuoha and Baker said they do not support legalizing overdose prevention centers, where people can safely consume drugs. The candidates all said they would support a policy banning Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents from schools and courthouses.

    Housing

    Baker and Onouha said they do not support Boston’s updated Inclusionary Zoning policy (IDP) that requires 20 percent of new housing units to be income-restricted as a way to increase affordable housing in the city.

    Housing construction has slowed in Boston, Baker said, because it has become unsustainable to follow the 20 percent policy.

    “So 20 percent of nothing is nothing at the end of the day,” he said.

    Onuoha agreed and said focusing on workforce housing – aimed at tenants who earn too much for subsidized housing but not enough for market-rate housing – would be his solution.

    “You have to be poor to get into affordable housing,” Onuoha said. “You have to be poor to stay in it.”

    Baker, Onuoha and Murphy said they don’t support Mayor Michelle Wu’s rent control proposal to cap rent increases at inflation plus 6 percent.

    Baker explained why he opposes it: “Because a lot of renters like myself are small property owners, and I don’t think we necessarily need the government to tell us what we can charge for rent.”

    Onuoha said the regulation aimed at stabilizing rent doesn’t work. “We outlawed rent control,” he said, because it increased the cost of housing.

    Asked how they would ensure that Boston prioritizes long-term stability for low-income residents, families, and older people, Onouha again mentioned workforce housing, while Baker said he would direct city dollars at housing rather than focusing on policies.

    Louijeune emphasized the need for rent stabilization policies as a commitment to Black and low-income communities, preventing them from being displaced by gentrification.

    Mathelier advocated for revising Article 80, the process that governs how new development projects are reviewed and approved by the Boston Planning Dept. Santana used the city of Austin, Texas, as a model of what they should aim for.

    Valdez said the most secure generational housing is achieved by creating tenant protection programs. Mejia and Murphy talked about their work on the City Council and the importance of working with the communities.

    Transportation and infrastructure

    Baker was the only candidate to oppose extending past 2026 free bus fares for all riders on routes 23, 28 and 29 through parts of Mattapan, Roxbury and Dorchester.

    “To say that fares are free, we’re paying for it one way or another,” Baker said.

    He was also the only candidate to oppose updating zoning rules to require new buildings to achieve net-zero carbon emission standards.

    Mejia, Murphy, Baker, Onuoha and Louijeune all said they oppose the renovation of White Stadium.

    Each candidate then offered their visions for a transportation system that balances safety, sustainability, and the needs of drivers, bicyclists, transit riders, and pedestrians.

    “Transportation and housing issues are actually married,” Onouha said.

    Baker said the city should do more with water taxis.

    “And we should also look to see what Uber and Lyft are doing,” he said.

    Civic engagement and leadership

    Murphy, Onuoha and Baker said they oppose increasing the $2 million allocated for participatory budgeting, which now allows residents to decide how part of the city budget is spent.

    The candidates were asked to grade the city’s success in engaging the voices of diverse residents.

    Mathelier, Murphy, Onuoha, Santana, Valdez and Baker all gave Boston a C. Louijeune gave the city a B-, and Mejia gave it an incomplete.

    They were asked to share what steps they would take to engage the voices of small businesses. There was overall agreement on the need to listen closely and find creative ways to include residents in conversations.

    A full video of the forum is available here.