|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The campaign behind the proposal to implement statewide rent control said Tuesday that conversations with real estate industry representatives have been fruitful and may lead to a compromise that would avoid voters deciding the issue on November’s ballot.
“We’re having productive conversations with real estate leaders and are hopeful that we’ll reach agreement on a legislative compromise that can avert the need for the ballot question,” said Andrew Farnitano, a spokesperson for pro-rent control Keep Massachusetts Home.
A framework of an agreement dated May 28, obtained by the News Service, describes a proposal to allow cities and towns to individually decide whether to opt into a rent control policy that would cap annual increases at the lower of either 10% or the increase in the Consumer Price Index plus 5%.
Keep Massachusetts Home is behind the ballot question that would cap year-over-year residential rent increases at the same rate as the increase in the CPI or 5%, whichever is lower. Exemptions would be in place for new construction, owner-occupied units and more. Proponents say the reform is crucial to keep residents housed and from fleeing for less expensive states.
Opponents of the ballot question, including Gov. Maura Healey, say it would hamper housing production. They argue that just having a rent control question advancing to November’s ballot has had a chilling effect on housing production in Massachusetts.
Opponents of the ballot question, including Gov. Maura Healey, say it would hamper housing production. They argue that just having a rent control question advancing to November’s ballot has had a chilling effect on housing production in Massachusetts.
Healey said in March that she got calls from six developers who had lost investment funds when the question was cleared to move ahead. That same month, the Federal Reserve said one of its New England sources attributed a pull-back in multifamily housing investment to the rent control ballot initiative.
The framework obtained by the News Service would include many of the same exemptions as the ballot question, but would also allow property owners to reset rents to market rate upon vacancy and would open the door to rent control boards.
“We were formally contacted by the Yes campaign on Sunday with language that differs from the proposed ballot question. In good faith we will review their proposal,” said Conor Yunits, spokesman for Housing for Massachusetts, the ballot committee opposing the initiative. “Our campaign is focused on policies that protect property owners, renters, housing production, and community budgets.”
When the Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions recommended last month that the Legislature take no action on the ballot proposal, lawmakers on the panel pointed out that the statewide proposal was “distinct from the most recent authorized rent regulation in Massachusetts from 1970 that allowed communities with over 50,000 residents to control rent increases.” The 10 committee members voted unanimously to not get involved with the ballot question by the deadline for the Legislature to single-handedly remove a question from consideration.
“Members of this Committee acknowledge that there is a housing crisis across the Commonwealth that will likely take many different public- and private-sector solutions to fully address,” the group wrote in its report. “While there are members of the Committee who agree with the concept of rent stabilization, given the complexities of the housing market and the issues raised by the expert, proponents, and opponents of this Petition as written, a majority of the Committee recommends that the General Court take no action.”
House Speaker Ronald Mariano has warned against the statewide rent control proposal, saying in February that he does not think the proposal on track for November’s ballot “is going to improve the ability for housing investors to get into the marketplace.”
“I think the barriers are very high, the amount of money that it’s going to cost, it’s almost going to keep people from even entering into it,” he said.
A relatively small number of cities and towns have repeatedly sent local option rent control proposals to the Legislature for years but those proposals have never received state clearance.
New Bedford debated rent control in 2023. The City Council voted to put a non-binding question on the ballot asking voters if the city should “adopt an ordinance stabilizing rents,” but Mayor Jon Mitchell vetoed the proposal. This April, Mitchell joined several other mayors to oppose the statewide rent-control ballot initiative.
Sixty-nine percent of respondents to a recent poll said they would definitely or probably vote to approve a ballot question imposing statewide rent control. The Polity Research Consulting poll of 608 registered voters was conducted between April 29 and May 7 for the Retailers Association of Massachusetts. The poll’s margin of error was plus or minus four percentage points.
The Light contributed reporting.
And there it is, folks! We finally get a ballot measure that would enable existing renters some relief from the insane increases and now the corrupt backroom deals are here to rug pull it.
The power brokers will never upzone the state to allow enough housing to reduce the exorbitant costs. They will never allow rent control either. Massachusetts will just become more unaffordable as time goes on until the average person is relegated to de facto serfdom. This state hates its working class, and the answer is to leave. Don’t sacrifice your hopes, dreams, and labor for a state, or city for that matter, that will never care about you.
Young people and families continue to depart MA for states with more affordable and better quality rental housing, and where there is still a glimmer of hope they may one day own a home that 6-figure incomes and private equity have not outbid them on.
MA rents need retraction, not a 10% cap. Rental units are already too expensive. Boston tenants pay the cost of heating in addition to rent. Landlords refuse to use MassSave and insulate the roof and walls. This crushes lower income renters, who can’t turn the thermostat low enough to avoid unaffordable heating bills on top of ridiculously overpriced rent. Eversource’s April bill was $8 for gas and MassSave, $27 to for-profit utility return on investment.
Developers can’t get financing, says the Governor, if rent goes unlimited. Did she ask, how much do real estate owners currently profit on this inflated market? The bottom line financial reality of housing in MA must be examined in detail. Our Governor and legislature need to query the industry’s “we can’t afford to build new housing” and real estate owner balance sheets.
Our supermajority legislature does not consider adequately most residents’ lived reality when deciding our laws. They favour those few with money and influence, at the expense and gaping impoverishment of the many.
I understand the complexity of the issue and why investors oppose rent controls, but it is becoming impossible for many with even middle incomes to afford rents. I have a comfortable retirement and no longer want to own, live in a lovely apartment building, but my rent goes up every year to the point that it is now 50% of my retirement income that does not increase. There must be a solution for investors and consumers or the system will soon collapse as people flee the state.
I agree with Cynthia Stone. Owning a single family home on a small retirement check is way too costly and rents just keep getting higher and higher. I believe in putting ” cap limits ” on rent at only 10 to 15 % increase on a every 2 year basis.