Battle Over Massachusetts Rent Control Repeal Heats Up: Industry and Advocates Clash
Legal memos are being exchanged as the battle intensifies over a proposed ballot question seeking to repeal Massachusetts’ ban on rent control. The latest memorandum argues that the proposed question meets constitutional requirements and should be presented to voters in 2024.
After various real estate, property owner, landlord, development, and fiscal associations voiced their opposition to the ballot question, a lawyer representing the original drafters is fighting back. Attorney Gerald McDonough expresses no surprise at the real estate industry’s resistance, as they have profited greatly from housing inflation and the exploitation of communities.
In a letter addressed to Attorney General Andrea Campbell, McDonough states that those who have benefited the most from the housing emergency and rising residential rents are attempting to prevent the public from voting on the Tenant Protection Act. McDonough criticizes their speculative arguments, particularly since no municipality has yet had the opportunity to exercise the power that would be delegated to them if voters approve the act.
The ballot question, introduced by Representative Mike Connolly, a Democrat from Cambridge, eliminates a portion of the state law that prohibits rent control and introduces new language granting municipalities the authority to regulate rents, fees, evictions, the removal of housing units from the rental market, and more.
However, the proposal has garnered disapproval from not only the real estate industry but also fiscal groups and even housing advocates. A New England fiscal group recently argued that the question violates two provisions of the state constitution, which dictate whether questions should be presented to voters.
Attorney General Campbell has until September 6th to determine which of the 42 proposed laws and constitutional amendments submitted to her office will progress. The range of questions encompasses various issues, including the removal of the MCAS as a high school graduation requirement and granting the state auditor the authority to audit the Legislature.
The Fiscal Alliance Foundation asserts that Campbell should reject the proposal due to its inclusion of multiple unrelated policies in a single question. They argue that the regulation of both rents and evictions fails to meet the required standard of related subjects. While acknowledging a somewhat abstract connection between rents and evictions, they contend that the petition does not present a comprehensive statement of public policy that can be accepted or rejected as a whole by voters.
On the other hand, McDonough argues that the question solely seeks to empower municipalities and serve one purpose.
The dispute over the rent control repeal in Massachusetts continues to intensify as opposing sides present their cases and await the Attorney General’s decision. With significant interests at stake, the outcome of this battle will have far-reaching consequences for the housing market, tenants, and property owners across the state.
