2026 Ballot Question

Housing Costs Are Too High. Rent Control Makes It Worse.

94% of Massachusetts voters say housing costs are too high. Economists, local leaders, and housing experts know that rent control raises taxes, lowers home values, and reduces the number of homes being built.

Protect Your Home Get the Facts

351

Communities impacted statewide

10%

Increase in Property Taxes

14%

Drop in property values

Join the Coalition

What you need to know

This is not the rent control you've been told about

The proposed ballot question would impose one of the most restrictive statewide rent control mandates in the United States. It caps annual rent increases at CPI or 5% — whichever is lower — with no local opt-out, no vacancy decontrol, and baseline rents locked as of January 31, 2026.

No local opt-out

Unlike the previous Massachusetts law, communities cannot choose whether to adopt rent control. It would be automatically imposed on all 351 cities and towns — from Cape Cod to the Berkshires — regardless of local housing needs. When rent control was previously allowed, only three of 351 communities had it in place by 1994.

The most restrictive cap in America

The average CPI increase from 2005–2024 was just 2.58%. By comparison, Oregon allows CPI plus 7%, California allows CPI plus 5%, and Washington allows CPI plus 7%. The Massachusetts proposal is the strictest statewide cap in the nation.

Sources: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; Oregon SB 608 (2019); California AB 1482 (2020); Washington HB 1217 (2025)

No vacancy decontrol

Unlike the previous Massachusetts law and virtually every other rent control regime in the U.S., vacant units do not reset to market rates. Property owners who kept rents low for long-term tenants would never be able to adjust those rents — even after a tenant leaves. No other statewide rent control measure includes vacancy control.

Baseline rents already locked in

The ballot question establishes baseline rents as of January 31, 2026 — ten months before voters go to the polls. For the estimated 60–70% of Boston units on September 1 lease cycles, baseline rents have already been set before anyone has voted.

The tax burden on your family

Your property taxes will go up — even if you don't own rental property

When rental property values fall, the tax base shrinks. Municipal budgets don't shrink with it. The shortfall gets passed on to homeowners — including single-family homeowners who have nothing to do with the rental market.

A fiscal tsunami for every Massachusetts community

A March 2026 study by the Tufts University Center for State Policy Analysis found that rent control would immediately shrink the residential property tax base by 6 to 9 percent in municipalities statewide. After a decade, property values would decrease by nearly 14 percent, costing home and property owners roughly $300 billion.

Faced with fast-eroding tax bases, cities and towns would have to choose between deep cuts to services — police, fire, schools, snow removal — or tax hikes of at least 10 percent to compensate for the losses.

Source: Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis, March 2026

Boston: already strained, about to break

Boston is already dealing with a collapsing commercial tax base as office building values plummet due to remote work. The city raised residential tax rates from 1.09% in 2024 to 1.24% in 2026 just to fill that gap. Adding rent control would compound the crisis: the average Boston property owner can expect a 9% reduction in value within three years, creating a $160 million residential tax shortfall by 2029.

Filling this shortfall while managing the ongoing commercial decline would require a 13% residential property tax rate increase.

Source: Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis / MA Housing Solutions, 2026

Massachusetts property taxes are already surging

Property costs in Massachusetts are climbing fast even without rent control. In 2024 alone, the statewide average property tax increase was 5.1%. From 2018 to 2023, home insurance premiums in Massachusetts jumped 22.8%. These costs would continue rising — but under rent control, the allowed rental increases would almost never keep pace, creating a widening gap between costs and revenue for property owners.

CPI growth in 2024 was just 2.9% — far below the rate of property tax increases. That means the proposed rent cap would lock in losses for property owners year after year.

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics; Massachusetts Department of Revenue

Protecting your largest investment

Rent control will reduce property values for all homeowners

The research is clear: rent control depresses property values not just for rental properties, but for surrounding homes as well. When the market knows that income potential is artificially capped, assessments drop — and every homeowner pays the price.

When Cambridge lifted rent control, values soared

A landmark study by MIT researchers David Autor, Christopher Palmer, and Parag Pathak examined what happened when Massachusetts voters banned rent control in 1994. In Cambridge, property values increased by approximately $7.8 billion in the decade following repeal. Roughly $1.8 billion of that increase — about $3 billion in 2024 dollars — was directly attributable to the end of rent control.

Close to 40% of all Cambridge properties were under rent control when it was repealed. Their property values appreciated faster than non-controlled properties, as did the properties surrounding them.

Source: Autor, Palmer & Pathak, "Housing Market Spillovers" (MIT, 2014)

San Francisco: rent control reduced housing supply by 15%

Researchers at Stanford University — Rebecca Diamond, Tim McQuade, and Franklin Qian — examined the effects of rent control expansion in San Francisco and found that landlords reduced rental housing supply by 15%, causing a 5.1% city-wide rent increase. Buildings subject to rent control were 8 percentage points more likely to convert to condominiums.

The combination of reduced supply and condo conversions fueled gentrification, attracting residents with incomes at least 18% higher — the exact opposite of rent control's intended goal.

Source: Diamond, McQuade & Qian, American Economic Review (2019)

New construction collapses under rent control

The evidence is nationwide and consistent. In St. Paul, Minnesota, new apartment construction permits fell by 79% after voters adopted rent control in 2022. In Montgomery County, Maryland, new multifamily permits dropped from 2,093 to just 54 between 2024 and 2025 after rent control was adopted.

In Cambridge, construction ground to a halt under rent control. Upon its repeal in 1994, improvements and new construction increased by 20%. Rent control has never built a single unit of housing.

Sources: St. Paul Building & Safety Dept.; Montgomery County MD Permit Data; Cambridge Historical Commission

Follow the money

Rent control serves the wealthiest — and leaves behind everyone else

There are no income restrictions with rent control. Unlike Section 8 housing vouchers, which target low-income families, rent control allows anyone — at any income level — to occupy a unit. The result? The wealthy and well-connected are always first in line.

Who actually benefits from rent control

A 2007 study found only 26% of Cambridge rent-controlled units were occupied by renters in the bottom income quartile, while the top half of earners held about 30%

At the time rent control ended in 1994, 93% of Cambridge rent-controlled tenants were white, college-educated, in their prime earning years (25–40), single, and living alone

Rent-controlled units are held an average of 20 years, compared to 2 years for uncontrolled units — locking out those who need affordable housing most

Notable Cambridge rent-controlled tenants included the Crown Prince of Denmark, the Mayor of Cambridge, a Massachusetts Supreme Court Justice, and the Vice-Chairman of the WGBH Board of Directors

Who gets left behind

Black and Latinx residents accounted for 25% of the population in rent-controlled Massachusetts cities but only 12% of rent-controlled unit occupants

Lower-income residents of color lived in neglected, dilapidated public housing while white, college-educated tenants occupied the rent-controlled stock

New renters, young families, and immigrants cannot access units held for decades by existing tenants

The Brookings Institution found that broad rent caps tend to benefit higher-income tenants who stay in place longer while doing little for low-income or new renters

"The pro-rent control advocates claiming that this policy will be an advantage to people of color are only offering us the hand-me-downs. They will take care of their well-connected friends first and our communities of color will be left with the scraps."

Mercedes Soto

Latina business owner, housing advocate, and former subsidized housing resident

Rent control blocks wealth creation for communities of color

Homeownership is the single greatest wealth-building tool for families of color. The 2022 State of Hispanic Wealth Report confirmed that homeownership plays a critical role in the growth of Latino household wealth. Property ownership is how immigrant families and communities of color close the wealth gap — but rent control artificially depresses property values, undermining this path to generational wealth.

If Boston imposes government control over the rent that families can charge for their properties, communities of color lose the incentive to invest in real estate — historically the most reliable path to financial security.

Source: 2022 State of Hispanic Wealth Report; Brookings Institution

Bipartisan opposition

Governor Healey opposes this ballot question

Democratic Governor Maura Healey — who signed a major housing bill authorizing more than $5 billion for housing construction — has unequivocally opposed the rent control ballot question, citing the overwhelming evidence that it halts housing production.

"I'm a no, because if you look at the studies, you effectively halt production. I will tell you that investors in housing have already pulled out of Massachusetts because they're concerned about rent control. I don't want to see housing production stopped."

Governor Maura Healey

Boston Public Radio, December 23, 2025

Investors are already leaving

At a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce forum in March 2026, Governor Healey revealed that when the ballot question gathered its required signatures, she personally received calls from six developers who lost their funding. Those lost projects represented thousands of housing units that will now be built in other states instead of Massachusetts.

Source: WBUR, March 12, 2026

Building more homes is the answer

Governor Healey pointed to a 220,000-unit housing shortage when she took office and noted that her administration has started or built 100,000 new homes so far. She has consistently argued that increasing supply — not price controls — is the path to lowering housing costs for all Massachusetts residents.

Source: Boston Globe, December 23, 2025; GBH News

Real solutions already working

The Governor signed a ban on renter-paid broker's fees to save renters thousands, released 450 acres of surplus state land for housing development, and signed a landmark housing bill authorizing $5 billion+ in construction funding. These production-focused strategies are addressing the crisis without the devastating side effects of rent control.

Source: Office of the Governor; GBH News, December 2025

Broad bipartisan opposition

Governor Healey joins a broad coalition including the Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, NAIOP-Massachusetts, MassLandlords, affordable housing developers, and mayors from across the Commonwealth in opposing this measure. Even Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, a rent control advocate, has called the ballot question language "quite restrictive."

Sources: Boston Globe; Banker & Tradesman; WBUR, 2025–2026