BOSTON — Three of Massachusetts’ leading real estate organizations are sounding the alarm over a proposed statewide rent control ballot question, warning that the measure would worsen the Commonwealth’s housing shortage, deter investment, and destabilize local budgets.
In a joint letter sent to mayors and chamber leaders across the state, Greg Vasil, CEO of the Greater Boston Real Estate Board; Theresa Hatton, CEO of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors; and Tamara Small, CEO of NAIOP Massachusetts, outlined what they call the “unintended consequences” of what would become one of the most restrictive rent control laws in the country.
The announcement comes as proponents confirmed they have gathered enough signatures to advance the measure toward the 2026 ballot. In response, the organizations released a joint statement underscoring the severity of the proposal:
“The risks of this ballot question for our economy cannot be overstated. It is not an opt-in: this question creates the most restrictive rent control program in the entire United States and forces it on every city and town across the Commonwealth. It will unquestionably make our housing crisis worse and significantly reduce the supply of quality homes on the rental market.Our priority over the next year will be educating homeowners, community leaders, businesses, and elected officials about exactly how damaging this proposal will be for their families, schools, workforces, and local budgets. At every point of the process, we will do whatever it takes to protect our economy, create new housing, and strengthen the future of Massachusetts.”
Leaders Cite Already Severe Housing Shortage
The organizations emphasize that Massachusetts is already well behind on housing construction. The state’s first-ever comprehensive housing plan determined the Commonwealth must add 222,000 new units over the next ten years. Yet in 2024, Massachusetts permitted only 14,338 new homes, one of the lowest per-capita rates nationwide.
Without more housing supply, the organizations argue, the state will struggle to compete for jobs, retain talent, and support economic growth.
A Mandatory, Statewide Rent Control System
Unlike previous rent control policies in place before 1994 or current legislative proposals that rely on local opt-in, the ballot question mandates rent control in all 351 cities and towns, regardless of local housing conditions or community preference.
Historically, only five municipalities adopted rent control before it ended statewide — and three later repealed or scaled back their programs on their own.
Restrictive Caps and No Appeal Process
The ballot language limits annual rent increases to 5% or CPI, whichever is lower — a standard the organizations say will not keep pace with property taxes, insurance premiums, or maintenance costs.
With CPI averaging 2.57% over the past two decades, the groups warn that landlords, especially small-property owners, will struggle to keep units well-maintained or financially viable. Data from previous rent control regimes in Cambridge and Brookline show rental housing stock fell by 8–12% under similar restrictions.
A Threat to New Housing Development
Developers working on 30- to 40-year project timelines must account for future rent caps, which can undermine financing and viability. A 2023 National Multifamily Housing Council report found that 88% of investors avoid rent-controlled markets, and St. Paul, MN experienced an 80% drop in new housing permits after adopting strict controls.
Community-Wide Fallout
The organizations also note research showing rent control depresses broader property values. A 2012 MIT study found Cambridge property values rose by $1.8 billion in the decade after rent control ended — with most of that increase occurring in units not directly regulated. In Portland, Maine, where rent control passed in 2020, taxable property valuations fell by 3.2% to 5.4%, increasing the burden on homeowners.
GBREB, MAR, and NAIOP say they plan to spend the next year educating stakeholders about the measure’s consequences. They argue that housing affordability can be addressed through zoning reform, expanded multifamily permitting, transit-oriented development, and targeted rental assistance — policies that grow supply rather than constrict it.
The organizations have also distributed a fact sheet on the proposed ballot question and their letter to mayors and chambers.
