Reflections on rent control
Boston Condos for Sale and Apartments for Rent
Reflections on rent control
Rent control won’t appear on the ballot in Massachusetts
If approved, the rent control petition would have blocked yearly rent increases greater than 5% or the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index, whichever was lower.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court struck down a proposed rent control initiative from appearing on the November ballot in Massachusetts. The court disqualified Initiative Petition 25-21 based on the measure’s exemption for facilities operated solely for religious purposes, something the court argued “‘relates to religion, religious practices or religious institutions,’ an excluded matter under [article] 48 of the Amendments to the Massachusetts Constitution.”
Essentially, the court found, by carving out an exemption for religious facilities, “the petition would confer preferential treatment on religious institutions by allowing them to increase rent prices, while limiting rent increases for secular facilities.”
If approved, the petition would have blocked yearly rent increases greater than 5% or the annual increase in the Consumer Price Index, whichever was lower.
Throughout its time in the spotlight, the petition drew strong opinions both for and against.
Supporters praised the measure as a solution to rising local housing costs.
“Through this campaign, it’s become clear that many members of the local real estate industry understand the need for common-sense rent regulation, and we’re committed to continuing conversations with all interested parties aimed at delivering the relief tenants so desperately need,” said Carolyn Chou, executive director of Homes for All Massachusetts in response to the court decision.
Meanwhile, opponents voiced concerns over property values in the Commonwealth and worried that rent control would disincentivize development. A study from The Tufts Center for State Analysis commissioned by the Greater Boston Real Estate Board found that if passed, the initiative would eliminate $300 billion in Massachusetts property values.
“If this passed, it would have been a disaster,” said Anthony Lamacchia, owner and CEO of Lamacchia Realty, in a recent video posted to social media. “Look around Boston. Do you see cranes? I don’t see cranes, because builders and investors are scared to build, which decreases our unit count. In addition to that, landlords have been scared in the recent months to even upgrade their properties or keep up with regular maintenance because they were worried about the notion of rent control … The Supreme Judicial Court came out on the right side of this thing … This is a win for housing, win for tenants and win for landlords.”
Reflections on rent control
Reflections on rent control
Jean Le Vaux founded Le Vaux Realty in 1978 (now Coldwell Banker) and has written a piece in the Cambridge Chronicle entitled Reflections of rent control. In her artilce, she describes what caused the downfall of rent control.
Excerpts from Jean Le Vaux commentary:
Cambridge was deeply divided – opposing views were everywhere, even in my own office. Housing stock deteriorated. Each loophole landlords found was soon closed. Those who, in desperation, kept units vacant were fined under the “90 day rule.” Rooms in private houses with locks on their doors were now labeled “units”, and controlled.
Many rents were so low that out-of-towners would rent a Pied a Terre for theatre nights and guests! Eric Segal, (author of “Love Story”), rented his luxury apartment to Harvard philosopher Robert Nozick, who sued for his rent to be rolled back to a prior limit. Surveys found that many tenants were single, white and economically privileged. An initiative to implement a means test to provide subsidies for only the needy was defeated
Do you think rent control will make a come back?
Click here to read her entire commentary.
