Andrew Mikula
A 2022 study by the Institute of Labor Economics found that, as a percentage of their housing stocks, only California and Hawaii had more extreme housing shortages than Massachusetts. But in terms of enacting policy to alleviate the housing shortage, a shining example is much closer than the Pacific coast: Maine.
According to a Mercatus Center analysis, Maine was the only state east of the Mississippi River to enact a “major housing supply package” between July 2024 and June 2025. That package, LD 1829, is a sweeping reform that, among other things, expands earlier legislation that required municipalities to allow up to four units on lots previously zoned only for single-family homes.
It also prohibits minimum lot size requirements above 5,000 square feet in “designated growth areas” served by water and sewer systems, establishes a special judicial venue for hearing appeals of housing-related local board decisions and mandates training for municipal planning board members.
The latter two of these provisions should help expedite the permitting process for housing in Maine, both by limiting the delays created by abutter lawsuits and educating local elected officials on the criteria that can be considered during the process.
But the first two provisions are momentous zoning reforms for what is, by some measures, the second-most rural state in the country after Vermont.
In particular, LD 1829 broadly enables small multi-family buildings to be constructed in most residential neighborhoods in a state where more than 70 percent of the housing stock consists of detached single-family homes, compared to 51 percent in Massachusetts. In many contexts, it also caps minimum lot sizes at 5,000 square feet per unit in a state where, as of 2022, the median lot size is 45,738 square feet.
What Mass. Can Learn
Massachusetts could learn some lessons from Maine’s housing reform approach.
First, by tying many of the zoning changes to the availability of sewer and water services, Maine is avoiding one of the primary points of opposition to the MBTA Communities Act: that many communities lacked sufficient infrastructure to implement it.
Even if many of those infrastructure concerns didn’t quite hold up to scrutiny, tying housing reforms to the availability of existing infrastructure is smart policy that could help cities and towns expand their tax base without taking on new maintenance liabilities.
Second, because many of the zoning reform parameters apply only to pre-existing “designated growth areas,” Maine is likely to avoid the years-long rollout that has characterized the MBTA Communities Act’s implementation.
Growth areas can be updated over time as part of a town’s comprehensive planning process, but since the 1988 enactment of the Growth Management Act, Maine municipalities have broadly been required to identify “growth areas” and “rural areas” within their borders.
With this growth management paradigm in place, most of LD 1829’s provisions become enforceable for larger towns a little over a year after the law’s passage, compared to nearly three years for the “Rapid Transit Communities” under the MBTA Communities Act.
Beacon Hill Avoiding Big Moves
The most notable housing bill enacted in Massachusetts in the previous legislative session was the Affordable Homes Act, a $5.2 billion bond bill that aims to accelerate affordable housing production and policy reform alike. The AHA made accessory dwelling units legal statewide and gave judges discretion to impose bond requirements on those appealing local board approvals for housing projects.
But since the MBTA Communities Act was passed in 2021, the commonwealth has largely avoided broad, preemptive actions that either apply to all types of housing or larger and denser project types.
To be fair, there are several pending bills on Beacon Hill that would enact substantial zoning and judicial reforms and mandate planning board training in Massachusetts. But as of this writing, the zoning reform one, dubbed “the YIMBY Act” (and by far the most ambitious of the three), hasn’t even been discussed in a committee hearing, with about two months to go before the Legislature is on recess until 2026.
And Maine’s LD 1829 is far from the only housing reform bill enacted there in the past year.
Other bills effectively barred any state or municipal agency from enforcing minimum parking requirements in new developments, allowed residential uses in commercial zoning districts statewide, imposed time limits on agencies for permitting state-funded affordable housing, and provided more transparency over how municipalities calculate development impact fees.
Thus, in terms of housing policy, Maine has recently lived up to its state motto of “Dirigo,” Latin for “I lead.” If a predominantly rural state with plenty of vacant land and a much less severe housing shortage can facilitate the creation of denser, lower-cost housing, so can Massachusetts.
Andrew Mikula is the senior housing fellow at the Pioneer Institute in Boston.
