Andrew Mikula

On June 23, after the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court struck down a proposed ballot measure that would reinstate rent control statewide, some members of the real estate industry seemed to quickly declare victory and move on. Instead, the industry should get ahead of future rent control proposals and offer alternative policy options that speak to proponents’ motivations directly.

Tenant advocacy groups have already suggested they will resurface a rent control proposal in 2028, which may be an even friendlier political environment for proponents. That’s because, relative to the general population, the groups that are most likely to say they support rent control – especially young people and renters – are more likely to vote in presidential elections than in the midterms.

Another factor is that rent growth has been relatively modest in 2026, but that could change by 2028 as permitting volumes for new homes remain underwhelming. Rising rents in the lead-up to the election could make rent control more appealing to voters, even as the momentous spikes in rents in 2021 and 2022 fade further into the past.

Don’t Count on Courts to Save You

To state the obvious, proponents won’t make the mistake of including religious exemptions in the petition language again.

As the Supreme Judicial Court ruled in June, including this religious exemption disqualified the rent control initiative from the ballot because the Massachusetts Constitution prohibits ballot measures that “relate to religion, religious practices or religious institutions.”

The 2028 petition language may have other vulnerabilities that could warrant a lawsuit. But that won’t become clear until the summer of 2027 at the earliest.

Instead, those who bristle at the prospect of rent control should offer clear alternatives that directly address rent control proponents’ concerns about the displacement of low-income renters.

Why Rent Control Has Support

At a legislative hearing in March, Carolyn Chou, who filed the 2026 rent control petition, cited “a crisis of tenants facing high rent increases and eviction” as her motivation. She continued, “we know that increased production is critical to moving forward, but we also know the tenants we see every day cannot wait” for a wave of new construction to stabilize prices.

Thus, the rent control debate, at its roots, is about whether policymakers should prioritize reliable, long-term, regional solutions like increasing supply or the short-term needs of people who are struggling now. Solutions like rent control turn fixing these dual housing crises – underproduction and instability – into a hard tradeoff. But as policy goals, they aren’t mutually exclusive.

Most coalition members behind the rent control campaign probably are not policy wonks. But they are sensitive to challenges facing tenants and responsive to what those tenants say they want. At a policy level, if the real estate industry can also find ways of being more responsive to tenants’ needs, rent control may become less necessary in the eyes of tenant advocates.

These pro-tenant efforts might also help shore up support for the process-based and zoning reforms that the industry has long championed. Henry Honorof, a national leader in advancing pro-housing legislation, was quoted in The Atlantic last fall as saying that “when major expansions in housing availability in blue places succeed, they usually pass alongside tenant protections and rent stabilization.”

Ideas Industry Should Consider

What pro-tenant policies might the real estate industry support?

One option is expanding the availability of rental vouchers and targeted assistance for tenants facing eviction. While this would require additional subsidies during a challenging time for the state budget, one interim step may be to codify the state’s voucher program in state law, improving predictability for tenants and affordable housing developers alike.

Similarly, there are capital and tax-based solutions designed to make it easier for community land trusts and other mission-driven organizations to acquire and maintain small buildings as “naturally occurring affordable housing.” In 2016, Massachusetts enacted – but did not implement – a Donation Tax Credit that encourages property owners to give existing housing to qualified nonprofits.

Importantly, there is another powerful entity that has already pushed for more policy collaboration between tenant advocates and the real estate industry: the Massachusetts Legislature. A reform package with strong support from both camps could help advance a legislative solution that avoids the ballot entirely and further allows lawmakers to fine-tune details that are politically contentious.

Critics of this approach will say that it does little to stop tenant advocates from advancing a rent control petition in 2028. But it might help show voters desperate for more and lower-cost housing that there are better alternatives than capping rent growth.

The most recent poll shows that 69 percent of Massachusetts voters support rent control and just 19 percent are opposed. Proactive compromise is necessary to address the rhetorical basis for rent control at its roots.

Andrew Mikula is the chief housing economist at the Pioneer Institute in Boston.