STATE HOUSE NEWS SERVICE: Beacon Hill, rent control ban targeted in flurry of ballot questions

By Sam Drysdale, Michael P. Norton, Alison Kuznitz, Chris Lisinski, Gintautas Dumcius

This article originally ran in State House News Service on August 6, 2025.

Many will fall through the cracks. A few may advance to the 2026 ballot. But proposed ballot laws wouldn’t have any chance this election cycle unless supporters filed language and signatures by the close of business Wednesday.

While the road ahead is long, the preliminary list of potential questions that will go before voters has some eye-catching proposals, including a series of measures that would force more reforms on a skeptical Legislature and an effort to reverse the three-decade-old ban on rent control.

Article 48 of the Massachusetts Constitution lays out the process that allows citizens and interest groups to get proposed laws and constitutional amendments on the ballot if they are willing to do the work to get there. It’s a road that some campaigns have taken to enact proposals that have failed in the state Legislature.

To even have a shot, initiative petition language must be signed by at least 10 registered voters and submitted to the attorney general’s office by the first Wednesday in August.

Supporters of a plan to strictly limit annual rent increases have signaled ballot question hopes, and there is an effort underway to force zoning changes to allow construction of more “starter homes.”

Other emerging campaigns focus on applying the public records law to the governor and the Legislature, overhauling the party primary election system by establishing one all-party primary, and establishing collective bargaining rights on behalf of Committee for Public Counsel Services employees.

There’s also a process to use the ballot to repeal an existing law. In 2024, the Civil Rights Coalition launched a campaign to wipe off the books the omnibus firearms law enacted by the Legislature. The referendum was certified for the ballot last November and the effort is ongoing.

Legislative records and pay

A bipartisan group of transparency and legislative reform advocates is pursing a ballot question overhauling the financial stipends that legislative leaders award to many lawmakers.

Scotia Hille, a member of the Coalition to Reform Our Legislature Steering Committee, said the group plans to file two proposals: one that would “dramatically reduce the number of stipends in the control of leadership and boost pay for rank and file members, [and] another that would eliminate additional stipends entirely.”

If organizers clear the subsequent hurdles, the campaign intends to place only one question on the ballot, Hille said, adding that the advocates “are leaving the option open for either at present.”

Another measure in the mix, which has the support of Auditor Diana DiZoglio, would subject the governor’s office and Legislature to the state’s public records law. Both entities are exempt and therefore not required to release any public records.

Asked Wednesday if he sees the ballot measure filings as a rebuke to the way the Legislature runs its business, House Speaker Ron Mariano talked about “the ease of the ability to get a ballot question on the ballot.”

“The use of paying someone to go out and get signatures — I see a lot of high-stakes, special interest groups investing money in ballot questions,” Mariano said.

A reporter asked Mariano if he thinks the Legislature should be subject to the public records law as the ballot question seeks to do.

 
“It depends on the definition of what opening up the laws are, and what you’re opening up,” Mariano responded. “I think there are some things that are better left to negotiate in private, and I would prefer it that way.”

House Speaker Pro Tempore Kate Hogan, the chamber’s number-three Democrat, on Wednesday morning said legislative stipends for leadership and committee posts are “very important because you have people that are doing a lot of work, and you’re able to recruit people to do the work that [are] able to live on salaries.”

On stipends, Mariano said, “Every organization, the longer you’re involved, the more work you do, and the higher responsibility you have, you get increases in pay. And I think it’s one of the ways to keep people think about this job as a potential career.”

Mariano defended the practice of legislative leaders selecting which lawmakers earn committee leadership posts, and therefore which members of their caucuses secure sizable bumps to their total pay.

 
“Who better to know who shows leadership and puts in the effort, than the leaders who are trying to move the agenda?” he said.

Election Day registration

Secretary of State William Galvin also filed a measure that would allow prospective voters to register and cast a ballot in a single trip to the polls on Election Day. Galvin, a Democrat, has long backed the idea that’s failed to gain traction in the Legislature.

“There’s been legislation filed for several years that has not gone anywhere, and this is a continuing problem,” he said. “The absence of this statute or this opportunity really creates a problem, especially in big elections, national elections, for instance, when you have many people who, for whatever reason, fail to register in time and then try to vote on Election Day.”

He described the change as a way to “complete our reform of election laws in Massachusetts” after Beacon Hill previously made mail-in voting widely available and established automatic voter registration options.

The proposal would take effect in 2028, including the presidential primary election that year, Galvin said.

“It would be wonderful if the Legislature adopted it because then that would make [a ballot question] unnecessary,” Galvin said. “I don’t know that they will. It doesn’t seem that they will. They’ve had opportunities to do that over a period of time.”

Public defense unionization

SEIU Local 888 members and CPCS employees submitted paperwork early Wednesday afternoon that would enable CPSC staff — which includes public defenders, social workers, investigators and administrative staff who support indigent clients — to unionize. The measure aims to clarify state law and give CPCS workers collective bargaining rights, similar to other state employees.

 
“From our estimation, we believe that they’re state employees in every way, and they deserve the same pathways as other state employees,” Tom McKeever, union president, told reporters in Ashburton Park.

 
Tanvi Verma, who’s worked as a public defender at CPCS for two years and earns $78,000, told reporters, “I’m just trying to find a way to make this sustainable for myself, to keep doing what I love for who I care about forever.”

Rent stabilization 

Advocates with Homes for All Massachusetts announced their push for a rent stabilization ballot measure at midnight Wednesday, with the aim of tamping down on rent hikes that can force strained tenants out. The initiative petition would curtail rent increases to the cost of living with a 5% increase, with some exemptions.

 
In a statement later Wednesday, Greg Vasil, CEO of the Greater Boston Real Estate Board, called rent control a “failed, misguided policy that stifles housing creation and disincentivizes unit upkeep and maintenance.”

“The real estate industry is firmly united against any effort to legalize rent control in Massachusetts. Instead, the state must reduce barriers to housing creation and build more homes across all price points to address the affordability crisis,” Vasil said. “The real estate industry is committed to helping fulfill the promises of the Affordable Homes Act and collaborating with state and local leaders to reduce red tape slowing housing development.”

The Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance called rent control a “failed experiment” and pointed out voters banned the policy statewide via a 1994 ballot question that the proposed new measure would essentially reverse.

 
“Even the discussion of rent control as a possible policy proposal will send rents higher, as landlords will want to increase rents before it’s too late,” MassFiscal Executive Director Paul Craney said. “It will also freeze current investment in new building, as developers will reevaluate their decisions to move forward.”

Tax cuts and refunds

A coalition of business groups, co-led by the Massachusetts High Technology Council and the Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance, filed two potential ballot initiatives aimed to “rebuild state competitiveness.”

One proposal would reduce the personal income tax rate from 5% to 4% over a three-year period, which the groups say could grow the state’s GDP by $17.5 billion within three years of full implementation.

A policy brief from the Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance estimates the change would save the average taxpayer roughly $1,336 annually compared to the status quo.

The coalition’s other proposed law would revise the state’s existing revenue cap formula to “slow state budget growth and ensure more consistent and predictable excess revenue refunds to taxpayers.”

Under the proposed formula, they say, taxpayers would have received 24 refunds over the past four decades, compared to two refunds under the current law.

“The measures filed today are part of a long-term strategy to ensure families, workers, and businesses can continue to call Massachusetts home,” John Lee, chair of the High Tech Council’s board, said in a statement.

Those measures could also create major headaches for state lawmakers by limiting the amount of revenue available to support a spending appetite that’s been especially robust in recent years.

Using sporting goods sales tax for conservation

A portion of the funds generated from the existing sales tax on sporting goods would go annually to fund conservation without increasing taxes, under a proposal from a coalition of environmental and climate activism groups.

 
The group, led by Mass Audubon that also including The Trustees, Conservation Law Foundation and others, estimates they can dedicate $100 million annually to conservation and climate goals under the proposed initiative.

 
“We’re responding to historic underfunding of land protection in Massachusetts. In the face of evaporating support from the federal government for conservation, we believe Massachusetts voters want to prioritize and protect our water quality, natural areas, forests, farmland, and parks,” the coalition says in a release.

Abortion funding

Anti-abortion attorney Thomas Harvey once again appears to be leading efforts on an initiative petition to block taxpayer funding of abortion.

 
Harvey and nine other Bay Staters submitted paperwork last month for a constitutional amendment stating, “Nothing in this constitution requires the public funding of abortion.”

Amid threats from the Trump administration and Republican-led states, Beacon Hill Democrats this session have expanded protections surrounding reproductive health care access, including abortion care. President Donald Trump’s megalaw sought to defund Planned Parenthood, and that provision is now tied up in lawsuits. 

What’s next?

The attorney general’s office will determine if each of the petitions meets constitutional requirements to appear before voters, and usually announces which petitions are certified by the first Wednesday in September. Petitions certified by the attorney general can then be filed with the Secretary of State.

 
It’s then on to the next round of signature-gathering: organizers need to collect 74,574 signatures for their petition and file them with local election officials for certification 14 days before the first Wednesday in December, according to the attorney general.

 
The process continues with a second round of signature gathering in the spring, and the field usually narrows to a smaller number of petitions that make it onto the fall’s ballot.