By Jennifer Smith | CommonWealth Beacon | February 7, 2026
Rent control opponents have gone to court to try to stop a November ballot question that would impose one of the strictest caps on rent in the country.
The suit, filed to the Supreme Judicial Court on Friday by the real estate-backed Housing for Massachusetts coalition, cites six separate issues that it claims disqualify the rent control question from being put before voters.
If passed, the ballot question would cap most rent increases across the state at either the annual change in the Consumer Price Index or 5 percent, whichever is lower.
Proponents of the initiative, led by the tenant advocacy group Homes for All, say it is a desperately needed fix for a rental market spiraling beyond the reach of many Bay Staters. The approach has split progressives over whether a statewide mandate or a tailored local option, allowing cities and towns to choose to impose rental control, would have been the more politically savvy play.
Rent control was banned in Massachusetts in 1994 through a statewide ballot question. Efforts to revive the practice since then – either statewide or by local option – have fizzled on Beacon Hill.
Four landlords who own and lease residential units in Massachusetts are the named plaintiffs in the suit seeking to kill the rent control measure. They are suing Attorney General Andrea Campbell and Secretary of State William Galvin in their official capacities.
“This poorly written and ill-conceived measure repeals a thirty-year old law passed by the people of Massachusetts,” the anti-rent control campaign said in a statement. “It will not only do permanent damage to housing and affordability in the Commonwealth, but it also presents voters with inaccurate and incomplete information.”
The ballot question would tie rent increases to the rent that was in place on January 31, 2026. The rent caps would not apply to owner-occupied buildings with four or fewer units, newly constructed units for the first 10 years of hosting residents, most public housing, units typically rented to visitors for fewer than 14 days, or units operated for educational, religious, or non-profit purposes.
Ballot measures can be disqualified for a number of reasons.
Because voters are only given the option to vote “yes” or “no” on the questions, the language must be clear and involve a single subject that is considered appropriate for a ballot campaign. For instance, the state does not allow ballot measures to be related to religion, the courts, or specific places in Massachusetts.
The rent control lawsuit takes on AG Campbell’s summary of the petition, argues that the measure involves excluded subjects, and says it involves multiple unrelated provisions.
Read the full article here.