“Next year, as Trump is president, some of the imagery around the state kicking out families — that happening under a Trump presidency will definitely increase a certain emotional reaction,” Jonathan Cohn, the policy director at Progressive Massachusetts, told Playbook.
In an interview on MSNBC shortly after the election, Healey said that Massachusetts State Police would “absolutely not” assist if asked by Trump’s administration to help execute mass deportations. That, Cohn said, is “a clear disconnect” from the message her office is sending at home.
What exactly do progressives think can help address the state’s 200,000-unit housing deficit?
Grassroots group Progressive Massachusetts looks at the Healey administration’s recent housing bond bill as a good step forward, but still falling short in a housing environment that needs much more investment.
Progressive Mass. Policy Director Jonathan Cohn told MASSterList that as the group prepares for next session, it’s continuing to support authorization of local option transfer fees and rent control, a pair of ideas that have pockets of support but have failed to unite legislative Democrats.
Cohn is calling on lawmakers to be more vocal and to “hear from and listen to” their constituents more on housing. He also thinks the way municipalities need to get approval from Beacon Hill in order to implement local housing policies — like the aforementioned transfer fees — needs to change.
“I think that we really need comprehensive reform around home rule in Massachusetts because on too many issues, cities and towns are blocked from taking necessary action by the state,” Cohn said. He added that the state could “use its power of the purse better” by closing tax loopholes and raising more revenue from high earners that could fund housing.
Sam Drysdale, “Guv Signs Housing Law, But Advocates Say It “Left So Much On The Table,” State House News Service, August 6, 2024.
“Inclusionary zoning is something that could have helped lower-income and working class communities,” Progressive Mass Director Jonathan Cohn said. “Legislators love the Housing Development Incentive Program, which is basically how do we build more high-end housing to gentrify Gateway Cities. They seemed to leave ideas that could have helped working or middle class people living in expensive cities.”
Cohn said he would have liked to see more robust tenant protections in the bill….”The Senate’s language on broker’s fees — it was never that clear how much they were willing to fight for it. It didn’t seem to be something the governor cared about, the Senate had other priorities; it ended up on the chopping block as well,” he said.
“Having it be a $5.2 billion authorization means more money will be spent, and it’s an increase from what Baker did, but with all bonding, there’s so much that needs to happen for it to yield results. And unlike Baker, I think Healey wants to act ally spend that money. But now all these priorities that actually made it into the bill will be competing with each other for actual spending,” Cohn said.
Cohn, Park, Chou and other advocates said they hope lawmakers and Healey don’t put housing legislation on the backburner after the signing of Tuesday’s housing bond legislation….”If you build a nice affordable development in 10 years that’s great, but by then Massachusetts’s low-income residents will be living in Rhode Island,” Cohn said.
On August 1, or, in Massachusetts State House time “still July 31,” the House and Senate passed a final version of the Affordable Homes Act, which Governor Healey first introduced all the way back in October.
The vote was 128 to 24 in the House, with Democrats Colleen Garry (D-Dracut) and Dave Robertson (D-Tewksbury) voting no and Republicans Marcus Vaughn (R-Wrentham), David Vieira (R-Falmouth), and Steven Xiarhos (R-Yarmouth) voting yes. The Senate vote was 38 to 2, with Peter Durant (R-Spencer) and Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton) voting no.
The Affordable Homes Act, also referred to as the housing bond bill, is a combination of bond authorizations and new housing policies.
First: what is a bond bill?
A bond bill is legislation that authorizes the state to issue and sell bonds to fund capital projects and programs. The bond bill contains capital authorizations, which identify programs that can be funded through revenue raised through said bonds. Importantly, a bond bill only authorizes the spending; it provides a menu, not a direct appropriation.
The final bill promises $5.16 billion in new investment in housing, but it is important to remember that this is not an exact budget appropriation. Indeed, Healey’s own capital spending plan dedicates only $2 billion for housing over the next five years, and $400 million in fiscal 2025. To be clear, this is a significant increase over recent years, but it indicates that all $5.16 billion in authorized expenditures are unlikely to be realized.
Among the bond authorizations, there were many important items, such as:
$2 billion authorization for public housing
$150 million for public housing decarbonization and $275 million for sustainable and green housing initiatives
$10 million authorization for a fund to help nonprofits acquire existing, non-subsidized housing units and keep them affordable for at least 30 years, protecting them from the speculative market
So next: what policies got included?
The final bill included such new policies as the following:
Legalizing accessory dwelling units (ADUs) by right (Governor’s, House, & Senate bills): The bill requires cities and towns to adopt by-right permitting in single-family zoned districts, caps parking mandates at 1 spot per unit for ADUs further than ½ mile from public transit, and bans owner occupancy requirements. Many cities and towns across the state have been fighting to pass zoning reforms to allow such ADUs (that is, small, independent residences built on the same lot as a single-family home) as a way to increase housing stock.
Eviction record sealing protections (Governor’s & Senate bills): The bill prohibits a consumer reporting agency from including in any report a sealed eviction record, and it gives tenants the ability to petition to seal eviction records in no-fault, non-payment, and fault cases over set time periods and the ability to seal any case that is dismissed or results in a final judgment in favor of the defendant. Unfortunately, none of this record sealing will be automatic; tenants will have to petition the court to get records sealed. Nonetheless, this is an important step because having an eviction record can create a devastating barrier for tenants looking for housing and these records impact people’s ability to obtain housing, credit, and employment, harming many and disproportionately impacting women and people of color.
Foreclosure Prevention Pilot Program (Senate bill): The bill creates a pilot foreclosure prevention program in 5 communities with the highest foreclosure rates statewide. The program would allow homeowners facing foreclosure to request a mediation with their lender, together with a neutral third party, to pursue alternatives to foreclosure.
Creation of an Office of Fair Housing (Governor’s, House, & Senate bills): The bill establishes an office within the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities with explicit focus on fair housing and establishes a trust fund for enforcement initiatives, fair housing testing, education, and outreach. Strong fair housing laws and enforcement ensure that people are not discriminated against in buying or renting a home for reasons of race, color, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, disability, etc.
Facilitating the Use of State Land for Housing (Governor’s, House, & Senate bills): The bill would help streamline the disposition of land under the control of a state agency or quasi for housing purposes. When the state owns the land, it can also lower the costs of building housing, making it easier to build affordable units.
What policies were excludedfrom the final bill?
Transfer Fee (Governor’s bill): This local option policy would have allowed cities and towns to apply a small fee to high-end real estate transactions in order to fund affordable housing.
Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (House bill): TOPA is a local option policy in which tenants would be given the right of first refusal to band together to purchase their building when the owner puts it on the market.
Banning Broker’s Fees (Senate bill): This language would have required broker’s fees to be paid by the party who originally engaged with the broker — meaning, in almost all cases, the landlord rather than the tenant.
Inclusionary Zoning by Simple Majority (Governor’s bill, modified in the Senate bill): This would have allowed cities and towns to adopt inclusionary zoning policies with a simple majority vote of their City Council / Town Meeting / Select Board, rather than the two-thirds vote that is currently required. Such ordinances require developers to build a certain percentage of affordable units as a part of new construction.
What’s the takeaway?
The bill contains a number of policy victories, but it only makes a dent in the overall affordable housing crisis. We need continued advocacy to make sure that promised spending actually happens, and we need our Legislature to give cities and towns the tools that they want (like a transfer fee, like TOPA, like rent stabilization) to best respond to the crisis locally. Where the Affordable Homes Act fell short, it did so due to heavy lobbying from the real estate industry: a sign of the need for greater organizing among progressives and tenant advocates in support of a housing justice agenda.
Although Massachusetts has a full-time legislature, the formal Legislative Session will end tomorrow.
After tomorrow (well, after the wee hours of Thursday morning), the State House will not likely be taking any more recorded votes for the rest of 2024.
As we noted last week, many important priorities are still in play. If you haven’t contacted your legislators yet, now is the best time.
Here’s what you can do:
Email Governor Healey in opposition to emergency shelter limits (new action alert)
Email your state senator about maternal health justice (new action alert)
Email your state rep in support of juvenile justice reform
Email the Housing Bill conference committee
Email the Climate Bill conference committee
Email the Ways & Means chairs about the Prison Moratorium
And whichever action or actions you take, make sure to share it with your networks too to keep the momentum going. In solidarity, Jonathan Cohn Policy Director Progressive Massachusetts
Email Governor Healey in Opposition to Shelter Limits
Last week, the Healey administration announced that it would limit stays in overflow shelters to five days beginning August 1st (this Thursday).
We can’t turn our back on our state’s right to shelter law (a law in which we should take pride), and we can’t turn our back on families seeking help. It’s simple: an affluent state like Massachusetts should not be kicking out families and young children to live on the streets.
Everyone in Massachusetts should be able to choose where they give birth and the type of maternity care that is most appropriate for their needs. Unfortunately, our state currently lags the nation when it comes to access to midwives, birth centers, home birth, and integration of care — models that can reverse our rising maternal mortality and growing racial inequities in birth outcomes.
The best time to contact your legislators is yesterday. The second best time is today.
That’s because time is short. The current legislative session will wrap up next Wednesday, and major decisions will be made between now and then.
As I noted in Monday’s update, this email will be longer than I’d like. That’s because our Legislature, despite being a full-time body, has the tendency to push off everything to the last month, last weeks, even last day of the legislative session. The public deserves a better process, and I’m sure most legislators would prefer one too.
But we wanted to keep you in the loop about what’s happening and what you can do. There will be an array of actions you can take: make a plan to choose at least one action step, and talk to friends about it.
Here’s what you can do:
Email your state rep in support of Raise the Age
Email the Affordable Homes Act Conference Committee
Email the Climate Bill Conference Committee
Email the Ways & Means chairs about the Prison Moratorium
Show up on Monday in support of families experiencing homelessness
Make sure to check out our blog for other updates, and stay tuned for action steps. Many bills move quickly at the end of the session (Example: We just learned that the Senate is taking up an important maternal health bill next Tuesday.) In solidarity, Jonathan Cohn Policy Director
Progressive Massachusetts
Email to Your State Rep: Raise the Age
On July 11, during the debate on its economic development, the MA Senate voted 31 to 9 to keep 18-year-olds out of the adult prison system.
Shifting legal system-involved youth from the adult criminal legal system into the juvenile system improves young people’s access to education and skills training, even if they are never incarcerated. Young people’s prosecution as adults during their late adolescence derails their education, which can have serious effects on their ability to attain employment during these critical adolescent years, diminishing their lifetime earnings, and preventing them from contributing fully to the Massachusetts economy.
The economic development bill is now in Conference Committee, where three senators and three representatives will negotiate a final bill. Here’s what you can do:
Email the Affordable Homes Act Conference Committee
Last month, the MA House and MA Senate passed versions of Governor Maura Healey’s Affordable Homes Act.
WHAT HAPPENED: Like Healey’s original version of the bill, both bills established an Office of Fair Housing, legalized accessory dwelling units in single-family zoning districts without undue restrictions, streamlined the use of state-owned land for housing, and increased the bond authorizations for public housing, building decarbonization, and many more housing initiatives. Unfortunately, however, both chambers caved to the real estate lobby and axed the widely popular local option real estate transfer fee (which would have allowed cities and towns to raise extra money to invest in affordable housing).
But the two bills had a number of differences, and a Conference Committee of three senators and three representatives are negotiating final details.
WHAT IS AT STAKE: We have a displacement crisis in Massachusetts, and it is essential that the final version of the Affordable Homes Act contain policies to help renters and working-class homeowners.
Creating a process for sealing eviction records (Senate bill)
Banning brokers’ fees (Senate bill)
Establishing a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase local option (House bill)
Creating a Foreclosure Mediation Pilot Program (Senate bill)
A Conference Committee of three state senators and three state representatives are negotiating the final details of the bill.
If we are to make a dent at addressing the affordable housing crisis, we need more investment, we need more housing production, and we need policies to prevent displacement. The Legislature shouldn’t leave out that critical final piece.
You can also email them directly and cc your own legislators, using the following emails:
Last week, the House took up its climate omnibus bill. While the bill contains a number of important reforms, it lacks the ambition of the Senate’s recent bill, which did far more to accelerate the transition away from gas. And the Senate’s bill still hadn’t gone far enough to meet the moment, especially around environmental justice.
Mass Power Forward, the coalition of climate justice advocacy groups, is asking people to email the six-person Conference Committee finalizing the details of this bill. Here is a template you can use:
I am writing to you regarding the Climate Omnibus bill. Both the Senate and the House bills are missing critical pieces. In particular, we need a robust cumulative impact analysis in line with current practice and a halt on new gas expansion. Please see this letter for further details.
This is important to me because
Best,
NAME
Email the Ways & Means Chairs about the Prison Moratorium
Last session, the MA Legislature passed a moratorium on new prison and jail construction, only for then Republican governor Charlie Baker to veto it.
New session, new opportunity. But time is running short.
The Prison Moratorium bill (S2821), which would put a five-year pause on the construction of new prisons and jails, was reported favorably out of the State Administration and Regulatory Oversight Committee. It needs to get a vote on the floor by next Wednesday.
Families for Justice as Healing is asking that people contact the two Ways & Means chairs in support of this critical bill:
Email/call script: “Hello, my name is _______ and I am calling to ask the Chairman to please bring the Prison Moratorium bill S.2821 of Ways and Means to the floor for a vote. Both chambers of the legislature already passed the Prison Moratorium last session, and the State Admin Committee worked hard to clarify the language so it’s even more clear that repairs can still be made for the wellbeing of incarcerated people. Passing the Prison Moratorium is a top priority for me, and this bill is supported by incarcerated people, formerly incarcerated people, community members from all over the state, clergy and faith leaders, public health experts, social workers, and medical providers. Please Pass the Prison Moratorium before the end of the session. Thank you.”
Support families experiencing homelessness and the right to shelter!
On July 23rd, Governor Healey announced changes to the Emergency Assistance (EA) family shelter system that will force children and their families out with no safe place to sleep at night. Families who are deemed eligible for shelter will now be forced to choose: wait in an unsafe place for a shelter placement or stay for 5 nights in a state-run overflow site but then wait at least 6 months to access EA shelter. This policy change will disproportionately impact immigrant families, both new arrivals and long-term Massachusetts residents.
Join our allies from the Massachusetts Law Reform Institute and the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless in front of the State House on Monday, July 29th, 11 a.m.–12 p.m. to call on the Governor and Legislature to uphold access to shelter for children and families.
The clock is ticking. The current formal legislative session at the State House ends in just two weeks. And there is a lot still pending.
Take action in support of strong action on our housing crisis and on the climate crisis with the tools and templates below.
The Affordable Homes Act Must Support Renters
WHAT HAPPENED SO FAR: Last month, the MA House and MA Senate passed versions of Governor Maura Healey’s Affordable Homes Act.
Like Healey’s original version of the bill, both bills established an Office of Fair Housing, legalized accessory dwelling units in single-family zoning districts without undue restrictions, streamlined the use of state-owned land for housing, and increased the bond authorizations for public housing, building decarbonization, and many more housing initiatives. Unfortunately, however, both chambers caved to the real estate lobby and axed the widely popular local option real estate transfer fee (which would have allowed cities and towns to raise extra money to invest in affordable housing).
But the two bills had a number of differences, and a Conference Committee of three senators and three representatives are negotiating final details.
WHAT IS AT STAKE: We have a displacement crisis in Massachusetts, and it is essential that the final version of the Affordable Homes Act contain policies to help rentersand working-class homeowners:
Creating a process for sealing eviction records (Senate bill)
Banning brokers’ fees (Senate bill)
Establishing a Tenant Opportunity to Purchase local option (House bill)
Creating a Foreclosure Mediation Pilot Program (Senate bill)
If we are to make a dent at addressing the affordable housing crisis, we need more investment, we need more housing production, and we need policies to prevent displacement. The Legislature shouldn’t leave out that critical final piece.
The House will be voting today on its climate omnibus bill (H.4876), which addresses the difficulties of connecting local clean energy projects to the grid.
Amendment #17 Protecting consumers and communities from new, large gas pipeline expansions (Williams), which would end Energy Facilities Siting Board approval of new, large, polluting gas pipeline expansions which, if constructed, will adversely affect ratepayers, the health and safety of Massachusetts residents, and the climate.
Amendment #15 Improving Air Quality in Environmental Justice Communities (Barber), which would create a technical advisory committee for air quality and direct the Department of Environmental Protection to identify at least 8 pollution hot spots, install air monitors there, and provide recommendations for how to reduce air pollution there by 50% by 2030.
Mass Power Forward also has a handy action guide as well that you can use.
My name is Jonathan Cohn, and I am the policy director at Progressive Massachusetts. We are a statewide, multi-issue, grassroots membership organization focused on fighting for policy that would make our Commonwealth more equitable, just, sustainable, and democratic.
Massachusetts faces a growing affordable housing crisis. To rent the average 2-bedroom apartment in Massachusetts requires an income equal to $37.97 per hour, more than twice the minimum wage. Home ownership has become increasingly out of reach, as the state’s median home price has passed $600,000. The high cost of housing has led to displacement, and in a growing number of municipalities, the local workforce can no longer afford to live there.
We are grateful for the work spent on the Affordable Homes Act (H.4726) this session, as it contains a number of critically important tools for addressing this affordability crisis.
We appreciate the inclusion in both chambers’ bills of provisions such as legalizing accessory dwelling units as of right with minimal restrictions (Sections 7 & 8 of the House bill, Sections 10 & 11 of the Senate bill), streamlining the process for using surplus state-owned land for housing (Section 105 in the House bill, Section 135 in the Senate bill), and creating an Office of Fair Housing (Section 5 of the House bill, Section 8 of the Senate bill).
When negotiating a final version of this bill, we urge you to incorporate the great ideas present in both bills, notably the following:
Eviction Sealing Protections (Section 66 of the Senate bill), which would provide tenants with the ability to seal an eviction record in certain types of cases at certain times. Right now, there is nothing tenants in Massachusetts can do to seal an eviction record—even if they did nothing wrong, won the case, or paid off any rent due. The moment an eviction case is filed—regardless of the reason or the outcome—a tenant has a permanent and publicly available eviction record on the Trial Court’s website that creates a significant barrier to finding a next place to live.
Tenant Opportunity to Purchase local option (Section 36D of the House bill), which would provide cities and towns the ability to pass ordinances to give tenants the right to buy their buildings by matching a third-party offer when their building goes up for sale. TOPA gives tenants, or a non-profit they designate, a chance of becoming owners of their homes, preserving affordability and requiring no loss of profit to the seller.
Banning Broker’s fees (Section 37 of the Senate bill), which would ensure that renters are not burdened with unreasonable costs and would promote transparency and fairness in real estate transactions. As tenants struggle to afford to rent in our increasingly unaffordable housing market, brokers’ fees can make housing options unattainable due to the increase in upfront costs required. A renter who moves every few years could have to pay such costs each time, and tenants on housing vouchers face restricted housing options due to the barriers these fees create. Moreover, MA is an outlier, as in most states landlords have to bear the full fee. The Boston Globe has excellent recent reporting on this issue: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/07/10/business/rental-brokers-boston-september-leases/.
Foreclosure Mediation Pilot Program (Section 150 of the Senate bill), which would help ensure housing stability. Under mediation, a homeowner and lender meet face-to-face with a mediator and discuss how to address a default. Sixteen states and DC have already adopted this proven policy. This excellent Boston Globe article underscores the importance of such a program: https://www.bostonglobe.com/2024/07/12/opinion/homeowners-foreclosure-mediation-legislature/. We also echo the call for minor modifications to the language as urged by the Homes for All coalition.
Inclusionary Zoning by Simple Majority (Section 13 of the Senate bill), which would allow cities and towns to pass, by simple majority, ordinances that require up to and including 13% of new units be affordable. Inclusionary zoning helps increase the economic diversity of affluent communities and expand affordable housing options.
Small Properties Acquisition Fund (Line Item 7004-0073, line 312, in the Senate bill), which provides not less than $10,000,000 for a Small Properties Acquisition Funding Pilot established in item 1599-6084 of section 2A of the Acts of 2022. This would provide subsidies for nonprofit acquisition of homes from the market, and by including funding for the production of affordable homeownership units that can be kept affordable in perpetuity.
Housing Shortage Commission (Section 142 of the Senate bill), which would establish a commission to produce a report about policies that can provide sustainable and equitable housing solutions to: (i) improve housing production; (ii) address racial wealth disparities in housing; (iii) ensure regional equity in housing; and (iv) prevent chronic homelessness, with the commission’s purview including studying a transfer fee, a vacancy tax, a blight tax, an increase in the excise tax, and community land trusts.
We hope that these measures will find your support. Poll after poll shows that voters across the Commonwealth want comprehensive action on housing, and this bill can be an important step forward.
Last night, the MA Senate voted unanimously (40 to 0) for its redraft of the Affordable Homes Act.
The Senate’s bill contains a $5.4 billion bond authorization, which — as it is important to acknowledge — is more than the $2 billion that the Governor actually plans to spend over the next five years. Not all of the spending authorized will materialize: the authorizations create potential, not hard reality.
But the policy components of bond bills are different: they are laws like any other laws. Their impact is not just potential, but reality.
Like Healey’s original version of the bill, the Senate bill would establish an Office of Fair Housing and legalize accessory dwelling units in single-family zoning districts without undue restrictions.
The Senate’s bill, like Healey’s, allows cities and towns to pass inclusionary zoning ordinances (i.e., requirements that a certain percentage of new construction be affordable units) by simple majority, but only allows it for requirements up to 13 percent.
The Senate’s bill, like Healey’s, creates a process for the sealing of eviction records and, importantly, allows this for cases that are dismissed or where tenants win (omissions in Healey’s original language), although the Senate did not streamline the process to make some of the sealing automatic to remove administrative burdens on tenants.
In a further win for tenants, the Senate bill bans brokers’ fees, requiring that real estate brokers’ fees be paid solely by the party that contracted with them and not born by renters for whom such fees can come as a costly and prohibitive surprise.
That all being said, the Senate’s exclusion of a local option real estate transfer fee was shameful and indefensible, a cowardly capitulation to the real estate industry, condescending a dismissal of cities and towns that want to take action, and sign that they simply do not take the housing crisis seriously. We can’t take tools off the table.
Recorded Votes from the Senate Session
Despite being in session from 10 am to midnight to work through the bill (with frequent recesses therein), there were almost no recorded votes, and there was little debate. Indeed, the third item that the Senate did was bundle 64 amendments — 1/5 of the total filed — and reject them en bloc on a voice vote (“All those in favor say aye, all those opposed say nay, the nays have it, and the amendments are rejected.” It lasts as long as it took you to read that.) The amendment to restore the local option transfer fee was among them.
They then adopted 71 amendments en bloc via voice vote. Later in the day, they rejected a bundle of 14 amendments and adopted a bundle of 30.
In other words, a total of 78 amendments were rejected via a bundled voice vote, and 101 were adopted via a bundled voice vote. Our deliberative body in action.
The remaining amendments did not get meaningful back-and-forth debate and deliberation either. Only three received recorded votes, and two of those were unanimous: the creation of a Crumbling Concrete Assistance Fund and the creation of First Time Home Buyers Savings Accounts. That those two received recorded votes is just a sign that their lead sponsors wanted to issue a press release or otherwise get public credit: the votes offer nothing in the way of transparency or accountability.
The only non-unanimous vote was on an amendment from Minority Leader Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) to enable cities and towns to evade compliance with MBTA Communities Act zoning requirements. It failed 6 to 34, with two Democrats — Edward Kennedy of Lowell and Walter Timilty of Milton — joining Republicans.
On June 24, the MA Senate released its redraft of Governor Healey’s housing bond bill (S.2834). Although the bill contains important provisions like legalizing accessory dwelling units, creating a process for sealing eviction records, establishing an Office of Fair Housing, and banning broker fees, it fails to meet the urgency of the housing crisis and leaves out key policies, such as a local option real estate transfer fee.
The bill can — and must — get better, so write to your state senators in support of the following amendments:
#119, Air Quality for Homes (Jehlen), which would create a task force to address identification and remediation of indoor air pollution and indoor mold contamination.
#141, HOMES Judiciary Committee Bill (Eldridge), which would substitute the eviction sealing language in the bill with language reported out of the Judiciary Committee which would also allow tenants whose case is dismissed or who win to petition to seal their eviction case. While 11 states have successfully adopted eviction record sealing protections, there is nothing right now tenants in Massachusetts can do now to seal their eviction records. In Massachusetts, the moment an eviction case is filed, a tenant has a permanent and publicly available eviction record on the Trial Court’s website. Even if a tenant paid off the rent, won the case, or did nothing wrong, they are rejected from housing regardless of the outcome of the case.
#150, Establishing local-option rent stabilization (Jehlen), which would allow cities and towns to pass rent stabilization ordinances. Cities and towns need an array of tools to combat displacement, and rent control is a key tool.
#214, Foreclosure Prevention Program (Gomez), which would create a statewide mediation program to prevent foreclosures, which is critical for homeowners across Massachusetts and particularly low-income, working-class, and new homeowners.
#235, Encouraging homeownership (Jehlen), which would give tenants the right of first refusal to buy their building when the owner decides to sell. This is critical to address the high cost of housing, to keep tenants in their homes, and to stabilize our communities.
#242, Local Option Transfer Fee (Comerford), which would give cities and towns the ability to put a small fee on high-end real estate transactions to raise dedicated funds for affordable housing. We have to give cities and towns in Massachusetts all the tools possible to tackle the housing crisis, and the real estate transfer fee, only for the towns that want it, will give them the much needed resources to do just that.
.png)
