In 1920, with troops returning home from World War I and with an economic recession, the state's rental market was tight.
[3][1][2] The federal policy lapsed in 1953, but Massachusetts continued until 1955 when Governor Christian Herter vetoed an extension.
The history of rent control in Massachusetts and around the nation "paints a consistent picture of market distortions and unintended, often inequitable, consequences.
[7] Landlords could not increase rent without permission, even for basic repairs and upkeep, and instead had to submit detailed requests and proposals demonstrating that the work had been done with the cheapest possible materials.
[6] Landlords would have to pay for repairs or to replace broken appliances and then submit receipts to the rent control boards, who were under no obligation to approve increases to recover the costs.
[7] According to the National Bureau of Economic Research, the number of rental units was reduced by 15% and tenants were 8-9% less likely to move due to rent control.
[9] In an independent study conducted of 2/3 of the rent controlled apartments in Cambridge in 1988, 246 were households headed by doctors, 298 by lawyers, 265 by architects, 259 by professors, and 220 by engineers.
[6] In one building in Cambridge, the rent control board set an allowance in 1979 of 1,038 gallons of heating oil a year.
[6] In that four year span, an extra 12,000 gallons of oil were burned and 122 tons of carbon dioxide were emitted into the atmosphere.
[8] Boston began decontrolling units in 1974, allowing rents to reset when new tenants moved in, and relaxing other controls.
[8] Many saw the repeal effort as difficult because it was often not just the poor and the elderly who benefited from rent control, but middle class and even wealthy renters.
[14] After the vote, the Massachusetts General Court passed a law protecting low-income tenants in rent control apartments from being evicted.
[15] In 1984, Vincent Bologna, a Sicilian immigrant and United States Navy veteran, purchased a dilapidated, abandoned house in Cambridge.
[16] They also lost another rental property that they owned because they could not keep up with the mounting legal bills while not receiving rent from the Stowes for five years.
[19] Because of the low rents owner John McAdams was receiving, he was unable to repair several of his apartments on Broadway to make them habitable.
[19] When they sat vacant longer than 120 days, criminal charges were filed against him and a warrant was issued for his arrest.
[21] Additionally, because the basement ceiling was too low, the board ordered the Petrillos to jack up the entire house, at their expense, to create a legal apartment.
[24] Hong Lu, who spoke English as a second language, was unable to adequately represent herself when she appeared before the rent control board.
[24] The rent control board convicted them of not living in their own home before the Javorskis filed a change of address form.
[24] Several owners of condos protested at city council meetings with bags over their heads to protect their identities and to prevent them from being arrested.
[4] However, there is "a general consensus among economists" that instituting rent control would not solve the affordable housing crisis facing the state.
[13][8] In a 2020 effort, Connolly proposed a rent control measure as an amendment to an economic development bill in the House; it failed 22–136.
[13] In 2023, he organized a last minute effort to restore rent control via ballot initiative at the 2024 Massachusetts election.
[1] The Boston Real Estate Board launched a campaign in 2023 to oppose Wu's measure, saying it will discourage housing production in a city and a region that already has an acute shortage, will make maintaining properties more difficult, and will hurt tax revenues.