LYNN — As Massachusetts voters prepare to decide on a proposed rent-control ballot initiative this November, the debate over housing affordability has taken on renewed urgency in Lynn, a city with a long and contentious history surrounding rent regulation.
On Tuesday night, the Lynn City Council voted in favor of a “resolution urging support for rent stabilization to protect tenants and preserve community stability.” The vote was 10-0 in favor. Ward 1 Councilor Pete Meaney was absent from that portion of the meeting.
Councilor at Large Nicole McClain said the resolution “Is not against development. It is the beginning of supporting reasonable housing costs, incremental rent increases, and long-term community stability.”
She added, “I am for development. We absolutely need more housing, but we also need housing that our community can afford.”
The proposed measure, known as the Massachusetts Rent Control Initiative, would overturn the 1994 statewide ban on rent control and establish statewide regulations for the first time in decades. Under the proposal, annual rent increases would be capped at 5% or the Consumer Price Index, whichever is lower. Landlords would also be prohibited from resetting rents to market rates after a tenant moves out. Importantly, this provision is the most controversial, in that it prevents a landlord from recovering the cost of improving properties when a tenant leaves. This makes the proposed initiative among the strictest in the country and could encourage condo conversions, further reducing the rental housing stock.
Exemptions would include certain owner-occupied buildings, newly constructed housing, and short-term rentals. Supporters argue the policy would provide relief for renters struggling with rising housing costs, while opponents warn it could discourage development and destabilize local housing markets.
Lynn’s history with rent control stretches back more than five decades. According to Item clips, in 1972, landlords unsuccessfully sought to repeal Lynn’s rent control policies through a ballot initiative, losing by a 60%-40% margin. The following year, the debate intensified with multiple violent attacks between supporters and opponents. The Lynn City Council voted 6-5 in 1973 to repeal rent control during a contentious March 13 meeting.
Opinions are split.
Two longtime Lynn property owners and operators, Gordon R. Hall, president of the Hall Company, and John Gilberg, president of Bayview Realty, said they fear the proposal could create significant long-term consequences for both landlords and renters.
The owners argued that limiting rent increases to the CPI — which has averaged roughly 2.63% over the past three decades — would fail to keep pace with rising operating expenses such as insurance, utilities, water and sewer costs, and maintenance repairs.
Gilberg said, “Landlord’s costs are increasing by more than 2.5%. Try 10% to 15% increases in expenses like insurance, electricity, gas, rubbish, and real estate taxes.”
Hall said the proposed ban would prevent landlords from raising rents to market rates after a tenant leaves and would have the unintended consequence of discouraging renovations to aging housing stock.
He described a recently vacated apartment that rented for $675 per month and required more than $100,000 in upgrades, including insulation, a new heating system, kitchen, and bathroom. Under the proposed law, Hall said, projects like that could become financially unrealistic, leading many landlords to perform only essential repairs instead of major improvements.
The owners also warned the policy could reduce property values and shift greater tax burdens onto owners of single-, two-, and three-family homes.
They also stated that there is an imbalance between supply and demand in the housing market.
“There seems to be a lot more vacancies out there in Lynn right now,” Gilberg said. “The Multiple Listing Service has quite a few, and some of the newer buildings have been unable to rent all the units.”
Rather than capping rent, encouraging the production of new units and providing incentives to maintain current buildings would be a more sound approach to the housing shortage.
A recent study conducted by the Greater Boston Real Estate Board and Tufts University Center for State Policy Analysis found that under rent control, property value losses could accumulate over time, forcing cities and towns to either raise taxes or reduce services.
According to the Tufts analysis, Lynn could see an 8.7% decline in property values by 2029, along with a 9.6% increase in tax rates to offset shrinking municipal revenue. By 2036, the report estimates property value losses could reach 17.4%, with tax rates increasing by more than 21%.
Hall also argued that reduced investment in housing improvements could affect workers in the trades, including electricians, plumbers, carpenters, and HVAC contractors, if landlords scale back renovation projects in response to tighter profit margins.
He added that many landlords support efforts to make housing more affordable, but believe rent control is the wrong solution. Instead, he pointed to recent state housing initiatives, including accessory dwelling unit reforms, zoning changes, and the MBTA Communities Act, as measures intended to encourage new housing production. He argued rent control could work against those efforts by discouraging investment and development.
Gilberg said, “With a greater supply of units, rents will come down naturally. A lot of owners who bought recently are going to be in trouble.”
While property owners warned of long-term economic consequences, rent control advocates argued the current housing crisis is already forcing residents into unstable and overcrowded living situations.
Isaac Simon Hodes, executive director of Lynn United For Change, said rising rents are already forcing residents out of the city.
“We’ve seen way too many people forced to leave Lynn because of unaffordable rents,” Hodes said. “We see entire families forced to live in single rooms because rent has just gotten too high.”
Opponents of the proposal said the issue has become increasingly polarized, with little direct conversation between tenant advocates and housing providers about alternative approaches to affordability. Both sides can all safely agree that rents are too high; the solution to fix the problem is up for debate.
The proposed rent control measure is expected to appear alongside 10 other statewide ballot questions this November, setting up what could become one of the most contentious housing debates in Massachusetts in decades.
