OPINION: Proposed rent control is a disaster for skilled trades and housing supply

By Ryan Emrich

The housing affordability crisis in Massachusetts is real, painful, and demands comprehensive solutions. However, the proposed statewide ballot question for rent control (Initiative #25-21), set for 2026, is not the solution. It is a Trojan horse that promises affordability but will deliver decay, disinvestment in our state, and deeper housing scarcity in our communities.

As a local resident and an active real estate investor, I vehemently oppose this initiative. It is based on a misunderstanding of how capital flows and how rental properties are maintained, and its retroactive nature is patently unfair. Here are just three problems (of many) with the proposed law:

1)  Loss of financial incentive

The core failure of this rent control proposal is simple; It eliminates the financial incentive for property owners to invest in their properties. The measure proposes limiting annual rent increases to the consumer price index (CPI) or a maximum of 5% (whichever is lower) across the entire Commonwealth.

While the costs of property taxes, insurance, repairs and maintenance, and labor continue to rise with real inflation, the revenue stream required to cover these costs (and fund necessary capital improvements) will be completely choked.

Why would an investor purchase an outdated multifamily building that desperately needs modernization if they know their return will be capped? Breaking news: They won't.

They will instead divert their capital to states or asset classes where they can realize a market rate of return. The result will be devastating for our state’s rental inventory:

• Stagnation and deterioration: Deferred maintenance (e.g., roof repairs, faulty plumbing) will become permanent problems. The properties that need updating most will fall into disrepair, worsening the quality of life for the very tenants the law seeks to help.
• Lack of modernization: We need updated, energy-efficient housing. Rent control removes the ability for owners to finance major renovations, ensuring our housing stock remains inefficient and outdated for decades to come (I argue, until the law is repealed).

2)  Immediate economic effect

We don't have to wait until 2026 to see the damage. The mere threat of this legislation is already causing a panic among real estate professionals:

• Deals are now being devalued: Appraisals for multifamily properties are already being impacted, with deal values being lowered to reflect the possibility of future restrictions on income. I have seen this with my own eyes already.
• Banks are throttling lending: Lenders are reacting to the decreased valuations and future risk by reducing the amount of money they are willing to lend on these properties.

This means the flow of capital, which is necessary for buying, updating, and sustaining rental housing, is being choked off before a single vote is cast. The trickle-down effect will be less reinvestment, fewer jobs in the trades, and reduced vitality in our local communities.

3)  An unjust retroactive clause

Perhaps the most egregious element of the proposed ballot question is its retroactive application. The rent cap would be based on the rent in place as of January 31, 2026, even though it would be voted on in November 2026. This creates an unworkable scenario. Rents may legitimately change throughout the rest of 2026 due to new leases, unit turnover, or market adjustments. If the ballot question passes in November 2026, property owners would be legally obligated to retroactively adjust those rents down, potentially having to reimburse tenants for rent that was entirely legal when paid. This is unfair, destabilizing, and a complete burden on landlords and property owners across the state.

My call to action:

Rent control has failed historically in Massachusetts (it was banned statewide in 1994) and it has failed in nearly every city where it has been implemented, ultimately decreasing housing supply and worsening housing quality.

If we want to solve the housing affordability crisis, we must focus on policies that increase supply, streamline permitting, and incentivize strategic density (i.e., we don’t want to introduce too many rental units all at once). We must support policies that bring money into the state for housing investment, not those that force capital out.

I urge you to publicly and strongly oppose this ballot initiative. This is a crucial moment, and the wrong decision will have catastrophic, irreversible consequences for the future of housing in the Commonwealth.

Ryan Emrich is a Medford resident, CPA, co-founder of Blue Canyon Equity Partners, and an active multifamily real estate investor. Blue Canyon primarily focuses on repositioning multifamily properties (e.g., outdated or distressed properties), renovating homes (e.g., flips), and new construction development of single-family homes.