Rent Control Measure Passed

BOSTON--In the final minutes of the 1994 legislative year, both houses of the state legislature last night passed an emergency act that will give some tenants a maximum of two years' grace period before the official end of rent control in Massachusetts.

The 11th-hour votes appear to have finally decided the fate of rent control, which was voted down in a statewide ballot initiative Election Day.

The measure cannot be altered or rejected by Cambridge, Boston or Brookline--the three Massachusetts communities with rent control laws. And the act effectively makes moot a two-month court battle over the way the nine Election Day ballot referenda--including the initiative to abolish rent control--were conducted.

Question 9, the initiative to abolish rent control, was passed by a 51 to 49 percent margin on November 8.

The act passed last night is expected to only cover between 10 and 20 percent of tenants currently under rent control.

The state House of Representatives and Senate passed a slightly altered version of a bill authored by Gov. William F. Weld '66, who had threatened to veto any other measure extending the life of rent control. Weld, who had left the state house by midnight, is expected to sign the bill today.

Two factors made last night's vote urgent: the inauguration of a new legislature this morning, and an order last week from the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC)--the state's highest--allowing the state to certify Question 9, which abolished rent control, as of 12 a.m. this morning.

Weld had earlier vetoed a petition by Cambridge to phase out rent control over five years for elderly, low-and moderate-income and disabled tenants. The Republican governor insisted that "the verdict of the voters is fairly implemented."

Weld's plan gives limited protection to anyone earning less than 60 percent of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) median-income guidelines, and for elderly and disabled tenants earning less than 80 percent of the guidelines.

Protected tenants living in buildings of one to three units, or owner-occupied buildings of four to 12 units, will live under rent control until December 31, 1995. Condominium tenants will also receive a one-year phase-out.

Those living in buildings of four or more units, not occupied by their owners, will have regulated rents until December 31, 1996. All other units will be removed from rent control.

The plan expressly eliminates rent control for students over the age of 18, which is certain to affect the thousands of graduate students in the greater Boston area who live in rent-controlled units.

Rent control, which started in 1970, regulates the rents of more than 16,000 units in Cambridge, nearly half the city's housing stock.

'A Fig Leaf of Protection'

While most legislators on Beacon Hill voted for Weld's bill, they said they were powerless to oppose it despite its severely limited protection for current rent-control tenants.

"It's a paltry excuse for real protection, but it's the best that we could do," said Sen. Thomas F. Birmingham (D-Chelsea). "We didn't have the votes to override the veto Gov. Weld had given us."

The final votes capped a day of political maneuvering. Yesterday morning, Weld issued a legislative proposal nearly identical to the one eventually passed.

But he filed his plan in defiance of the legislature's approval of a pre-existing plan, which would have given tenants greater protection. That plan--which the Senate yesterday passed, 21-16, following the House's approval last week--would have phased out rent control over two years for all elderly and disabled tenants, and for all tenants earning 60 percent of the HUD income guidelines.

Weld met yesterday with Rep. John E. McDonough (D-Jamaica Plain), who had shepherded the original plan through the legislature. Weld adamantly opposed two of McDonough's suggestions: the continuation of rent control boards and of vacancy decontrol plans, in which units are removed from rent control when their occupants leave. Boston and Brookline currently have vacancy decontrol programs.

Despite his complete political victory, legislators accused Weld of failing to compromise. Birmingham described the governor's plan as "pretty extreme." "It is not a good-faith effort to reach a compromise," the senator added.

Other legislators said they were strong-armed into accepting the last-minute plan. The Senate had "no practical political leverage," he added.

The city of Boston also condemned Weld's plan. "The cumulative effect of this basically creates nothing more than a fig leaf of protection," said Howard Leibowitz, director of inter-governmental relations for Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

A Growing Rift

Yesterday's debate also highlighted a growing rift between small property owners and landlords.

Jon R. Maddox, the Cambridge attorney who wrote Question 9, said real-estate industry representatives had seized control of the rent control opposition. Real-estate groups gave the bulk of the campaign's funding. The Greater Boston Real Estate Board (GBREB), for instance, gave more than $75,000 to the Small Property Owners Association (SPOA), which fought for rent control's end.

"They sold us out," Maddox said.

"They're laughing all the way to the bank while the people who did all the work for Question 9 get kicked in the ass," said Maddox, who owns a rent-controlled condominium in Cambridge. Maddox and the small property owners' group supported a rent subsidy program rather than a rent control phase-out.

Tenant groups also bemoaned the short respite left before the death of rent control.

"[The act] is an utterly mean-spirited instrument to decimate rent control and put at considerable risk many thousands of low- and moderate-income tenants," said Michael H. Turk, chair of the Cambridge Tenants Union.

But some industry representatives, who held day-long negotiations with the governor's staff and state legislators, said the plan provided a limited yet stable transition from rent control.

"It's step in the right direction in maintaining the intent of Question 9 and providing for an orderly transition out of rent control," said Edwin J. Shanahan, managing director of the Rental Housing Association, which includes state property owners who own more than 100,000 units.

Certification Today

The two-month court battle over November's election procedures also appears to be nearing an end. Four voters had charged Secretary of State Michael J. Connolly--who administered the ballot referenda--with violating the constitution by not printing summaries of the nine lengthy initiatives inside voting booths. They also charged numerous voting irregularities.

But the Supreme Judicial Court ruled Dec. 27 that providing separate paper summaries of the questions was indeed constitutional. A full court opinion is expected this week.

Justice Herbert P. Wilkins '51 had ordered a stay on Question 9's certification, however, until 12 a.m. today, leaving room for the legislature to act in advance of rent control's abolition.

Connolly plans to deliver Question 9 to the Governor's Council for enactment at 11 a.m. today, said John K. McCarthy, Connolly's communications director. Question 9 will be the last of the ballot initiatives to be certified.

And even if the courts decide that voting irregularities did take place, the legislature's act is law, with or without Question 9

Two factors made last night's vote urgent: the inauguration of a new legislature this morning, and an order last week from the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC)--the state's highest--allowing the state to certify Question 9, which abolished rent control, as of 12 a.m. this morning.

Weld had earlier vetoed a petition by Cambridge to phase out rent control over five years for elderly, low-and moderate-income and disabled tenants. The Republican governor insisted that "the verdict of the voters is fairly implemented."

Weld's plan gives limited protection to anyone earning less than 60 percent of the federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) median-income guidelines, and for elderly and disabled tenants earning less than 80 percent of the guidelines.

Protected tenants living in buildings of one to three units, or owner-occupied buildings of four to 12 units, will live under rent control until December 31, 1995. Condominium tenants will also receive a one-year phase-out.

Those living in buildings of four or more units, not occupied by their owners, will have regulated rents until December 31, 1996. All other units will be removed from rent control.

The plan expressly eliminates rent control for students over the age of 18, which is certain to affect the thousands of graduate students in the greater Boston area who live in rent-controlled units.

Rent control, which started in 1970, regulates the rents of more than 16,000 units in Cambridge, nearly half the city's housing stock.

'A Fig Leaf of Protection'

While most legislators on Beacon Hill voted for Weld's bill, they said they were powerless to oppose it despite its severely limited protection for current rent-control tenants.

"It's a paltry excuse for real protection, but it's the best that we could do," said Sen. Thomas F. Birmingham (D-Chelsea). "We didn't have the votes to override the veto Gov. Weld had given us."

The final votes capped a day of political maneuvering. Yesterday morning, Weld issued a legislative proposal nearly identical to the one eventually passed.

But he filed his plan in defiance of the legislature's approval of a pre-existing plan, which would have given tenants greater protection. That plan--which the Senate yesterday passed, 21-16, following the House's approval last week--would have phased out rent control over two years for all elderly and disabled tenants, and for all tenants earning 60 percent of the HUD income guidelines.

Weld met yesterday with Rep. John E. McDonough (D-Jamaica Plain), who had shepherded the original plan through the legislature. Weld adamantly opposed two of McDonough's suggestions: the continuation of rent control boards and of vacancy decontrol plans, in which units are removed from rent control when their occupants leave. Boston and Brookline currently have vacancy decontrol programs.

Despite his complete political victory, legislators accused Weld of failing to compromise. Birmingham described the governor's plan as "pretty extreme." "It is not a good-faith effort to reach a compromise," the senator added.

Other legislators said they were strong-armed into accepting the last-minute plan. The Senate had "no practical political leverage," he added.

The city of Boston also condemned Weld's plan. "The cumulative effect of this basically creates nothing more than a fig leaf of protection," said Howard Leibowitz, director of inter-governmental relations for Boston Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

A Growing Rift

Yesterday's debate also highlighted a growing rift between small property owners and landlords.

Jon R. Maddox, the Cambridge attorney who wrote Question 9, said real-estate industry representatives had seized control of the rent control opposition. Real-estate groups gave the bulk of the campaign's funding. The Greater Boston Real Estate Board (GBREB), for instance, gave more than $75,000 to the Small Property Owners Association (SPOA), which fought for rent control's end.

"They sold us out," Maddox said.

"They're laughing all the way to the bank while the people who did all the work for Question 9 get kicked in the ass," said Maddox, who owns a rent-controlled condominium in Cambridge. Maddox and the small property owners' group supported a rent subsidy program rather than a rent control phase-out.

Tenant groups also bemoaned the short respite left before the death of rent control.

"[The act] is an utterly mean-spirited instrument to decimate rent control and put at considerable risk many thousands of low- and moderate-income tenants," said Michael H. Turk, chair of the Cambridge Tenants Union.

But some industry representatives, who held day-long negotiations with the governor's staff and state legislators, said the plan provided a limited yet stable transition from rent control.

"It's step in the right direction in maintaining the intent of Question 9 and providing for an orderly transition out of rent control," said Edwin J. Shanahan, managing director of the Rental Housing Association, which includes state property owners who own more than 100,000 units.

Certification Today

The two-month court battle over November's election procedures also appears to be nearing an end. Four voters had charged Secretary of State Michael J. Connolly--who administered the ballot referenda--with violating the constitution by not printing summaries of the nine lengthy initiatives inside voting booths. They also charged numerous voting irregularities.

But the Supreme Judicial Court ruled Dec. 27 that providing separate paper summaries of the questions was indeed constitutional. A full court opinion is expected this week.

Justice Herbert P. Wilkins '51 had ordered a stay on Question 9's certification, however, until 12 a.m. today, leaving room for the legislature to act in advance of rent control's abolition.

Connolly plans to deliver Question 9 to the Governor's Council for enactment at 11 a.m. today, said John K. McCarthy, Connolly's communications director. Question 9 will be the last of the ballot initiatives to be certified.

And even if the courts decide that voting irregularities did take place, the legislature's act is law, with or without Question 9