On November 3, voters will decide on the Massachusetts governor, members of the House and Senate, and local offices. While the up-ballot races will set the tone for the national news cycle, voters will also decide on nine citizen-initiated ballot questions, the most certified since 1994. The questions range from supporting new laws to overturning or updating old ones.

Your nearest polling location and voter registration status can be located here.

You can also check your voter registration status and find your polling location here.

Question 1: Expanding the Public Records Law

Question 1 would make certain records held by the Massachusetts Legislature and Governor’s Office available through the state’s public records law.

Currently, both offices are exempt from many public records requirements. The proposal would increase access to certain government documents, although records involving policy discussions and constituent communications would remain largely exempt.

Supporters say the change would improve government transparency and accountability. Critics question how much additional information would actually become available.

Voting Yes: Would make certain legislative and governor’s office records subject to public records requests.

Voting No: Would keep the current public records law unchanged.

Question 2: Collective Bargaining for Public Defenders

Question 2 would allow employees of the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS), including public defenders and other staff, to unionize and negotiate working conditions.

Unlike most other state employees, CPCS workers currently do not have collective bargaining rights.

Question 2 has received support from electeds including Representative Stephen Lynch, City Councilors Ed Flynn, Julia Mejia, Ruthzee Louijeune, Erin Murphy, and Henry Santana, and Mayor Michelle Wu.

“Every day public defenders provide free legal representation to people at some of their most vulnerable moments, often while managing crushing caseloads with limited resources, ” Wu said. “I’m voting Yes on Question 2 to ensure that public defenders have a seat at the table and the right to organize.”

Voting Yes: Would allow eligible CPCS employees to unionize and bargain collectively.

Voting No: Would maintain the current law.

Question 3: Changing State Primary Elections

Question 3 would replace Massachusetts’ traditional party primaries with a single primary featuring candidates from all political parties.

The two candidates with the most votes would advance to the general election, even if both were from the same party.

Opponents, including the Massachusetts Democratic and Republican parties, argue that it would weaken political parties and could make it harder for smaller parties to compete.

Voting Yes: Would establish a single all-party primary, with the top two candidates advancing to the general election.

Voting No: Would keep the current party-based primary system.

Question 4: Election Day Voter Registration

Question 4 would allow eligible Massachusetts residents to register to vote or update their registration address on Election Day.

Under the proposal, voters could register at their polling place by providing proof of residency and signing an oath confirming their eligibility. Provisional ballots would be available in certain circumstances.

Supporters say the change would make voting more accessible, particularly for people who move frequently or miss registration deadlines.

Opponents argue that registering voters on Election Day could create administrative challenges and make it harder to verify eligibility before ballots are cast.

Voting Yes: Would allow eligible residents to register or update their address at the polls on Election Day.

Voting No: Would keep the current voter registration system.

Question 5: State Revenue Limits and Taxpayer Rebates

Question 5 would change how Massachusetts calculates the amount of tax revenue the state can collect before returning excess money to taxpayers.

The proposal would base the annual revenue limit on the previous year’s collections plus average wage growth. It would also include revenue from the state’s additional tax on income over $1 million.

Supporters say the change would help control government revenue growth and return more money to taxpayers.

Opponents argue that tighter revenue limits could reduce funding available for schools, transportation, public safety, and other services.

Voting Yes: Would change the state revenue limit calculation and potentially trigger more taxpayer rebates.

Voting No: Would keep the current revenue limit system.

Question 6: Natural Resource Conservation Fund

Question 6 would create the Nature for All Fund to support conservation and environmental projects throughout Massachusetts.

The fund would use a portion of existing sales tax revenue associated with sporting goods and certain recreational activities.

Money would support efforts to protect drinking water, reduce pollution, improve parks and green spaces, and address flooding and storm damage.

Supporters say the fund would provide a more reliable source of money for environmental protection.

Opponents argue that dedicating tax revenue to one purpose could limit the state’s flexibility when setting budgets.

Voting Yes: Would establish the Nature for All Fund using existing tax revenue.

Voting No: Would leave the current conservation funding system unchanged.

Question 7: Single-Family Homes and Zoning

Question 7 would make it easier to build single-family homes on smaller lots in Massachusetts.

The proposal would allow single-family homes on residential lots measuring at least 5,000 square feet, provided they meet certain requirements, including access to public water and sewer systems and at least 50 feet of street frontage.

Cities and towns would still be able to regulate certain aspects of construction, including building height, setbacks, and parking.

Supporters say the change could encourage construction of smaller, more affordable homes.

Opponents argue that a statewide requirement could override local planning decisions and create challenges for communities with different infrastructure needs.

Voting Yes: Would allow qualifying single-family homes on lots of at least 5,000 square feet, subject to certain local regulations.

Voting No: Would keep existing zoning laws unchanged.

Question 8: Recreational Marijuana Sales

Question 8 would repeal the laws allowing the retail sale of recreational marijuana in Massachusetts.

Recreational marijuana sales were legalized by voters in 2016. Under the new proposal, licensed recreational dispensaries would no longer be permitted to sell marijuana for adult recreational use.

Medical marijuana would remain legal. Adults 21 and older would also still be allowed to possess up to one ounce of marijuana, subject to limits on concentrates, while possession of more than one ounce and up to two ounces would carry a civil penalty.

Supporters argue that ending recreational sales would address concerns about public health and safety.

Opponents say the measure would hurt local businesses, eliminate tax revenue, and encourage illegal marijuana sales.

Voting Yes: Would end legal retail recreational marijuana sales and change possession limits and penalties.

Voting No: Would keep current marijuana laws in place.

Question 9: Firearms Regulation

Question 9 asks voters whether to keep or repeal Massachusetts’ 2024 firearms law.

The law expanded regulations involving firearms, including requirements for serial numbers on certain firearms, restrictions on so-called ghost guns, and changes to the state’s assault-style firearms rules.

It also expanded who can request an Extreme Risk Protection Order, sometimes called a red flag order, which allows courts to temporarily restrict firearm access in certain circumstances.

Supporters say the law strengthens public safety and helps prevent gun violence.

Opponents argue that the regulations place unnecessary restrictions on lawful gun owners and raise Second Amendment concerns.

Unlike the other ballot questions, Question 9 concerns a law that has already been passed.

Voting Yes: Would keep the 2024 firearms law in place.

Voting No: Would repeal the 2024 firearms law. Other existing Massachusetts firearms laws would remain in effect.

For more information, including the full text of each question and arguments from supporters and opponents, visit the Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth’s official 2026 voter guide.

Don’t forget to vote!