Let the debate begin!
Mayor Michelle Wu officially filed her rent control proposal with the City Council on Monday. According to the Boston Globe, the proposal calls for rent increases of 6% a year plus inflation, which would cap out at 10%.
New construction would be exempt from this policy for the first 15 years it’s open, as well as small owner-occupied properties.
You can read the full details here.
So what’s next? Well, the City Council has to approve the proposal before being approved at the State House. Final approval will be by Gov. Maura Healy.
What do you think?
Maureen Dahill is the editor of Caught in Southie and a lifelong resident of South Boston sometimes mistaken for a yuppie. Co-host of Caught Up, storyteller, lover of red wine and binge watching TV series. Mrs. Peter G. Follow her @MaureenCaught.
What’s better than rent control? A tax on vacant lots and unoccupied buildings. While rent control makes it less attractive to supply accommodation, a vacant-property tax makes it less attractive NOT to! Such a tax, although sometimes called a “vacancy tax”, is not limited to what real-estate agents call “vacancies” — that is, properties available for rent. It also applies to vacant lots and empty properties that are not on the rental market, and prompts the owners to get them occupied in order to avoid the tax.
Yes, a vacant-property tax is meant to be AVOIDED. It’s not meant to be paid. Better still, its avoidance would involve economic activity, expanding the bases of other taxes and allowing their rates to be reduced, so that everyone else—including tenants, home owners, and landlords with tenants—would pay LESS tax!