Politics
Massachusetts voters narrowly reject Question 7, keeping local control over lot sizes
Question 7, which would have reduced minimum lot sizes statewide to spur housing production, failed by a 50.6% to 49.4% margin. The defeat preserves the ability of Massachusetts' 351 cities and towns to set their own residential zoning rules, even as advocates say the close vote shows growing demand for more housing.
Massachusetts voters have narrowly defeated Question 7, a ballot measure that would have reduced minimum lot sizes statewide in an effort to spur housing production, the Associated Press reported Friday.
The measure failed with 50.6% of voters opposed and 49.4% in support, according to the AP's call at 2:02 p.m. with 99% of votes counted. The margin fell below 33,000 votes: 1,288,536 voters cast ballots against the proposal, while 1,255,595 supported it.
The result preserves the authority of Massachusetts' 351 cities and towns to control the residential landscape in their communities. But it also revealed widespread voter concern about the state's housing shortage.
"The fact that this proposal came so close demonstrates the growing recognition that Massachusetts must rethink its approach to housing development," Kristen Keegan, president of the Massachusetts Association of Realtors, said in a statement Friday.
Question 7, backed by the campaign Legalize Starter Homes, would have allowed smaller lot sizes for single-family homes across the state. Supporters argued the change would make it easier to build starter homes and increase housing stock in a state where prices and rents have soared. Opponents countered that the measure would strip local officials of the ability to shape their neighborhoods and could lead to unwanted development.
The narrow defeat leaves the status quo in place: municipal zoning boards will continue to set minimum lot sizes, a power that has often been used to limit density and, critics say, perpetuate exclusionary housing patterns.
The close margin is likely to keep housing at the center of state politics. With voters nearly split, advocates on both sides signaled the debate over how to produce more homes is far from over.