Rent control in Massachusetts

Massachusetts adopted rent control in the 1970s when the effort was spearheaded by a group of Harvard University graduate students.[1] Those who lived in rent controlled apartments included

• Ruth Abrams, a Justice of the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court.[1]
• Kenneth Reeves, the mayor of Cambridge, Massachusetts at the time rent control was repealed in Massachusetts, was living in the same rent controlled apartment he lived in as a Harvard student in 1973.[1]
• Frederik, Crown Prince of Denmark, lived in a rent controlled apartment in Cambridge when he was a student at Harvard, but left once the story was printed in the newspapers.[1][2]

Rent control was repealed in 1994 via ballot initiative.[3][1] At the time, only Boston, Cambridge, and Brookline had rent control measures in place.[3]

Many saw the repeal effort as difficult because it was often not just the poor and the elderly who benefited from rent control, but middle class and even wealthy renters.[2] The opposition challenged the 73,769 petition signatures the pro-repeal side collected to put the measure on the ballot.[2] In the end, the pro-repeal side had 34 more than was required.[2]

Proponents of the repeal argued that it kept rents artificially low, made it hard to lease a property, and made it difficult to make repairs and improvements to the property.[4] Opponents argued that it kept prices from rising too quickly in a tight market.[4]

Within four years of repealing the law, Cambridge, where "the city's form of rent control was unusually strict," saw new housing and construction increase by 50%, and the tax revenue from construction permits tripled.[2]

After the vote, the Massachusetts General Court passed a law protecting low-income tenants in rent control apartments from being evicted.[2] Only 9.4% of tenants in rent control apartments qualified.[2]

In 1984, Vincent Bologna, a Sicilian immigrant and United States Navy veteran, purchased a dilapidated, abandoned house in Cambridge.[5] He renovated the building himself, hauling away 55 truckloads of trash and restoring the building, including remedying all 60 code violations.[5]

He turned the building into a two family home, and moved his family into the 800-square-foot rear apartment.[5] He rented the front apartment to Drs. Krenie and Marie Stowe, a psychiatrist and her daughter, a student at Harvard Law School.[5][1] The Stowes sublet out rooms in their apartment.[5]

The Cambridge Rent Control Board ruled that because the property had once been a rooming house, even though it was illegally operating as one in violation of the local zoning laws, that it was covered by rent control.[5] Because of this, they ruled Bologna had been overcharging the Stowes, who made a combined income of $110,000 a year in 1986.[5]

The Board ordered Bologna to convert the house back into a rooming house and to slash the rent he was charging the Stowes by $1,000 a month.[5] The Stowes then sued Bologna for retroactive overcharges, plus triple damages and legal fees.[5] Their lawyer encouraged them not to pay any rent, as Bologna did not have enough assets to pay more than $100,000 in fees and damages.[5] The Bologna family faced foreclosure and bankruptcy as a result.[5] They also lost another rental property that they owned because they could not keep up with the mounting legal bills while not receiving rent from the Stowes for five years.[6]

The Cambridge Zoning Board then refused to allow Bolgona to convert the home back into a rooming house as it violated the zoning laws.[5] Bologna and his family were ordered to live in a one bedroom apartment in a converted garage.[5][1][4]

Peter and Helen Petrillo owned a three-family house in Cambridge.[7] They lived in one unit, rented a second until to Helen's brother, and rented a third unit to another tenant.[7] When their daughter's home burned down, the Petrillos moved into the basement to give their daughter, her husband, and their three children their unit.[8][9][4]

The Rent Control Board ruled that it was now a four unit building and thus subject to rent control.[8] They ordered the Petrillos to slash their tenant's rent and to pay them damages.[8]

Additionally, because the basement ceiling was too low, the board ordered the Petrillos to jack up the entire house, at their expense, to create a legal apartment.[6] The board refused a request to allow the basement to be restored to its previous unfinished state.[6] Three days after the board's ruling, Peter died of a heart attack.[8][7][4] Peter's "heart attack was a result of the stress from the hearings. It was just too much for him," according to Helen.[4]