2026 Massachusetts ballot measures

In Massachusetts, a constitutional amendment or proposed law can be placed on the ballot by popular petition. If a petition collects 74,574 signatures, it will be considered by the General Court. If the General Court does not pass the proposal, the petitioners can have their proposal placed on the ballot at the next general election if they collect 12,429 more signatures.^[2] In addition, a law passed by the General Court can be put to a veto referendum, in which the law must be passed by popular vote.^[3]

The first round of signatures needed to be submitted by December 3, 2025. The legislature had until May 5, 2026 to decide whether to implement the proposals.^[4] Organizers have until June 17 to gather the second round of signatures to place the measures on the ballot.^[5]

The final list and ordering is not yet finalized. Massachusetts Secretary of the Commonwealth William F. Galvin decides the final ordering of questions on the ballot.^[6]

On July 25, 2024, governor Maura Healey signed into law a bill cracking down on homemade firearms. The new law expanded on existing red flag laws in the state. The bill banned anyone besides law enforcement officials from carrying guns inside a school, government building, or polling site and created new restrictions on gun modifications while also adding new requirements for people applying for gun licenses, including a new standardized test. The legal definition of assault weapons was expanded to include more types of weapons.^[10]

Gun rights activists quickly organized against the new law, believing it to erode the constitutional right to bear arms.^[11] They gathered over 90,000 signatures to place the law on the 2026 ballot as a veto referendum, in which the law must be passed by popular vote before it can come into effect. They gathered the required number of signatures by October 2024.^[12]

Unlike other types of measures, veto referendums can be placed on the ballot immediately after the first round of signature gathering is completed and do not have to wait for the state legislature to decide whether or not to implement the law. As such, the gun law veto referendum will be on the ballot.^[4]

A ballot proposal to prohibit any law or zoning ordinance from requiring minimum lot sizes higher than 5,000 square feet may be on the ballot. The proposal, called "Legalize Starter Homes" by supporters, would also prohibit local authorities from implementing special permitting requirements to build single-family residences in residential zoning districts. The measure aims to alleviate the high cost of housing in Massachusetts by allowing for more homes to be built.^[13][14]

It has been compared to the rent control proposal, which may also be on the ballot. Organizers for the rent control measure have criticized the lot size measure and vice versa. While both measures aim to alleviate the state's housing crisis, the lot size measure aims to do so by increasing supply while the rent control measure aims to restrict cost.^[15][16]

Municipal organizations have criticized the measure, which would apply to all municipalities in Massachusetts except Boston, for bypassing local control. Organizers for the measure claim that the measure could cause 2,200 to 5,700 homes to be built each year and that 700,000 new buildable lots would be created.^[17]

A measure to introduce same-day voter registration may be on the ballot. The measure would scrap the existing registration deadline which requires voters in Massachusetts to register at least 10 days before election day.^[18] One of the main proponents of the measure is longtime Massachusetts secretary of the commonwealth William F. Galvin. Galvin is the elected official in charge of administering elections in the state. Galvin decided to gather signatures to place the measure directly on the ballot after the legislature refused to take up the issue over multiple legislative sessions.^[19]

Some local election officials have expressed worry about the extra work which may be required on election days. However, Galvin contends that same-day voter registration will actually reduce the burden on local officials by removing the need for unregistered voters to cast provisional ballots, which require officials to verify the eligibility of said voters after they have cast their ballots.^[18][19]

A measure to re-criminalize recreational marijuana may be on the ballot. The measure would repeal a measure passed by voters in 2016 which legalized and regulated recreational marijuana. The measure is backed by the anti-legalization group Smart Approaches to Marijuana. Adults over 21 years old would still be allowed to possess up to one ounce of marijuana, but the legal dispensaries which have opened since legalization would be shut down.^[14]

Advocates for the measure claim that legalization has harmed public health and safety. Opponents of the measure have initiated legal action against organizers. A complaint was filed accusing organizers of misleading voters during the signature gathering phase, although the complaint was dismissed. A separate lawsuit brought before the Supreme Judicial Court contends that the measure illegally mixes unrelated subjects by also including a requirement that young adults attend a drug awareness program if they are caught with marijuana.^[14]

A measure to introduce nonpartisan blanket primaries may be on the ballot. The measure would implement a system similar to the one used in California and some other states, where all candidates participate on the same primary ballot, regardless of party, with the top two candidates advancing to the general election.^[20] Primary elections in Massachusetts are often uncontested, with proponents of the measure claiming that it could lead to more competition and higher turnout for primaries.^[20]

The proposal has been met with opposition from both Democrats and Republicans. The Democratic State Committee voted to formally oppose the measure, and two Democratic activists initiated a lawsuit attempting to stop the measure from appearing on the ballot.^[20][21] On the other hand, some Republicans worry that the system may lead to general elections in which one Democrat faces off against another Democrat, with no Republican making it to the general election.^[20] While the party itself opposes the proposal, some prominent individual Democrats have expressed support for it, including state auditor Diana DiZoglio, former governor Deval Patrick, and former state treasurer Steve Grossman.^[21][5] The campaign for the measure is led by Danielle Allen, a Democratic candidate for governor in 2022.^[5]

A measure to place legislative and gubernatorial records in the state's public records law may be on the ballot. Massachusetts is the only state in which gubernatorial, legislative, and judicial records are not publicly accessible. The measure would contain some exceptions for sensitive information. Multiple attempts to pass similar laws through the legislature were met with failure in the past, leading organizers to go through the ballot initiative process instead.^[22] The proposal has received extensive support from Diana DiZoglio, a Democrat and the state auditor, who has donated $150,000 to the ballot measure campaign from her own campaign funds. The measure comes two years after the passage of 2024 Massachusetts Question 1, another measure pushed by DiZoglio which gave her the ability to audit the state legislature. Since the passage of the 2024 measure, DiZoglio has been engaged in a protracted conflict with the legislature, which has resisted her calls for an audit, citing concerns about constitutional separation of powers.^[23]

The Massachusetts Senate challenged the proposed measure, along with another proposal regarding legislative stipend reform, at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In April 2026, the court declined to make a ruling on the public records proposal, preferring to wait to see whether the new law is passed by voters.^[24]

A measure to establish a fund to purchase land for conservation, water quality improvement, and recreation using state sales tax revenue from sporting goods may be on the ballot. The measure is supported by a coalition of nonprofit organizations and private companies which previously tried unsuccessfully to lobby the state legislature to pass a similar piece of legislation.^[25] In 2021, Massachusetts ranked last in the nation in funding per capita for state parks.^[25]

While no group arose to oppose the measure, state lawmakers still chose not to pass the measure, clearing the way for organizers to gather more signatures to place it on the ballot.^[14] Lawmakers could choose not to fund the new land conservation fund even if the measure passes.^[25]

A measure to introduce new limits on how much tax revenue the state can collect while increasing tax rebates may be on the ballot.^[26] The measure would change the existing calculation which sets a limit to the amount of revenue the state can collect in a year to cut taxes. It would also include the new revenue gathered from a 2022 ballot measure which introduced a new tax on income over $1,000,000 in the calculation. The measure is backed by a coalition of business and trade groups.^[27]

The measure is opposed by labor unions and legislative leaders, who claim the measure (along with the other measure which would reduce the state income tax) would lead to deep cuts to social services and state spending. Supporters of the measure maintain that tax cuts would spur growth.^[27]

A measure to reduce the state income tax from the current 5% to 4% may be on the ballot. The ballot initiative would gradually decrease Massachusetts's state tax rates for personal taxable income, which includes salaries, wages, interest and dividends. In the 2027 financial year, the tax rate would be 4.67%, down from 5%, followed by 4.33% in 2028. From the following year, taxable income would be taxed at a rate of 4.00%.^[28]

Labor unions have sued to attempt to keep the measure off the ballot, asserting that the ballot summary drafted by attorney general Andrea Campbell was unconstitutional. Opponents of the measure, including many state lawmakers, have claimed that deep cuts to services would be required if the measure were to be passed. Proponents contend that it would help address the state's affordability crisis.^[28]

A ballot proposal to re-institute rent control is scheduled to appear on the 2026 Massachusetts ballot.^[b] If adopted, it would become the strictest rent control law in the country.^[31][30][32] Unlike the previous version of rent control, in which individual cities and towns could choose whether or not they wanted to have rent control, this measure would cap rent increases at the rate of inflation, or 5% a year, whichever is lower, across the entire Commonwealth.^[31][30][33]

A measure to allow employees of the Committee for Public Counsel Services (CPCS), the government organization which employs the state's public defenders, may be on the ballot. The push comes in the aftermath of a strike by bar advocates, who are outside lawyers hired by the state as independent contractors to augment the public defenders which are direct employees of the CPCS. Bar advocates are paid much less than comparable attorneys in neighboring states. The strike led to many defendants being released since there were no lawyers to provide counsel. The proposal, which is backed by existing labor unions, would allow CPCS employees to form a union through the same mechanisms that other state employees can.^[45]

An initiative to reform how legislative stipends are given out was certified to be on the ballot in January 2026. However, it was blocked from proceeding to the ballot in May. In Massachusetts, the base pay for all members of the state legislature earn a base pay of around $82,000. However, legislative leaders, such as committee chairs, vice chairs, and leaders of both houses earn significantly more thanks to legislative stipends paid to lawmakers to compensate them for their additional responsibilities. The proposed ballot measure seeks to reduce this excess pay, with organizers claiming that the current system allows leadership to reward loyalty by paying their appointed committee chairs significantly more than regular legislators.^[22]

The Massachusetts Senate challenged the proposed measure, along with another measure concerning an expansion to the state's public records law, at the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court. In April 2026, after the measure had already been certified as constitutional by the attorney general, the court issued an advisory opinion which found that the proposal was unconstitutional. Initiative petitions in Massachusetts can only concern either laws or constitutional amendments, and the court found that the stipend proposal concerned the internal rules of the legislature. The opinion did not immediately strike it from the ballot; it was essentially a recommendation that the attorney general should not allow the measure to move forward.^[24] In May, the attorney general's office sent a letter to the secretary of state which declared that the measure could not legally be placed on the ballot. The secretary of state's office informed petition organizers that they would no longer be able to collect signatures. Organizers vowed to place a similar measure on the ballot in 2028.^[46]