A new bill in Massachusetts, H.336, proposes to restrict landlords and their agents from when they can require a lease to be signed. The exact language is “A lessor, or agent thereof, of a residential property shall not require the signing of a lease more than three months in advance of the termination date of the current lease.” At first glance, this might seem like a tenant-friendly initiative. However, a closer look reveals serious unintended consequences that would disrupt the housing market, hurt renters, and wreak havoc on property operations across the state— particularly in Greater Boston. (see bill here: https://malegislature.gov/Bills/194/H336)
A Threat to Boston’s Rental Cycle
Greater Boston operates on a leasing cycle that has served MA well for over one century. In fact, they’re decades old black-white newspaper articles than can be found on micro-film in Boston Public Library that talk about the Boston 9/1 apartment leasing cycle. The leasing cycle in Boston gravitated to 9/1-8/31 fixed term one-year leases because it was the most logical path based on a number of factors inherit to Greater Boston. It doesn’t take a genius to recognize that over 200,000 college students arrive each year around 9/1 to start school.
In fact, if you didn’t notice all the U-Haul trucks and the endless articles about the free furniture on the 9/1 “Allston Christmas” now being rebranded into the 9/1 “Boston Christmas” – it would mean you don’t live, nor understand Greater Boston. For countless decades, roughly 70% of leases begin on September 1st, and both tenants and landlords have relied on advance planning—sometimes up to nearly one year in advance —to secure or prepare housing units. By limiting lease commitments to just three months before move-in, this misguided bill would have catastrophic effects for any and all parties involved in trying to obtain or rent an apartment. There are very few benefits that would come…