By Bob Katzen

The Senate 5-33, rejected an amendment that would allow the city of Boston to shift more of its property tax burden onto commercial real estate in fiscal years 2027 through 2029. The amendment is similar to the one that has been proposed and supported by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu.

The amendment would have allowed Boston to adjust its property tax classification if residential properties were set to bear a higher share of the total levy than in fiscal year 2025, with maximum shift levels capped at 181.5 percent in fiscal 2027, 180 percent in fiscal 2028 and 178 percent in fiscal 2029.

Sen. Mike Rush (D-West Roxbury) framed the amendment as a direct response to what he described as a mounting affordability crisis for Boston homeowners, particularly seniors and working families. He said the amendment was filed at the request of Wu and the Boston City Council and closely mirrored a home rule petition approved by the council and first filed with the Legislature in 2024. He pointed to rising residential values, lagging commercial property values and statutory limits on municipal tax increases as drivers of recent spikes in Boston tax bills. He said the amendment would give Boston temporary flexibility to blunt those increases while state and city officials work on longer-term solutions.

Rush added that the average tax bill for a family home rose by more than $500 in 2025 and is expected to increase by more than $700 in 2026, while commercial tax rates have continued to decline. He said those increases have disproportionately affected seniors on fixed incomes.

Sen. Will Brownsberger (D-Belmont) argued that the tax shift proposal risked producing unintended and inequitable outcomes.

“One narrative, one example, would be, well, I’ve got a struggling homeowner that’s benefiting from it,” said Brownsberger. “That’s good, and I’ve got an office tower whose private equity owners are paying more taxes. Maybe that narrative makes sense in some cases. But on the other hand, the truth is, we’re lowering … taxes for your very wealthy single-family homeowner, perhaps living in something of a mansion in the most tony neighborhood of the city. And you’re raising taxes on your little garage owner trying to make things work.”

(A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.)

Sen. Patricia Jehlen Yes