Ballot question results, still being tallied a day later, show Massachusetts voters choosing to keep recreational pot legal, reject all-party primaries, and back public records requests all the way up to the governor’s office.
The state electorate was faced with the most ballot questions — nine — since 1994. As of Wednesday morning, seven had been decided, while the results on two remain too close to call.
Here’s a summary of where the ballot questions stand with approximately 77% of the vote tallied statewide:
- Question 1 – Expand Public Records Law to governor and legislative offices – passed, 86% in favor
- Question 2 – Allow Committee for Public Counsel Services employees to engage in collective bargaining – passed, 64.5% in favor
- Question 3 – Top-two primary elections – rejected, 61% against
- Question 4 – Allow Election Day voter registration – passed, 57% in favor
- Question 6 – Establish Nature for All conservation fund – passed, 61% in favor
- Question 8 – Repeal recreational marijuana legalization – rejected, 76% against
- Question 9 – HB4885 firearm regulations – Push to repeal gun regs, rejected, 67.5% against
Undecided
- Question 5 – Modify state tax revenue limit methodology – 52% against vs 47% in favor
- Question 7 – Reduce minimum lot sizes for single-family homes – Dead heat 50-50
Residents voted against repealing a 2016 ballot question that made marijuana sales legal, falling in line with local lawmakers like Boston Mayor Michelle Wu, who pointed to the revenue and jobs the pot shops have created for cities and towns.
The race was called after midnight Wednesday, with more than 75% of voters opting to continue recreational pot sales. That vote has sprouted to 75.8% as of Wednesday morning.
Results were also declared for Question 9, when 67.5% of voters were lined up against a push to repeal the 2024 gun control law, thus keeping in place stronger gun control rules supported by local district attorneys like Suffolk DA Kevin Hayden, who argued that the stricter regulations have saved lives.
The 2024 gun control law increased the regulation of firearms, including ghost guns, machine guns and assault-style weapons.
Residents have also kept the separate-party primary system in place. Roughly 61.2% of voters rejected a push to move toward a single, all-party primary where the top two candidates would advance to the general election, regardless of party affiliation, with 77% of votes counted.
The question, which conservative critics said would effectively neutralize the Republican Party’s chances of having candidates elected to top statewide offices like governor in blue Massachusetts, also drew criticism from liberal pols.
Political observers have speculated that the Democratic opposition to that question, No. 3 on the ballot, was driven by the desire to protect incumbency, though progressive pols like Wu and U.S. Rep Ayanna Pressley argued it was a matter of keeping grassroots candidates in the game against well-funded interests.
Voters also appeared to reject a ballot question that would have more often triggered refunds from a little-known state law, Chapter 62F, that was designed to put money back in the pockets of residents when the state collects surplus revenue in a given year.
That race was tighter, with a roughly 55% to 45% split to reject with 20% of votes counted by 10:30 p.m.
While the refunds are required under the terms of Chapter 62F, they have only been triggered twice since it was introduced in a 1986 ballot question. The most recent refunds were issued back in the fall of 2022.
Residents seemed to dismiss the opportunity for roughly $200 to $250 in annual refunds to side with opponents who argued that the rebates would lead to more state budget cuts and reduce the flexibility surplus revenue creates for the state’s rainy day fund.
Still, voters do want to see some change aimed at increasing affordability, transparency and accountability in the state, per early voting results that had not yet been called by the Associated Press.
Early results had voters trending toward deadlocked on allowing single-family homes to be built in a residentially zoned area as long as the land on which it is to be constructed is at least 5,000 square feet, has at least 50 feet of land bordering the street, road or public way it faces, and has access to public sewer and water services.
Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis researchers estimated the change would result in anywhere from 350 to 1,200 new homes being built a year, though they cautioned it does not guarantee the homes will be starter-sized or built at all.
By early this morning, the results were split 50% to 50%, with 77% of votes counted — this question is going down to the wire.
Voters also approved same-day voter registration on Election Day at a higher rate, at 56.9% to 43.1% as of 7:30 a.m. The change would allow residents to register by going to their polling place during voting hours and providing proof of residency and signing a written oath.
Nearly half of U.S. states allow same-day registration, but Massachusetts law requires registration at least 10 days in advance of an election.
Voters backed Auditor Diana DiZoglio’s push for greater transparency on Beacon Hill, by passing a question that would make most records held by the state Legislature and Office of the Governor subject to the state’s public records law.
The race was called with more than 86% ‘yes’ votes by 11:45 p.m.
The state Legislature and governor’s office are currently exempt from public records law, meaning officials there don’t have to provide documents requested by journalists and private citizens who file public records requests.
By comparison, state agencies, as well as city and town governments in Massachusetts are required to honor public records requests under state law.
There would still be exemptions, and the Legislature could override the ballot results by passing a proposed bill that would open up the governor’s office to public records requests, but adopt a narrower approach for the Legislature than sought by Question 1.
Voters chose to allow public defenders — or attorneys appointed by the court to represent defendants facing criminal charges who can’t afford legal representation — to form a union that could push for better pay and working conditions by a roughly 65% to 35% margin when the race was called by AP.
Another change that was approved by voters would establish a “Nature for All Fund,” and direct a portion of state tax revenue collected from the sale of sporting goods, recreational vehicles and golf courses to that fund.
The fund would be intended to support conservation and recreation initiatives in the state, though the Legislature is not bound to use the funneled money that way, or increase spending for those initiatives.
The change would take effect on July 1. That won 61.2% to 38.8%.
Comments