Why can't Mayor Wu get a win on Beacon Hill?

Editor's Note: This is an excerpt from WBUR's politics newsletter, Mass. Politics. If you like what you read and want it in your inbox, sign up here. 

It was a fight that riveted political observers for months, as Boston Mayor Michelle Wu took on the Legislature over property tax bills.

The mayor officially lost last week, and Boston homeowners will now see a 10.5% hike in their property tax bills next year.

“They didn’t need to, and I believe shouldn’t have had to,” Wu told WBUR’s Radio Boston on Friday.

And she’s clear about where she believes the blame lies: the state Senate.

For months, Wu tried to convince lawmakers to sign off on her plan to shift more of the city’s property taxes to businesses.

It didn’t go well. Though it passed the House, the original bill died in the Senate last summer. A few months later, Wu hammered out a more business-friendly proposal with some of the biggest players in Boston real estate. But last week, that bill was also officially declared dead, following public resistance from South Boston Sen. Nick Collins, armed with real estate campaign cash and new city data showing the tax hike wouldn’t be as dire as initially predicted.

Wu needs buy-in from Beacon Hill lawmakers to pass her most ambitious housing policy proposals. And so far, she doesn’t have it — even as housing costs in Boston continue to rise.

It’s notoriously hard for municipal leaders to push major local proposals through the State House because of the state’s home rule system. The Legislature also tends to be more incremental and business-friendly.

Wu has learned that the hard way. Her home rule petition to bring back a form of rent control in Boston never made it past a hearing. A real estate transfer fee — lauded by progressives as a way to raise money for affordable housing from deep-pocketed developers — was ultimately stripped from a major housing bond bill.

Wu forged her political chops in the raucous arena of the Boston City Council, and many of the strategies that made her so successful there were apparent in these recent negotiations.

Wu is often aggressive and direct in public, but more transactional and open to compromise behind the scenes. For example, as a councilor, Wu fought to reign in short-term rental giant Airbnb, which was gobbling up longer-term rentals in Boston. The company even organized a PR campaign targeting her specifically; she called their messages “fake news,” and Airbnb walked them back.

In the end, Wu won major new restrictions on investor-owned units, but without the strict time limit she’d originally supported.

But the strategy of punch first, talk later doesn’t appear to be working in the marble hallways of the State House, where lawmakers know never to openly criticize leadership if they want their priorities to pass.

Wu saw even the compromise versions of her core housing proposals flounder on Beacon Hill during her first term, which begs the question: Does she double down, or change tack?

P.S.— This is our final Mass. Politics newsletter of the year. We’re taking a break for the holidays, but will be back in your inbox on Jan. 6 with a look ahead at the political stories we’ll be covering in 2025.