Good Monday Morning, everyone.

Here’s the new fight over brokers’ fees on Beacon Hill — same as the old one. But with a twist.

And it comes down to your definition of “contact.” Because this is the Massachusetts Legislature, and nothing is ever as straightforward as it seems.

But first, a quick review.

Brokers’ fees are an upfront cost, paid by tenants, that usually amounts to a month’s rent.

In Boston, where rental prices hover comfortably around $3,000, that can mean prospective tenants have to cough up as much as $9,000 or $10,000 to rent an apartment. By any reasonable definition, that’s a serious chunk of change.

Tenant advocates have long railed against the fees. And when New York’s City Council passed a law last year banning them, the Bay State’s reform effort picked up a new head of steam before hitting the inevitable stonewall of opposition.

It’s Take Two in 2025.

Democratic Gov. Maura Healey included language spiking the fees in her $62 billion budget proposal for the new fiscal year that starts July 1. The majority-Democrat state House and Senate also have proposals to get rid of the fees.

So here’s where things get complicated.

Language advanced by the Senate would require the person who contracts the broker to pay the fee. And as we noted above, that’s usually the landlord.

The House’s language is a little squishier, mandating that whoever “initiates” the contact for the apartment — say, a renter who responds to an ad — would be on the hook for the fee

If that’s finally approved, it wouldn’t change much of anything at all.

State Sen. Julian Cyr, D-Cape and Islands, the Senate chair of the Legislature’s Joint Committee on Housing, told MassLive that he’s not a fan of the “backdoor” that the House’s language could open.

“I think the good news is you have the Senate, the House and the governor all in agreement that we need to reform brokers’ fees,” he said. “Obviously, [we’ll] have to figure out the specifics in conference [committee].”

“But I really think the Senate’s approach is what makes sense here,” he continued. “We don’t want to have a backdoor way for prospective tenants to be saddled with these fees when, you know, it’s the landlords … who, by and large, are the ones engaging [brokers].”

The interest on Beacon Hill reflects growing advocacy in eastern Massachusetts to spike the fees. Cambridge’s City Council, following Boston’s and Somerville’s lead, recently got on board with an effort to eliminate the fees. The proposals would require legislative authorization, The Boston Globe reported.

Lawmakers mulled a similar proposal last year. However, it failed to gain traction when the House and Senate couldn’t reach an agreement.

Landlords and the real estate industry, which wields outsized clout on Beacon Hill, also opposed the plan.

One lawmaker who could have a big say this year, state Sen. Nick Collins, D-1st Suffolk, told MassLive last week that he’s keeping his powder dry for now.

Which is not to say that things might change.

“I think there’s a gray area about … you know, the intent of who’s doing the outreach,” he said, noting that brokers do play “an important role in vetting” properties, Collins, an industry ally on Beacon Hill, said.

“Because if it’s just between the [landlord] and the consumer, it doesn’t always go well,” he continued. “I know it’s a serious debate. I think there’s merit to the individual who’s making the effort in doing the outreach.”

Collins told MassLive that he’s “trying to get a little more clarity myself on who’s going to referee, you know, at the end of the day … who was the responsible party” before he makes up his mind.

One person who also could have a big say on how the debate unfolds, however, is decidedly not a fan. That’s Demetrios Salpoglu, the CEO of Boston Pads, the city’s biggest rental portal.

“Real estate agents provide an incredibly valuable service to consumers, property owners and landlords. They are the boots on the ground,” he said. “They notice things — uncollected trash, snow on a vent, a bike in the common area. They will notice things that a tech company from Seattle won’t notice. Your real estate agents are Marines. If the goal is to get rid of them, that’s not a good idea.”

Policymakers could better spend their time doing something about the lack of rental stock — one of the big goals of Healey’s bond bill — which drives up demand and prices, and keeps vacancy rates low, he said.

“The elephant in the room is supply,” he asserted.

Meanwhile in Washington State

Now that Washington State Gov. Bob Ferguson has signed legislation aimed at preventing excessive rent increases, housing reformers in the Bay State are looking to duplicate that success.

Because, as you know, the rent is still too darn high: From 2015 to 2023, while total inflation in Massachusetts was 28.4%, rents went up an average of 53.1%, according to Homes for All Massachusetts, a tenant advocacy group.

“The housing status quo in Massachusetts is failing our families, with a recent report finding that nearly half a million low-income households lack access to an affordable rental home,” Carolyn Chou, the group’s executive director, said in an email.

The Washington law imposes a 7% annual cap on rent hikes, plus inflation, to a ceiling of 10%. The law includes exemptions for new construction. And it imposes a flat 5% cap for mobile homeowners who rent the land where their home sits, according to the group’s analysis.

“Without [an] adequate supply of truly affordable housing, renters across the state are at the mercy of the predatory corporate investors who buy their homes and hike the rent. Working families and seniors are being forced out of their homes so these investors can drive up rents to juice their profits,” Chou said.

More than 85 organizations are pushing for a similar law in Massachusetts. And those affected by runaway rents told their stories during a State House briefing last month.

Monday Numbers

With college students across the commonwealth gearing up to collect their diplomas in the coming days, there’s concern that the state’s high cost of living will force many of them to take their energy and talents elsewhere.

Eighty-one percent of respondents to a new poll by the Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance expressed that fear, further underlining the urgency for policymakers to address the state’s housing crisis and the other issues that drive up costs.

“Massachusetts is home to world-class higher education, but attracting students is only the first step,” Christopher R. Anderson, president of the Massachusetts High Technology Council, one of the alliance’s founding members, said.

In a statement, the group pointed to other data underlining those concerns. That included the 19% of Harvard’s 2024 graduating class who remained in Massachussetts after collecting their degrees.

Then there was the 2023 Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce Foundation data showing that “despite 89 percent of young adults aged 20 to 30 expressing satisfaction with their daily lives in Massachusetts, one in four planned to leave the region within the next five years.”

“To keep talent in-state, we must make the commonwealth a place where people want to live and work long term,” Anderson continued. “That means lowering the cost of living and fostering a business climate where opportunity thrives. When our workforce succeeds, Massachusetts succeeds.”