Know Before You Go: Ballot Measures Affecting You at Work and at Home

America heads to the polls this November to vote for a wide array of candidates and issues. Before casting their votes, it is important that citizens are informed and aware of what they will see on their ballots. Each American has the right to have their voice heard. There are many ballot measures for Americans to review, and thanks to our friends at Ballotpedia, you can quickly find your sample ballot:

When it comes to housing reform and worker freedom, here are a few of the ballot measures that ALEC is watching closely.

HOUSING REFORM

MASSACHUSETTS QUESTION 7

First on the list is Question 7 from Massachusetts, an indirect initiated state statute on the state’s ballot in November. Citizens of the Bay State will decide whether to preempt local ordinances by requiring the minimum lot size for single-family homes to be 5,000 sq/ft. Currently, many local ordinances in the State require the lot size for single-family or single-residence dwellings to be far greater than 5,000 sq/ft.

For example, in Wellesley, MA, dwellings in single-family residential districts must be constructed on a minimum lot size of 10,000 – 40,000 sq/ft. These local jurisdictions make it increasingly difficult and expensive to purchase such large lot sizes to build smaller, affordable homes. Question 7 would only apply to residential zoning districts and prohibit any special permit or zoning approval from being required to build these dwellings in residential zones.

The reforms mentioned in this ballot measure mirror similar ideas in the ALEC model policy By-Right Housing Development Act. When all rules and regulations are met by a proposed development, there should be no additional permits or special approvals required. This streamlines the development process for housing and addresses the housing shortage. With this Massachusetts ballot measure, the state ensures efficiency and avoids arbitrary obstacles in the development of single-family starter homes.

Question 7 also coincides with the ALEC FAIR Zoning Act, model policy that limits zoning protests and expands the use of private property. The model is designed to promote the production of housing, not prevent it. In this way, state lawmakers work best when they remove or reform obstinate regulations that disrupt the production of housing. Too many regulations can discourage individuals from building affordable homes on reasonable lot sizes because the costs outweigh the benefits.

CALIFORNIA PROPOSITION 45

Second on the list of housing reform ballot measures is Proposition 45, an initiated state statute from California. This measure is one of six citizen-initiated petitions and modifies existing CA legislation by expediting the environmental review process for certain development projects, notably housing.

Prop. 45 would set a 30-day shot clock for an agency to review and respond to essential housing project applications. If the agency fails to do so, the application is automatically approved. Moreover, an agency may not deem an application incomplete for reasons not publicly available at the time it was submitted.

Aspects of Prop. 45 mirror the ALEC Accessory Dwelling Units Act, which streamlines permits for accessory dwelling unit (ADU) developments by shortening the timeline for permit applications and aims to eliminate regulatory barriers that contribute to the housing crisis.

In addition to the timeline specifications, Prop. 45 also provides rules around legal challenges. According to the statute, only by showing clear and convincing evidence that a specific adverse effect would occur as a byproduct of this development project can the project be halted by an injunction. This section, like the ALEC Third-Party Challenges to Development Permits, narrows the scope in which a third party can challenge an essential project and prevents frivolous lawsuits from gaining traction. Moreover, if a legal challenge were to succeed, the petitioner may not block the whole project, but only the defective piece.

WORKER FREEDOM/RIGHT-TO-WORK

MASSACHUSETTS QUESTION 2

The government is a unique employer in that whether you are an elected official or an employee of the state, you are working for the citizens. In the 4^th Edition of ALEC’s States that Work: A Labor Policy Roadmap Across America, we find that only seven states have laws that either fully or partially ban public-sector collective bargaining. Wisconsin Gov. Scott Walker famously fought to heavily restrict public-sector collective bargaining in 2011 with Act 10, so this is not a simple reform to make, but it is an essential one.

Massachusetts Question 2 takes a different route and expands the State’s public-sector-collective-bargaining rights to more public employees. This ballot measure allows the Committee for Public Counsel Services to participate in collective bargaining.

The ALEC Fair and Accountable Public Sector Authority Act bans public sector collective bargaining outright. This does not mean that groups cannot lobby on behalf of employees or prevent public employees from supporting or joining a group. The Act only prohibits public employees from participating in the official collective bargaining process – protecting American tax-dollars and ensuring no one has preferential powers beyond what other individuals and groups in the state possess.

VERMONT PROPOSAL 3

Voters in the Green Mountain state will decide if the right to join a union and collectively bargain is a constitutional right. If passed, this ballot measure would allow employees to collectively bargain while simultaneously banning any law that says otherwise. Proposal 3 would allow forced union membership as a condition for employment.

Right-to-Work is simply the belief that workers should be able to decide for themselves if they would like to join a union or not, without intimidation or fear of losing their job. This does not prevent anyone from joining a union. Instead, it allows workers to decide what option works best for them.

Not only does the ALEC Fair and Accountable Public Sector Authority Act apply here, but aspects of Proposal 3 also contrast with ALEC’s Right-to-Work Act. This model policy ensures that the right to work is protected and that worker freedom takes precedence over union agendas.

According to ALEC’s 2026 Rich States, Poor States publication, of the top five ranking states, four of them also rank in the top five of GDP. All five are Right-to-Work states and have some of the highest absolute domestic migration. Furthermore, employment in right-to-work states has increased by 16.4% since 2014, while non-Right-to-Work states only experienced half of that growth. The results are clear: workers are drawn to where they experience employment freedom, and the states are better for it.

ALEC is dedicated to the principles of free markets, federalism, and limited government. Citizens flourish, and the economy grows when it is less restricted by arbitrary laws established by the government. By loosening the reins on regulations and maximizing economic opportunity for workers, states can succeed in producing a more affordable and prosperous America.