In ballot questions, lopsided wins for most items, including ending MCAS as requirement for grads (corrected)

Cambridge and Somerville residents who voted Tuesday cast ballots for state elections as well as for president, and on ballot questions on topics ranging from high school testing to legalizing the use of some psychedelic substances. All won in Cambridge and Somerville, but two ultimately lost statewide: legalizing psychedelic substances and increasing the minimum wage of tipped employees.

Late Tuesday there were unofficial results available from election commissions (and Associated Press statewide results, which we looked at with more than 82 percent of results in shortly after 1:30 a.m. Wednesday); we also spoke with some voters outside polls to hear their thoughts on the issues.

Massachusetts voters were asked five questions in common and some limited to specific communities.

Somerville’s question No. 6 was on increasing a current 1.5 percent surcharge on annual property tax to 3 percent and putting the money toward spending on affordable housing, open space and historic preservation via a Community Preservation Fund. There were 36,457 ballots cast on the question (another 2,148 ballots were left blank on the question), with a majority of voters saying yes (25,282, or 69.4 percent), outweighing the no votes (11,175, or 30.7 percent).

Cambridge’s question No. 6 was a nonbinding referendum for two state representative districts contained partially in Cambridge: Would constituents want Daniel Ryan and David Rogers to “vote for legislation to create a single-payer system of universal health care”? There were 4,546 ballots cast on the question, with a majority of voters saying yes (3,523, or 77.5 percent), outweighing the no votes (1,023, or 22.5 percent).

Question 1: Auditing the legislature

Statewide
Yes: 71.5 percent No 28.5 percent
Cambridge votes 42,779
Yes 31,975 (74.7 percent) No 10,804 (25.3 percent)
Somerville votes 35,954
Yes 27,424 (76.3 percent) No 8,530 (23.7 percent)

The state auditor will get explicit authority to audit the state Legislature, increasing oversight, based on these results. The topic drew little attention in the run-up to Election Day, and understated commentary from the voters we talked with.

“I wasn’t too sure about that one because I don’t want to create too many loopholes for people to jump through to not follow the law,” said Casey Cross Zussman, 43, who voted at City Hall in Cambridge.

David Oliveira, a 24-year-old researcher, said he voted yes on the question and supported the change because the Massachusetts Legislature is one of the more closed-off state bodies.

Question 2: MCAS as a graduation requirement

Statewide
Yes: 58.9 percent No 41.1 percent
Cambridge votes 44,844
Yes 24,946 (55.6 percent) No 19,898 (44.4 percent)
Somerville votes 37,300
Yes 23,618 (63.3 percent) No 13,682 (36.7 percent)

Eliminating the use of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System test as a requirement for high school graduation has received strong support on both sides, and at the polls, that was no different.

Cross Zussman, a former Cambridge Public Schools teacher at the King Open School, and Kathy Aluia, 63, who was voting at the East Somerville Community School and teaches at the Acera School in Winchester, agreed there are better methods for evaluating students.

“Having had a child with dyslexia disability and a daughter that went to private school, I think that we need to support the ability for everybody to pass and get a high school diploma,” Aluia said.

Cross Zussman referred to the MCAS as “classist and racist” and a way of “further disenfranchising the disenfranchised.” She assured opponents that removing the graduation requirement wouldn’t mean schools no longer have standards. “Kids are assessed multiple times a day every single day. They’re still going to have to pass all their classes, and their teachers and administrators will still be assessing whether or not the kids are ready to enter adulthood. So they still will be assessed, just not through high-stakes testing,” Cross Zussman said.

Science teacher Caitlyn Murphy, 39, voting at the East Somerville Community School, said her colleagues were split on the question, but she ultimately decided to vote yes because of similar issues with the test. “These tests are, in my opinion, flawed, especially for special-education students and English-language learners,” Murphy said. “Those tests are not equitable and they do not serve them.”

Maya Israelsson, an 18-year-old student voting for the first time at the Morse School in Cambridge, said she voted to get rid of MCAS too.

Rashi Jeeda, a 24-year-old grad student; Daphne Jochnick, 57; and Sam Seidel, 58; all considered both sides but in the end voted no. Jeeda thought it would be helpful to keep the standard of education across the state. Jochnick, too, wanted to make sure “that school quality is consistent in all different areas.”

Question 3: Rideshare driver unions

Statewide
Yes: 54 percent No 46 percent
Cambridge votes 43,873
Yes 32,721 (74.6 percent) No 11,152 (25.4 percent)
Somerville votes 36,804
Yes 27,864 (75.7 percent) No 8,940 (24.3 percent)

Voters speaking with us showed widespread support for allowing labor representation for   transportation network drivers, also known as rideshare drivers, working for companies like Uber and Lyft. The vote would not apply to delivery network drivers, such as employees of DoorDash and Instacart.

Cross Zussman called herself “pro-union.”

“I’m really happy that they’re going to allow more unions to be created, assuming that can get through the polls,” said Kyle Amgan, 34.

And Seidel said he has “no objection to that.”

Question 4: Legalizing psychedelics

Statewide
Yes: 43.3 percent No 56.7 percent
Cambridge votes 44,086
Yes 25,083 (56.9 percent) No 19,003 (43.1 percent)
Somerville votes 37,165
Yes 24,464 (65.8 percent) No 12,701 (34.2 percent)

The proposed law in this question would allow for people 21 years and older to use five naturally occurring psychedelic substances – psilocybin, psilocyn, dimethyltryptamine, mescaline and ibogaine – under supervision in licensed locations by a licensed facilitator, such as in therapy. But they would also be allowed to grow and use the substances in their homes, and to distribute personal-use amounts to others. If the law passed, it would come with an overseeing Natural Psychedelic Substances Commission.

Jochnick and Cross Zussman voted yes, as did Murphy, in part in support of psychedelics as treatment for mental health conditions. “There has been so much research into the validity of using psychedelics for PTSD, for all sorts of things,” she said.

But the law would allow users to take psychedelics for more than just therapeutic purposes, and for Seidel, that’s too far. “It seemed a little too broad for me, and I didn’t have confidence that that wouldn’t lead to a bad situation,” he said.

Oliveira, on the other hand, voted yes because he feels changes can be made any time.

“I’m always a fan of trying something,” he said.

Question 5: Higher wages for tipped staff

Statewide
Yes: 36 percent No 64 percent
Cambridge votes 44,113
Yes 28,057 (63.6 percent) No 16,056 (36.4 percent)
Somerville votes 37,161
Yes 21,914 (59 percent) No 15,247 (41 percent)

The final statewide question on the 2024 ballot would raise the minimum wage for tipped employees, which is $6.75 an hour, to $15 an hour between 2025 and 2029. It would also allow the pooling of tips to be shared with cooks and other nonmanagement staff once all employees were paid the minimum wage.

Israelsson, who works as a host at a restaurant, voted yes in support of her back-of-house co-workers. “A lot of people in the back have to work a lot harder to earn the same amount of money,” she said.

Seidel and Cross Zussman heard arguments for both sides, but voted yes in the end.

“A lot of waitstaff I know wanted people to vote no, but I feel like that’s because the owners are telling them they can’t afford to pay them minimum wage, which I think is part of the classist imbalance we have in our economic system,” Cross Zussman said.

Seidel ended up in support of raising the minimum wage for all because of the disparities in wealth and income in our country.

“To me, it seems pretty basic that if you’re working that hard in that kind of job, you should at least be getting enough money at the end of the hour that you feel like you’ve earned a living wage,” Seidel said.

This post was updated Nov. 6, 2024, to correct a description of ballot question wins.

A stronger

Please consider making a financial contribution to maintain, expand and improve Cambridge Day.

We are now a 501(c)3 nonprofit and all donations are tax deductible.

Please consider a recurring contribution.

Donate now