For nearly twenty years, Jeff Kanne has channeled billions into Greater Boston real estate. However, with Mayor Michelle Wu beginning a second term and statewide rent control proposed for November’s ballot, Kanne indicates he’s halting new investments.
Such investors are not limited to one market. As CEO of National Real Estate Advisors, overseeing approximately $10 billion for 120 institutional clients, Kanne continuously evaluates prospects in about 20 markets nationwide, spanning from Charlotte, N.C., to San Francisco. While Boston presents significant demand for new housing, achieving an adequate return on investment there has become too challenging.
“If Boston officials desire investors like us to eagerly commit capital, they must extend a welcoming invitation, detailing the benefits,” he stated. “Contrary to popular belief about real estate development, it’s a high-risk endeavor where losses are as common as profits.”
Kanne’s heightened prudence may stem from his role managing pension funds, specifically for the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers and the National Electrical Contractors Association, rather than being a typical private equity or Wall Street investor. His primary focus is financial returns, with projects frequently generating employment and bolstering local communities. His portfolio includes downtown skyscrapers such as One Greenway and Bulfinch Crossing, as well as Chestnut Hill’s 300 Boylston Street complex.
Consequently, if investors such as Kanne withhold capital from Boston, developers dependent on that funding will be unable to proceed with their projects.
Kanne similarly expressed reservations about New York City after last year’s revelation that Zohran Mamdani, upon becoming mayor, intended to fulfill a pledge to freeze rents there.
He had been considering a Manhattan investment at that point but opted to delay.
“We found it very appealing,” he recollected, “but chose to pause… we simply couldn’t predict the outcome.”
Beyond market volatility, Kanne assesses a city’s regulatory environment, including the duration of project approvals and the extent of mandates like energy efficiency standards and affordable housing quotas.
“I’m not implying these initiatives lack merit,” he stated, “but it’s undeniable that fewer restrictions increase a project’s viability, making it more probable that capital providers such as myself will invest in your city due to reduced risk.”
National Real Estate Advisors
Conversely, City Hall justifies these regulations as essential for fostering a more environmentally sound and affordable Boston for its inhabitants. The city’s often protracted approval process also guarantees resident participation in development decisions.
City Hall contends that Wu’s policies should not impede ongoing projects, as many received permits prior to her stricter energy and affordable housing mandates. They maintain that global market conditions, rather than mayoral directives, are the primary concern.
Attempts to reach Wu’s planning chief, Kairos Shen, for comment were unsuccessful; only a lengthy statement from spokesperson Brittany Comak was provided.
“We consistently engage with developers to explore how the City can facilitate project initiation,” Comak stated. “While we sometimes assist in bridging financial gaps, the requested level of support for private market-rate projects can occasionally exceed what is justifiable for taxpayer expenditure.”
However, interest rates and material costs are largely uniform across locations. Kanne, notably, is directing investments elsewhere; over the past year, he has allocated capital to cities such as Washington D.C. and Atlanta, backing diverse projects from medical facilities to data centers.
Even San Francisco, which experienced a post-pandemic urban decline, is now rebounding due to the artificial intelligence boom. Real estate investors are actively seeking opportunities in the Bay Area again. Kanne attributes this resurgence partly to the new mayor, philanthropist Daniel Lurie, who has “extended a clear welcome to businesses and capital.”
Kanne noted that Boston previously offered such an environment under mayors Tom Menino and Marty Walsh. He suggested that while local developers might be compelled to adapt to the current changes, national investors like himself are not.
“If Boston were my home and business base, I’d have no choice but to manage these conditions,” he explained. “However, that’s not my situation, and my capital is free to be deployed anywhere across the United States.”
Presently, Kanne is not only disinvesting from Boston but also considering a broader withdrawal from Massachusetts should statewide rent control be approved on the November ballot. If enacted, this measure would cap annual rent increases at either the Consumer Price Index or 5 percent, whichever is less.
He references data analyzed by housing economist Jay Parsons, illustrating the impact of rent control in Montgomery County, an affluent Maryland suburb adjacent to Washington, which implemented the policy in 2024.
In the initial eight months of 2024, prior to rent control’s implementation, the county authorized 2,093 multifamily units, a rate consistent with other Maryland counties. However, during the same period in 2025, Montgomery County issued only 54 building permits, while construction elsewhere in the state continued steadily.
Parsons and Kanne arrived at an identical conclusion.
“Implementing rent control will stifle housing production,” Kanne warned, “leading to a loss of investors like myself, who will seek opportunities elsewhere.”
Once a seemingly guaranteed investment, Boston’s office towers and luxury condos no longer offer such certainty. Some foresee up to a decade before a new construction boom emerges.
Such a lengthy wait for market recovery is significant. Alternatively, we could endeavor to steer our own destiny.
Shirley Leung, a Business columnist, can be contacted at [email protected].