Boston Mayor Michelle Wu’s tax shift bill was killed again in the state Senate, this time as an amendment to alternative Senate-led property tax shock legislation that was overwhelmingly defeated by the chamber on Thursday.

The Senate voted, 33-5, to defeat an amendment filed by state Sen. Michael Rush, a Boston Democrat, that closely mirrors the language included in a home rule petition the mayor has been pushing for nearly two years that would shift more of the city’s tax burden from the residential to commercial sector.

The mayor’s legislation was killed by the state Senate in late 2024, and stalled in that chamber again all last year. It was not taken up again until Thursday. Wu renewed her push for Senate approval last month while portraying her plan as critical to lower the projected 13% tax hike for homeowners that the city says is driven by a 6% drop in commercial values alongside a 2% rise in residential values.

The day’s vote on Rush’s nearly identical amendment, filed at the request of the mayor, leaves the future of Wu’s proposal uncertain, given that it appears to have no path forward in the Senate, despite clearing its two other legislative hurdles — the Boston City Council and state House of Representatives — three times.

“I hope we can move on past this issue to work with our municipal partners on all the goals we truly share,” said state Sen. William Brownsberger, a Belmont Democrat who represents parts of Boston and filed the tax shock bill Rush was seeking to amend with the mayor’s home rule language.

Wu’s office did not respond directly to an inquiry about whether the mayor plans to continue pursuing her legislation, which seeks to exceed the 175% state limit for shifting taxes onto commercial properties in order to lower residential tax increases, for three years.

Her office, however, pointed to the support the amendment received from four of six Boston senators, while suggesting that the mayor’s proposal has widespread support in the city.

“In addition to having overwhelming support from the people of Boston, the city’s residential tax relief legislation has had support from 12 of 13 Boston city councilors, all 16 Boston state representatives, and now four of Boston’s six state senators,” a city spokesperson said in a statement.

“We’re grateful to Senator Rush for putting this amendment forward, and Senators Lydia Edwards, Liz Miranda, Sal DiDomenico and Patricia Jehlen who voted for this today,” the mayor’s office added.

Brownsberger and state Sen. Nick Collins, a South Boston Democrat, were the two Boston senators to vote against the Rush amendment, after having co-led the push to kill the mayor’s tax shift bill in the Senate in late 2024.

The Senate approved Brownsberger’s alternative tax relief bill, by a 37-1 vote.

His “tax shock” legislation would give “cities and towns the ability to shield their most vulnerable taxpayers from the shock of an extraordinarily high tax bill” in years when residential property tax hikes are expected to exceed 10%, per a Senate fact sheet.

Brownsberger’s bill would phase in increases or offer targeted tax credits in years with projected double-digit tax hikes.

Co-sponsored by Collins and Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, a Gloucester Republican, the tax shock bill now moves on to the House of Representatives for consideration.

“This is a targeted relief measure,” Brownsberger said of his bill. “It’s only helpful to municipalities in a tax shock year. Tax shock years are not common, fortunately … and if a city has reserves, it can work.”

By comparison, Brownsberger said the mayor’s plan, by way of Rush’s failed amendment, does not target tax relief to the most vulnerable homeowners. He said wealthy homeowners would likely see lower tax bills with the tax shift while small business owners would be hit with higher property taxes.

Brownsberger added that the language in Rush’s amendment would have opened up the floodgates for all cities and towns to tax commercial properties beyond the 175% maximum shift allowed under state law to lower residential tax bills.

“The whole fundamental compromise of (tax) classification would be out the door, and I don’t believe that’s good for the Commonwealth in the long run,” Brownsberger said.

State Sen. Lydia Edwards, an East Boston Democrat who voted in favor of the Rush amendment, said the city’s residents are most concerned right now about taxes, and the tax shift language would help ensure housing stability.

She questioned why the Senate was unwilling to trust the City of Boston’s assessment that the tax shift was needed to stabilize residential taxes, when it was willing, “on so many different occasions,” to trust Boston’s ability to “manage itself and to manage its zoning and to manage its fiscal responsibility” with prior home rule petition approvals.

“Why don’t you trust the Boston assessing department when it says I need this tax shift to protect my residents?” Edwards said. “Just be consistent.”

This as-told-to essay is based on a conversation with Sam Slater, a 41-year-old real estate developer based in Boston. It’s been edited for length and clarity.

I was born in South Florida, where my parents and uncle currently live, and I moved to Massachusetts when I was 10 years old.

I run our family office, which is based in both Boston and Palm Beach, Florida. We have business ventures across multiple industries, but my focus is on our real estate portfolio. From light industrial to agricultural to multifamily real estate, we’re well-diversified across many states in the US, as well as Canada.

It’s been interesting to see an increase in national interest in the Massachusetts millionaire’s tax as some initiatives in other states come up. I have friends in other markets who have been asking about it. Since its implementation in 2023, the obvious question to me is, why wouldn’t I move back to Florida?

The truth is, I often think about moving, but I feel strongly about why I’m staying. It’s all for my kids.

I’ve witnessed wealthy friends leave Massachusetts after the state tax

In addition to my focus on real estate, I also work in the sports and entertainment industry. I hold a minority ownership stake in the Seattle Kraken, an NHL team, and last year, I joined the ownership group of the Memphis Grizzlies. I’m very active in the world of sport, and it’s been a really enjoyable and successful venture. Over the past 15 years, I’ve also produced over 40 feature films.

With the progression of state taxes in the last few years, particularly the millionaire tax, I’ve seen many people, including friends in the hedge fund, private equity, and finance spaces, move or confirm their plans to do so. However, I’m in a slightly different situation.

I want my kids to grow up in Massachusetts

I have two younger children, a 7 and 10-year-old, and I would prefer them to grow up here with all that Massachusetts has to offer.

We live in a town with a wonderful public school system, and I don’t want to take that away from them. More broadly, eastern Massachusetts and Boston, in particular, are highly accessible areas and offer a lot. We’ve got everything from sports to culture, and all four seasons. I don’t want to pull my kids from that for my desire to pay less in taxes.

If my children weren’t young, maybe my answer would be different.

I’d consider moving if things keep trending in this direction

It’s difficult to say if any changes I’ve seen in Massachusetts are a direct result of this particular tax. The broader market conditions in the economy are, in certain areas, quite strong, while in other areas, they are not.

If you take condominium sales in downtown Boston, we’re at extraordinarily low points both for pricing and velocity, especially if we’re looking back on a 10 or 15-year horizon. I think it would probably be a stretch to say it’s solely because of this tax, but high earners leaving Massachusetts removes potential high-end condominium buyers from the market.

The wealth tax in Massachusetts hasn’t affected my lifestyle

Fortunately, I haven’t had to make any lifestyle changes because of the wealth tax, but I’m certainly aware of the taxes I pay in general, specifically as a result of this tax. My question is, what will come next after this?

What remains to be seen is how the additional revenue brought in to Massachusetts from this tax will trickle back to everyone in the Commonwealth.

If taxes continue to increase and no one can point to any substantial changes being made in the state, I think that’s when we’ll see a more meaningful exodus of people, even potentially myself, from Massachusetts.

My hope is that the government will make smart choices as to where the additional revenue goes

The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, our public transit system, has struggled for a long time, and it needs huge investments in its infrastructure and operations. Will we see a boost there? I don’t know.

There are two bridges that connect mainland Massachusetts to Cape Cod, and they’re nearly 100 years old. They were going to be replaced at a multi-billion-dollar cost, but some of the funding was cut due to the Trump Administration. Will we see some help for those projects?

I’m wondering if there’s anything that will be done to truly help move us forward, rather than just keep us afloat with the existing programs we have at the state budget level. I think more people who are paying the millionaire’s tax would be on board if there were a more complete message about how the tax dollars would be used.

It’s certainly something that people are watching and aware of, with good reason.

Do you have a story to share about paying a wealth tax? If so, please reach out to the reporter at tmartinelli@businessinsider.com.

Can Matt Damon, Ben Affleck and Jimmy Fallon pronounce every city and town in Massachusetts correctly, including those on Cape Cod, Nantucket and Martha’s Vineyard?

In a promotion for Damon and Affleck’s upcoming thriller film, “The Rip,” the trio hammered through every single one of the state’s 351 municipalities on NBC’s “The Tonight Show” on Tuesday, Jan. 13 – in thick Boston accents.

Having grown up in Massachusetts, the two actors are no strangers to Boston accents – famously putting them to use in “Good Will Hunting.” And while their newest movie is set in Miami, not Boston, the actors jumped at the chance to slip into their New England personas on “The Tonight Show.”

Wearing their most “Boston” outfits – Red Sox merch and cold-weather gear – Damon, Affleck, and Fallon took turns reciting the names of each Massachusetts town in alphabetical order as soft music played in the background.

“Abington, Acton, Acushnet, Adams, Agawam,” Damon started, with a deadpan expression on his face.

“Alford, Amesbury, Amherst, Andover, Aquinnah,” Affleck continued, with a gruff Boston accent.

“Arlington, Ashburnham, Ashby, Ashfield, Ashland,” Fallon went on, trying his hand at an accent as well.

And yes, the segment continued like this for about five minutes.

Were there any slip-ups on the Massachusetts town names?

For the most part, the three flew through the Massachusetts town names, even though it’s easy for tongues to get twisted when reciting them all at top speed.

Fallon stumbled briefly over Winchendon, repeating it a few times before he sounded confident. Damon pronounced “Uxbridge” as “Oxbridge.”

Cape and Islands towns seemed to get a fair shake. Fallon made a point to enunciate each “r” in the town of Truro. Chatham and Eastham, spelled similarly, but pronounced differently, were each said correctly. Yarmouth got a little more airtime as the final town on the list, when Affleck threw up his hands in celebration while drawing out his Boston-accented “Yaaaah,” then bowed.

Affleck, a Massachusetts town-name natural, couldn’t resist a cheeky comment when he reached the home of the New England Patriots.

“Foxboro for your mother,” he quipped.

Another notable moment was when Affleck seemed to learn mid-recitation that Peru is, in fact, the name of a town in Massachusetts.