Question 1 would make the governor's office, the state House and the state Senate subject to public records laws.
Public records laws allow anyone to ask government officials for things like communications, schedules, budgets, documents and reports. Journalists often use them for public accountability reporting, corporations use them to figure out business interests and anyone curious about what their government is doing can file a request.
Massachusetts is the only state in the nation that exempts all three branches of government, the Legislature, governor's office and courts, from public records laws. So while anyone can ask them to share records, they're not legally required to comply.
There would be some exceptions to what government officials would have to make public: most communications between legislators and their constituents would be exempt, as would materials that have to do with developing policy — for example, lawmakers discussing a bill before it becomes law.
What do supporters say?
Auditor Diana DiZoglio is the public face of this push. She says expanding the public records law would make Beacon Hill more transparent.
"We're frequently ranked the least transparent state government in the entire nation," DiZoglio told GBH's Boston Public Radio. "That is largely to do with the fact that we are the only state in the nation that allows our legislature, governor's office and judiciary to claim blanket exemptions from the public records law."
You might remember Question 1 from two years ago, in which DiZoglio pushed for an explicit right to audit the Legislature and won with 72% of the vote. That audit has still not happened because the Legislature's leadership has pushed back.
What do opponents say?
There's no organized "No" campaign, but that does not mean no one opposes this measure. DiZoglio herself said she expects the Legislature to resist.
"They're 100% not going to honor this next vote, and they've made that apparent," DiZoglio told GBH's Boston Public Radio. "It's not just disappointing, it's a dangerous precedent."
All but one member of the state's Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions, all members of the Legislature, said they opposed passing this measure. They wrote that they believe it would "chill open communications by lawmakers," take up too many government resources and that "the legislative process in the Commonwealth is already structured to be publicly accessible" through open hearings and livestreamed sessions.
Who is paying for this?
A group called the Committee for Transparency and Democracy has spent more than $300,000 in favor of this ballot question. Almost half of that money came from the Committee to Elect Diana Dizoglio.
Because there is no official campaign against Question 1, the state's Office of Campaign and Political Finance is not tracking spending against it.
Bottom line:
A "Yes" vote would make the state's public records law apply to the governor's office and the state Legislature. A "No" vote would keep public records laws as they are.
More resources:
- Video: Auditor Diana Dizoglio explains Question 1 on Boston Public Radio
- Article: How do public records laws work in New England? We tested it.
- Summary from the Secretary of State's Office
- The attorney general's summary of the measure
- Video: A special committee hearing on Question 1
- Full text of the measure
Copyright 2026 GBH News Boston
