A fourth of Tri-Town voters have voted early or requested mail-ins

With less than two weeks until Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 3, about 15% of Tri-Town voters have already cast ballots for statewide and local races. 

Edward Markey and Seth Moulton are running for the Democratic U.S. senator nomination, while Bill Keating and Craig Swallow are running for the Democratic U.S. representative nomination in all three towns.

Michael Roger Minogue and Brian Shortsleeves are running for the Republican governor nomination. Sandra M. Wright, Anthony Thomas O’Brien Sr. and Korey Michael Welch are running for the Republican Plymouth County Commissioner nomination in all three towns.

Polls will be open from 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. for Mattapoisett voters at Old Hammondtown School, 20 Shaw St.; for Marion voters at the Benjamin D. Cushing Community Center, 465 Mill St.; and for Rochester voters at the Council on Aging, 67 Dexter Lane.

About a fourth of Tri-Town voters have already voted early in-person or requested mail-in ballots.

As of Oct. 23, Marion had 4,620 registered voters. Of those, 167 voted early, 958 had requested to vote by a mail-in ballot and 409 had already returned mail-in ballots.

Mattapoisett had 6,094 registered voters as of Oct. 23. Of those, 290 voted early, 1,380 requested mail-in ballots and 623 mail-in ballots had already been returned.

Rochester had 4905 registered voters as of Oct. 24. Of those, 181 voted early, 914 requested to vote by mail and 614 mail-in ballots had already been returned.

You cannot bring mail-in ballots to a polling place on Election Day, Tuesday, Nov. 3.

Sippican Week has given a summary of each question and what a yes or no vote would mean. For a more detailed summary, including who is endorsing each question and what the current law is, visit sec.state.ma.us/divisions/elections/download/information-for-voters/archive/IFV_2026%20English.pdf. 

1. Public Records: The first question is asking whether to make changes to the law surrounding public records. Voting yes will make records held by the Legislature and the Office of the Governor public. Certain documents would be exempt, including development of public policy and communications between legislators and constituents. Voting no would make no difference to the current law. 

2. Collective Bargaining: The second asks if voters approve of a law surrounding the Committee for Public Counsel Services. A yes vote would allow the Committee to form a union to collectively bargain with an employer, execute a collective bargaining agreement and request necessary appropriation. Voting no would make no change to the current laws. 

3. Primary Election Changes: This question asks if voters approve of having political party primaries for state elections. Voting yes would get rid of political party-based primaries, meaning all the candidates would appear on the primary ballot and the top two candidates would appear on the November ballot. This would also mean governor and lieutenant governor would run and be listed together and would provide political party status to candidates who receive 3% of the vote in the state primary. Voting no would make no changes to how voting works. 

4. Registering to vote: This question would change how people register to vote. A yes vote would allow eligible individuals to register to vote on the day of an election by signing a written oath and providing proof of residency. Without proof of residency, a person can cast a provisional vote, which would only be counted if they can prove residency within two days of a primary or six days of a state election. Residents would still not be able to change party affiliation the day of. This would go into effect on Jan. 1.  A no vote would make no changes to how voting works. 

5. State revenue: This question would change how much revenue the state can collect in a year. A yes vote would tie the limit to the prior year collections plus average wage and salary growth. Any excess collections would be refunded to the taxpayers the next year. This would also include revenue from surtaxes on incomes over $1 million. This would go into effect on July 1, 2027. A no vote would make no change to state taxes. 

6. Nature for All Fund: This question would create a Nature for All Fund, which would be funded from 50% of state sales taxes on sporting goods, recreational vehicles and golf courses in their first year. After July of 2028 the fund would receive 100% of these sales taxes. This would exclude revenue from the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority State and Local Contribution Fund and the School Modernization and Reconstruction Trust Fund. The Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs could use this money for natural resource conservation. This fund could receive donations. Surplus funds from this could not be transferred, but public entities involved in conservation could receive funds. A 15-member Nature for All Board would be created, hired by the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, who would create annual reports on the funds. A no vote would not create this and keep sales taxes on these goods as they are. 

7. Increasing housing: This question would lower the amount of land required for single-family houses in residentially zoned areas with access to public sewer and water to 5,000 square feet. The land would need 50 feet bordering the street or public way. The Zoning Board could reasonably regulate other aspects like height, distance from neighbors, open space, parking and renting. The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities could give guidance on regulations to the law. A no would make no changes to current zoning laws. 

8. Marijuana sales: This question would reverse previous votes legalizing marijuana. It would change the amount marijuana a person over 21 could possess to one ounce or less, including five grams of concentrate. Possession of marijuana over this amount would impose a civil penalty of $100 and require forfeiting the marijuana, and for those under 21 would impose the fine and forfeit as well as completion of a drug awareness program, community service and notification to legal guardians. Current dispensaries would operate on an expedited basis to become medical dispensaries and sell the rest to medical dispensaries. A no vote would keep dispensaries and current marijuana laws. 

9. Gun laws: This question would implement changes to current gun laws. A court can order the surrender of firearms when school administrators or licensed healthcare providers are concerned about the person carrying a firearm or during a Harassment Prevention Order. The firearm licensing requirements would change to allow local licensing authorities to request prior license and permit information and petitions for involuntary mental health commitments and require someone to be 21 to own semiautomatic rifles or shotguns. It would allow incarceration of up to six months for failing to report the loss or theft of a firearm. The definition of machine guns would include bump stocks, trigger cranks and Glock switches. It would determine what an assault style weapon is and the conditions in which a person can keep the ones they own. It would prohibit carrying firearms in government buildings, polling locations and schools, with some exceptions. A no vote would not just not pass these changes, but also repeal aspects of the current law that were passed in 2024. Currently, there are penalties for possessing, creating or transferring ghost guns and require all guns besides antiques and relics to have serial numbers. Local licensing authorities have to transfer firearm dealer inspection to the police, and require the licensing authorities to attend statewide training. Dealers need to confiscate expired or suspended licences and report them.