Who is a member?
Our members are the local governments of Massachusetts and their elected and appointed leadership.
The Honorable Aaron Michlewitz, Chair
House Committee on Ways and Means
State House, Boston
Delivered electronically
Dear Chair Michlewitz and Distinguished Members of the Committee,
On behalf of the cities and towns of the Commonwealth, the Massachusetts Municipal Association writes with regard to H. 4744, An Act relative to energy affordability, clean power and economic competitiveness. We appreciate the Legislature’s review of how energy affordability impacts daily life in Massachusetts, and we look forward to working with you to craft policy that provides meaningful relief in light of a challenging energy cost environment.
To begin, we first must express our appreciation that this legislation recognizes the challenges posed by recent shifts in clean energy policy. From the pausing or cancellation of grant funding for critical public projects, to walkbacks on tax credits for clean energy and efficiency upgrades, or to an overall growing uncertainty in depending on our federal partners, there is an undeniable need to prepare for and navigate these headwinds. Our residents, businesses, economy, and environment depend on Massachusetts’ ability to meet this moment with thoughtful planning and deliberate, meaningful action.
Within this ever-changing national context, the 351 cities and towns of the Commonwealth continue the work to fortify our communities and increase our collective energy and environmental resilience. Municipalities depend on state grant and loan programs, as well as federal incentives, to make incremental progress and inspire private energy efficiency and electrification investments. To do this, though, local governments need certainty and a clear vision forward. We appreciate the work of the Healey-Driscoll Administration and the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy in its steadfast commitment to the energy affordability conversation for the Commonwealth.
Local leaders have a deep understanding of the myriad financial pressures currently impacting families and businesses, energy affordability among them. Our members hear frequently about the challenges that rising gas and electricity bills impose, and often serve as a first point of contact when residents seek relief and opportunities to save dollars where possible.
Additionally, municipal officials exist in the same complex, inflationary environment that residents do. Utility costs – including gas and electricity bills for schools, police, fire, public works, and other municipal buildings – are also increasing and adding strain to local budgets. Our municipal members rely on a strong partnership between state government and city and town halls across Massachusetts to safely navigate these municipal finance challenges.
As the House Committee on Ways and Means reviews the legislation on the table, we urge you to ensure that future redrafts of energy affordability legislation strike a balance between cost savings and continuing the necessary work to address climate change at the state and local level.
As you know, municipalities are limited in their ability to raise local revenues to address ongoing and unexpected needs in their communities. With an increasingly strained revenue structure, cities and towns depend on reasonable, rational expectations from the state. Unfunded mandates, even when attempting to solve an issue as important as climate change or electrification, remain unworkable for city and town governments.
This is why we appreciate the intent of the proposed affordability standard for future state programs and efforts included in H. 4744. We have supported similar cost-benefit approaches as central components of good governance, such as those within H. 1039 and S. 675. The MMA and its members will be closely monitoring the development of this legislation to ensure that opportunities to reduce costs do not negatively impact necessary progress, and that new rules and regulations do not impose additional cost pressures on governments, businesses, and residents of Massachusetts.
In addition, the MMA also wishes to take a position on several policy items within H. 4744:
Municipal Net Metering Cap
The MMA supports Section 73, which would raise the 10 MW cap for municipal net metering hosting capacity to 20 MW. Raising the cap, or removing it all together, would allow interested municipalities to continue to factor net metering credits into their decision making. Net metering provides local governments a meaningful incentive to invest in solar energy systems; this cap should not continue to limit their development.
Solar Permitting Provisions
The MMA has serious concerns with Section 21 of H. 4744, particularly the second section, which amends Chapter 25A with a new “Section 23.” This subsection complicates the still-evolving municipal permitting changes to comply with Chapter 239 of the Acts of 2024. This section would utilize a newly defined term of permit granting authority, referring to: “the board of appeals or zoning administrator of a city or town.” The provision goes on to state that a permit-granting authority “shall” allow applications for residential solar energy systems or associated equipment to be submitted through a web platform, which “automates plan review, produces a code-compliant approval, and instantly issues a permit or permit revision.” Further clarity is needed as to whether this provision provides an option for municipalities and permitting agencies to utilize or whether this would be a new requirement for all permit-granting authorities. This provision also complicates the continuing implementation of the major solar and clean energy permitting reforms passed in 2024.
Transmission Permitting Provisions
The MMA is also concerned with the broad language utilized in Section 96, which creates an alternative permitting mechanism for high voltage transmission line installations on highways across “any public right of way” or along roadways. This section is particularly troubling because of its inclusion of the word “roadway,” which is left undefined and thus could be construed to mean roads under municipal jurisdiction. We suggest clarifying that this section would only apply to state roads and highways.
Mass Save, Fossil Fuel-Free Municipalities
The MMA strongly recommends that Section 94 of H. 3469 be removed from future redrafts. This section would disqualify fossil fuel-free municipalities, particularly major renovations and new construction projects, from future Mass Save incentives. This removes meaningful benefits from the 10 leading communities that have undertaken significant work to make climate progress happen in their neighborhoods.
Eligibility for Mass Save contributes to the decision-making process for any municipality considering moving towards fossil fuel-free development in their community. This section only stands to hurt these communities who have taken on a meaningful responsibility, one granted by the Legislature, to learn how to reduce fossil fuel use in major renovations and new building construction and make recommendations for future state policy. The residents of Acton, Arlington, Aquinnah, Brookline, Cambridge, Concord, Lexington, Lincoln, Newton, and Northampton should not be punished for their community’s participation in this program.
In summary, cities and towns must be enabled to progress toward our shared state and local success in light of federal changes, cost challenges, and policy considerations impacting daily operations. The MMA appreciates the commitment to this issue by the Healey-Driscoll Administration and the Legislature. However, this cannot be done by harming state programs supporting municipalities, removing critical local flexibilities, or imposing new unfunded mandates.
If you have any questions or desire further information, please do not hesitate to have your office contact me or MMA Senior Legislative Analyst Josie Ahlberg at any time.
Sincerely,
Adam Chapdelaine
MMA Executive Director and CEO