In an even-numbered year, July typically brings a scramble ahead of the traditional July 31 close of formal session in the Massachusetts legislature. This year, however, under new rules, bills that reached conference committee by the July 31 deadline stay alive until the session’s end on January 5, 2027. This means negotiations on a number of bills will continue into the fall (and possibly early winter). Plenty is still in motion, and here’s where things stand on some of the bills CREDA is following:
Economic Development Bill
After the passage of the Economic Development bill in the House and Senate, conferees were appointed to negotiate a final bill. Both versions contain provisions beneficial to the commercial real estate industry. The Senate’s bill, An Act relative to economic development in the Commonwealth (S.3228), included CREDA-supported language on expanding commercial conversion districts and clarifying the appeals process for the state’s energy codes. Other critical language includes doubling Chapter 40R incentive payments to municipalities that adopt smart growth and starter home districts; permanent authorization for remote and hybrid public meetings; increased residential property tax exemptions (without harming commercial real estate); and duplexes by right on residential lots.
The House version (H.5576) included CREDA-supported language on Site Plan Review, commercial conversion districts, and clarifying the appeals process for the state’s energy codes. The House also adopted other critical provisions during debate, including a two-year extension of the 2024 Permit Extension Act; an expansion of the Housing Development Incentive Program (HDIP) annual award; language replacing the Urban Housing TIF with a local-only housing TIF; and Yes in God’s Backyard, which allows the by-right construction of multifamily housing on land owned by religious organizations.
In addition, several amendments that CREDA opposed in both the House and Senate bills were defeated – including mandatory water banking, transfer taxes, and an expansion of Architectural Access Board jurisdiction.
The Senate and House did, however, adopt language dealing with Tenant Opportunity to Purchase (TOPA) – though in different ways. The Senate version would create a five-year TOPA pilot program in five cities or towns and the House version would allow for an opt-in TOPA program statewide. Given the harm TOPA has done in other markets, CREDA is working with other industry groups to strongly oppose both TOPA proposals during conference committee.
CREDA will be submitting detailed feedback to the conferees and legislative leaders on all of the various provisions we support and oppose in the House and Senate economic development bills.
Environmental Bond Bill
Following the passage of both the House and Senate bill versions, An Act to build resilience for Massachusetts communities, otherwise known as the Mass Ready Act, headed to conference committee in early July.
CREDA supports several of the permitting reforms included in both versions, particularly the Priority Housing Project designation and the related Chapter 91 general licensing reforms.
However, CREDA has concerns that the changes both bills would make to the wetlands permit appeals process are unlikely to accelerate review as intended. Under the House version, MassDEP would be removed from the appeals process for certain projects, and an applicant denied a local permit would have to appeal to the Superior Court. Because courts defer heavily to the record established at the local level, a denial would become more difficult to reverse. The Senate version retains MassDEP’s role, which CREDA considers the preferable approach. CREDA also recommended that a party challenging a local decision must be required to present credible evidence before MassDEP is required to conduct a full review.
CREDA will continue to work to ensure conferees understand our concerns and how the various provisions included in each version will affect the industry.
Energy Affordability Bill
The House and Senate versions of the energy affordability bill (also in conference committee) differ substantially. The House bill would cut close to $1 billion from Mass Save, the state’s energy efficiency program. The Senate bill leaves Mass Save largely intact, but caps administrative spending instead. It also phases out the Gas System Enhancement Plan (GSEP), the program that lets gas utilities recover costs for replacing aging pipelines, by 2030. In addition, the Senate bill would allow the utilities to securitize certain grid modernization, storm recovery and gas-transition costs.
CREDA, as part of the Mass Coalition for Sustainable Energy, joined a letter to the conference committee urging conferees to prioritize affordability and avoid adding new costs to already high energy bills. The coalition opposes provisions that would create or expand programs that add costs, sunset GSEP, end the requirement that utilities serve natural gas to customers who choose it, and securitize clean energy costs.
Furthermore, the letter urged that the final bill must lower ratepayer bills and must not put the reliability and safety of energy infrastructure at risk.