Page 16 THE REVERE ADVOCATE – FRIDAY, JULY 10, 2026 BHRC | FROM Page 15 ural ecosystems. [The bill] is a commonsense measure that will help municipalities save money, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and improve public lighting by prioritizing warmer, properly shielded fi xtures.” “This legislation strikes a vital balance of reducing unnecessary light pollution, conserving energy, and protecting both wildlife and the night sky,” said Senate President Karen Spilka (D-Ashland). “By introducing a lower electric rate for streetlights, mandating fully shielded fi xtures and setting a warmer color temperature, we’re helping cities and towns cut costs while improving public safety and environmental health. It’s a cost-eff ective, science-based step to ensure future lighting installations respect our dark skies—and to ensure future generations are able to experience the natural wonder of gazing up at our starry skies.” (A “Yes” vote is for the bill.) Sen. Lydia Edwards Yes ENERGY COSTS (S 3143) Senate 32-8, approved legislation that supporters said would save people money; repair the climate; grow the economy; tackle rising energy costs head-on by cutting unnecessary fees; even out price spikes that hit households during high-demand months; crack down on predatory sales practices by energy suppliers and steer the state away from expensive infrastructure projects that don’t deliver value for ratepayers. “The cost of energy in Massachusetts has placed a real strain on family budgets,” said Senate President Karen Spilka (D-Ashland). “This legislation refl ects the Senate’s commitment to addressing that strain in a serious and sustained way while continuing our deeply held commitment to lead on our climate goals.” “With the passage of this comprehensive energy aff ordability bill, the Senate acted decisively today, laying the foundation for aff ordable and renewable energy for generations to come,” said Sen. Mike Rodrigues (D-Westport), Chair of the Senate Ways and Means Committee. “Homeowners, renters and small businesses across my district consistently cite expensive energy costs as one of the single biggest issues they face, and this legislation levels the playing fi eld and provides a pathway to a more affordable future for consumers of the commonwealth. This bill will drive down monthly utility bills and fl atten out sudden price spikes, and our proposal will lead to long-term savings that will be felt by residents across the commonwealth.” “Baystaters want to power their lives without polluting our air and water, harming our health, changing our climate or emptying our wallet,” said MASSPIRG’s Legislative Director Deirdre Cummings. “This bill will help them do that. By removing costly and cumbersome red tape, this bill makes it easier and quicker for residents to go solar. Alongside new municipal solar options, this means more people will be able to tap the abundant, clean energy of the sun’s golden rays. The bill also prioritizes energy effi ciency and adopts common sense consumer protections.” “The systems run by the gas and electric companies are sprawling and complicated,” said Sen. Mike Barrett (D-Lexington), Senate Chair of the Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy. “The Senate sees no greedy masterminds behind the scenes, but we do identify pockets of overspending and overcharging that have accumulated over the years. My colleagues and I want to go after the excesses and save people some serious money.” Not everyone was on board with the bill. “This Massachusetts Senate bill asks families and businesses to pay more money for a less reliable electric grid,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton). “It would dramatically expand off shore wind mandates while shifting the fi nancial risk from developers to ratepayers. The proposal could cost an estimated $20 billion, leading to even higher electric bills at a time when Massachusetts is already one of the most expensive states in the country in which to live and do business. Energy aff ordability and reliability must be the objective— not increasing costs for hardworking families. My goal is to make Massachusetts more affordable, not less, and this proposal misses the mark.” “Tonight’s vote is a profound disappointment for the hundreds of thousands of Massachusetts consumers who exercise their right to choose who supplies their electricity,” said Chris Ercoli, president of the Retail Energy Advancement League. “Rather than standing with their constituents, members of the Senate voted today to cede control of the Legislature to local government over a decision that belongs to consumers.” “While we appreciate the complexity of the issue, we are deeply concerned that the bill the Senate produced is missing an opportunity to make meaningful reforms that lower energy costs — and follow the lead of other climate leaders across the country who have balanced climate innovation with the ability of residents to aff ord the transition,” said a statement by the Massachusetts Coalition for Sustainable Energy. “Specifically, the bill doubles down on a strategy other states are walking away from that has failed to realize its promise of abundant clean and aff ordable energy. The members of the coalition are deeply concerned that several sections of this bill increase the cost of energy in Massachusetts.” (A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.) Sen. Lydia Edwards Yes BIOMASS (S 3143) Senate 35-4, approved an amendment that would remove woody biomass as an eligible fuel under the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Standard for Massachusetts municipal light plants. Supporters explained that while biomass was removed from the state’s Renewable Portfolio Standard in 2022 because it is not considered clean energy, it remained eligible under a separate section of state law governing municipal light plants. They said the amendment would close that inconsistency by ensuring public clean energy standards are aligned with current science and Massachusetts climate policy, preventing municipal light plants from counting electricity generated by burning woody biomass toward their greenhouse gas reduction requirements. “For too long, Massachusetts law treated a polluting energy source as if it were clean,” said amendment sponsor Sen. Adam Gomez (D-Springfi eld). “This amendment closes that loophole, aligns our statutes with science and ensures our clean energy policies reflect our climate commitments and environmental justice values. It’s an important step for communities like Springfield that have spent years fi ghting to protect public health and cleaner air.” Opponents of the amendment did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking them why they opposed the amendment. (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment removing woody biomass as an eligible fuel. A “No” vote is against the amendment.) Sen. Lydia Edwards Yes GAS LINE EXTENSIONS (S 3143) Senate 19-20, barely rejected an amendment that supporters said would end ratepayerbacked subsidies for new gas line extension allowances. They noted that the current system allows utilities to distort the market and undermine competition by charging ratepayers for costly new gas connection infrastructure, which ratepayers pay for decades in their utility bills. They argued that ending these subsidies will help reduce costs for ratepayers while allowing lower-cost clean energy alternatives to compete on a level playing fi eld, including electrifying the grid in new neighborhoods, and the use of heat pumps and solar panels in homes. “I voted for this amendment because if Massachusetts is really serious about meeting its carbon emissions reductions goals, while also delivering long-term energy savings to residents, we need more tools in the toolbox to end the continued expansion of costly gas infrastructure, which we all pay for decades,” said Sen. Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough). “I do not support subsidizing utility companies to maintain the status quo, while climate change continues to bring weather extremes, infrastructure damage and ever-rising electric bills to Massachusetts residents.” “The bill contains provisions that should produce significant energy cost savings for residents,” said Sen. John Keenan (D-Quincy). “I voted against the amendment to ensure that the commonwealth will build all new types of housing, including aff ordable housing, as part of an overall approach that balances mitigating the eff ects of climate change on the one hand and incentivizing needed residential development on the other.” (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.) Sen. Lydia Edwards No ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL CHANGE “HEARING IMPAIRED” TO “DEAF OR HARD OF HEARING” (S 3142) — The House gave initial approval to a measure, already approved by the Senate on June 23, that would strike outdated language from state laws that refer to people who are deaf or hard of hearing as being “hearing impaired.” The legislation replaces the term “hearing impaired” with the phrase “deaf or hard of hearing.” The Senate bill was sponsored by Sen. Cindy Creem (DNewton). “Words shape how we see one another, and our laws are no exception,” said Creem when the Senate fi rst approved the measure on June 23. “This bill takes a simple but important step toward ensuring that the words we use reflect respect, accuracy and the preferences of the communities they describe. I’m proud the Senate is taking decisive action to help modernize our statutes and affi rm the dignity of deaf and hard of hearing individuals across Massachusetts, and I’m grateful to the students of Newton’s CAPS Deaf and Hard of Hearing Program for bringing this issue to my attention.” “Members of the deaf and hard-of-hearing community have been advocating for this change for years, and they made a compelling case that the language currently found in our laws no longer refl ects the people it is meant to describe,” said Sen. Nick Collins (D-South Boston) when the measure was considered by the Senate. “This legislation makes a commonsense update to our statutes and refl ects the respect that community deserves. Our laws should evolve alongside the people they serve, and it is important that the language we use refl ects both the dignity of all residents and the commonwealth’s commitment to treating every person with respect. It is a small change on paper, but an important step in ensuring our laws continue to refl ect the values of Massachusetts.”
17 Publizr Home