By Bob Katzen
The House 137-8 and then 139-4, Senate 39-1, approved and sent to Gov. Maura Healey a $3.9 billion economic development package that supporters say would make bold investments in life sciences, climate tech, AI and small businesses, “building on Massachusetts’ national leadership and creating an environment where businesses and workers thrive.”
The package increases the annual tax credit authorization for the life sciences industry from $30 million to $40 million. Other provisions include $400 million for the MassWorks Infrastructure Program to support public infrastructure projects and create jobs; $150 million for library construction projects; $103 million for AI in systems across the state; $100 million for infrastructure improvements in rural communities; $21 million for resilience in agriculture and fishing; and $40 million for food science innovations.
“This economic development bill maximizes assets and opportunities and ensures Massachusetts will continue to lead the way toward a robust, adaptable and innovative future,” said Sen. Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Senate Chair of the Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. “The bill provides meaningful investments in life sciences, climatetech and small businesses.”
“This legislation will ensure the commonwealth can inject millions of dollars into critical sectors, develop the state’s workforce, grow our economy and make Massachusetts more competitive,” said Rep. Jerry Parisella (D-Beverly), House Chair of the Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. “Policy provisions include permitting reforms, educator diversity, consumer protections around ticketing and home improvement contractors, workforce training and rural development. These, along with meaningful tax credits and incentives for life sciences and climatetech will help keep Massachusetts a leader in vital industries.”
“This well-rounded economic development package makes significant, targeted investments into major sectors of the commonwealth’s economy,” said Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, (D-Boston), chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means. “By renewing our commitment to the life sciences industry, and by making significant new investments into climatetech, we will be elevating the commonwealth’s economy to be able to compete and thrive for years to come.”
Rep. Nick Boldyga (R-Southwick) said this “so-called economic development” bill contains major education and civil service reforms. “That alone is enough for a ‘No’ vote,” said Boldyga, “They should be separate bills. But regardless of that, this bill will continue to march the commonwealth down a destructive path of reckless government spending. It’s full of pork, tax breaks for special interest groups and over $400 million in more subsidies for offshore wind that is destroying our coastline, killing our whales and decimating our fishing industry.”
Boldyga continued, “[It] also includes dangerous DEI language that would allow for exemptions of certain certification tests for public school teachers in order to meet diversity goals, incorporates ‘culturally responsive training,’ requires schools to create ‘diversity plans,’ and creates DEI officers and other mandatory DEI roles within our schools.”
“While I support many of the funding initiatives in the bill, I have concerns with outside sections of the bill that have nothing to do with economic development which I simply cannot support,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton). “For example, the SAPHE act, which is about public health and dramatically expands the power of state health officials while diminishing local control and leading to lower levels of accountability which could cause severe economic impacts on businesses and individuals.”
Fattman continued, “I do not agree with the portions of the bill that lower the standards of licensure for teachers and physicians, especially at a time where we should expect nothing but excellence from our teachers and doctors. Where too many of the sections were unrelated to economic development, it led to my ‘No’ vote, and these sections are troubling and distracting from the intended purpose of this legislation. Quite frankly, I believe the public is tired of this approach to legislating. Instead, we should have included practical ways to reduce the cost of living for Massachusetts residents struggling to make ends meet because of affordability issues in the state, such as tax breaks for childcare and/or middle class families.”
(A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.)
Rep. Christine Barber Yes/Yes Rep. Mike Connolly Yes/Yes Rep. Paul Donato Didn’t vote/Didn’t vote Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven Yes/Yes Sen. Patricia Jehlen Yes