By Bob Katzen

House 142-6, Senate 39-1, approved and sent to Gov. Maura Healey a $63.4 billion fiscal 2027 conference committee version of a state budget for the fiscal year that began July 1, 2026. The House and Senate had approved different versions of the budget and a conference committee hammered out this compromise version. The price tag is 4 percent higher than last year’s package.

“Our budget is a chance each year to make life more affordable for residents while strengthening the public services we all rely on, including our schools and transit systems—and the Senate delivered for fiscal year 2027,” said Senate President Karen Spilka (D-Ashland). “As a longtime advocate for expanded public education from cradle to career, I am especially proud of our commitment to reexamining how we address K-12 costs at the very moment we fulfill the promise of the Student Opportunity Act. Overall, this final budget protects our residents, grows opportunities, supports our municipalities and cuts costs for individuals and families.”

“As a result of the Trump Administration’s sweeping federal funding cuts, reckless trade policies and war with Iran, this budget has come during a period of significant economic uncertainty.” Said House Speaker Ron Mariano (D-Quincy). “That’s why I’m incredibly proud of the investments that this budget makes despite those challenges, from funding for free school meals and for the final year of the Student Opportunity Act, to robust support for the MBTA, to nearly $10 billion for cities and towns across the commonwealth – all without raising taxes.”

“Grounded in fiscal responsibility, the fiscal year 2027 budget leads with a steady hand and delivers a spending plan that does not raise any taxes or fees on residents and businesses of the commonwealth, while making major investments in education and local aid, emphasizing our continuing commitment to supporting all 351 cities and towns,” said Sen. Mike Rodrigues (D-Westport), Chair of the Senate Committee on Ways and Means.

Not everyone agreed.

“At a time when Massachusetts families and small businesses are pleading for affordability and meaningful tax relief, this budget delivers virtually neither,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton). “Instead, it continues the commonwealth’s perpetuated pattern of unsustainable spending growth while failing to prioritize the core services that residents rely on every day. Our focus should be on strengthening local communities, supporting municipal services, improving public safety and providing relief to hardworking taxpayers—not funding special interest initiatives such as legal defense funds for individuals who are unlawfully present in our state. Massachusetts can and must do better. We should be delivering a budget that reflects fiscal responsibility, affordability and the priorities of the people we were elected to serve. For those reasons, I was compelled to vote No.”

“Legislative leaders will point to a smaller rate of spending growth as evidence of fiscal restraint, but the underlying budget tells a different story,” said Paul Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “Rather than confronting structural spending problems, this budget depends on one-time funding sources and accounting shifts while continuing to expand programs that will place increasing pressure on taxpayers in the years ahead. Massachusetts has benefited for years from generous federal funding while failing to improve oversight and accountability. As those federal dollars become less certain, taxpayers could be left paying the price for years of poor fiscal management.”

“The State Legislature did it again—they passed a budget that prioritizes illegals over middle-class taxpayers, failed to do anything about the cost of living and neglected to provide any tax relief,” said Rep. John Gaskey (R-Carver). ”That’s why I unapologetically voted No on this boondoggle. Billions of dollars continue to flow to those who broke the law to come here. If you come to Massachusetts illegally, you can get legal counsel, shelter—even college tuition paid for on the taxpayers’ dime. That money is coming at the expense of local aid to our town governments. At a time when municipalities across the state are strapped and facing property tax overrides, the State Legislature preferred to shift aid from local government and instead give it to illegals.”

(A “Yes” vote is for the budget. A “No” vote is against it.)

Rep. Christine Barber Yes Rep. Mike Connolly Yes Rep. Paul Donato Yes Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven Yes Sen. Patricia Jehlen Yes