Mass. House advances bill aimed at tackling energy affordability

With thousands of residents still in the dark after a massive blizzard, the Massachusetts House voted Thursday to advance a bill to address the high utility bills across the state.

The House bill (H 5151) seeks to cut roughly $1 billion from the Mass Save program's marketing and administrative budgets, return 70% of alternative compliance payments (ACPs) to ratepayers through mid-2029, expand clean energy procurement authority, ease political barriers to nuclear development by repealing a voter law that placed restrictions on it, and delay an offshore wind contracting deadline by two years to 2029.

The bill is a redraft of the legislation that the Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Committee supported in the fall, but does not include the committee's proposal to change the state's binding mandate to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% below 1990 levels by 2030. The latest draft is the product of meetings House leaders held with all members, which House Ways and Means Chairman Aaron Michlewitz has said featured "a lot of varying of opinions in relation to how to proceed."

The House passed the bill 128-27 just before 10:15 p.m. Thursday. Democratic Reps. Mike Connolly of Cambridge and Erika Uyterhoeven of Somerville voted with the Republican caucus in opposition to the bill while independent Rep. Susannah Whipps voted in favor.

House leaders defended the bill after a closed-door caucus Thursday, speaking with reporters inside Speaker Ron Mariano's office — an unusual move prompted by hallways filled with protesters upset about the proposed cuts to Mass Save, the energy efficiency program geared toward reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Energy costs and affordability have become a central policy and political issue on Beacon Hill and in the 2026 gubernatorial race. Gov. Maura Healey filed her own energy affordability plan and in January announced that the state would spend $180 million as part of a bid to temporarily reduce residential electric and gas bills this winter. The median Massachusetts household spent 3% of its income on energy bills in 2024, the state said in its most recent climate report card.

Michlewitz expects Bay Staters will see "immediate cost savings" as a result of the ACP rebates and Mass Save cuts. Those provisions, along with a reduction in net metering credit amounts and certain charge reforms, are anticipated to save ratepayers almost $3 billion, according to the Ways and Means Committee.

Environmental activists have argued this week that the House's cut to Mass Save would "devastate" the state's energy efficiency program and grind it to a halt.

"Energy affordability and clean energy are not at odds – fundamentally, the same solutions needed to address underlying drivers of energy costs are those that will make the grid cleaner, more flexible, and more efficient," Kyle Murray, Massachusetts program director at the Acadia Center, said. "The House has advanced a promising updated package of policy reforms that better recognizes this reality, but more work must be done to rectify the major remaining red-flag and remove arbitrary and counterproductive cuts to energy efficiency, which should remain the anchor of the Commonwealth's energy affordability strategy. Failing to do so will make this package a net-loser for families, who will be left paying dearly for more expensive conventional fuel and infrastructure."

Asked whether lawmakers were trading long-term savings for short-term relief, Mariano deferred to Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy Chairman Mark Cusack.

Cusack described the reduction as "a one-year pause" and the cut as "focused on the administrative and marketing budgets, which are bloated." He said the cuts are "not at the programmatic level," but instead target back-end costs and incentives "lingering from when the program was created."

"But again, this is still going to be the second-largest program in the country, and still the highest per capita in the country," Cusack said.

He added that the inspector general would review the program and "report back to us so we can reform it to make sure that it is truly a cost saving and energy efficiency program."

"I don't think it's going to kill the program or cost people anything," Cusack said. "It's going to be a savings to the ratepayers in the short term and then making sure the program actually works in the long term."

Michlewitz said lawmakers have heard from constituents frustrated with the program's administration.

"We want to put a pause on it, allow us to maybe find some different pieces from an IG report, and then allow that thing to grow long term and to continue to be a leading program in the country, as it is currently, right now," he said.

Mariano said House members raised complaints during internal meetings about constituents facing delayed rebates from the program.

Asked about the political sensitivity of the Mass Save vote, especially for members facing tight races in November, the speaker said the private meetings made him confident he has the votes to advance the bill.

Mariano said Rep. Mark Sylvia, who was the commissioner of the Department of Energy Resources and energy undersecretary of the Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs under former Gov. Deval Patrick, said he'd support the bill.

"We had a former chairman of this whole thing under the Patrick administration get up and say that it is time. It is time to look at this ... So that gives me some confidence in the fact that even the people who have administered this program realize it doesn't go as smoothly as we would like it to go," Mariano said.

The bill addresses alternative energy sources but does not touch the 2030 climate mandates. Massachusetts law requires that emissions reductions reach at least 50% below 1990 levels in 2030. Based on 2022 data, which the state says is the most up-to-date it has, Massachusetts has seen a 26% reduction in statewide gross emissions since 1990.

While environmental activists took Cusack to task in the fall for suggesting the state back off of its 2030 commitment, the local leader of the National Federation of Independent Business said Thursday that's exactly what his small business members want to see.

"Today's energy reform bill includes some positive steps towards affordability like reducing the Mass Save budget and ACP refunds, but until Beacon Hill addresses the carbon reduction mandates, problems will persist," Christopher Carlozzi, NFIB state director in Massachusetts, said. "Massachusetts policymakers must ultimately reconsider the state's self-imposed 2030 and 2050 carbon reduction mandates, or real relief from skyrocketing energy bills will become a recurring challenge."

Cusack told reporters Thursday, "In terms of the climate activists criticizing this, they offer no solution to the affordability crisis. It's not on their agenda to save people money. It is on ours."

If or when the Senate takes up the issue of energy and affordability, that chamber's bill seems unlikely to concede the state's 2030 decarbonization target.

"No. I believe that we need to continue to balance our climate goals and our goals to make energy more affordable," Senate President Karen Spilka said Wednesday when asked if it was a mistake to start the state down the road of electrification. "I will not back off for our climate. I was one of the original two lead sponsors of the Global Warming Solutions Act years ago, and I still believe in those goals. We need to keep them forefront and we need to keep working for them. Our planet, our children, our children's children depend upon that. It's just too important."

Reporters also pressed leaders on what was not included in the House bill, noting that Healey's energy proposal contained a provision limiting utilities' ability to recover lobbying costs from ratepayers.

"It's more complicated. It's a nice PR hit," Cusack said. "In terms of any meaningful savings? No."

The House bill would also extend to June 30, 2029 (from June 30, 2027) the deadline for the state to secure additional "cost-effective long-term contracts" for offshore wind energy generation, according to a committee summary. Massachusetts has been on a decade-long quest for offshore wind power and so far has landed one lasting contract for about 800 megawatts.

The bill attempts to remove a barrier to nuclear energy by repealing a 1982 law that established requirements for voter approval and legislative certification of new nuclear power plants or low-level radioactive waste disposal or storage facilities. Healey proposed to remove the same restriction in her energy bill.

"I'm a kid who grew up in the shadows of Seabrook Nuclear Power Plant, right? I grew up [in] seacoast New Hampshire ... and also in the aftermath maybe of Three Mile Island. I understand, like, people's visceral response and concern about nuclear power. I also know that technology's evolved," Healey said at a budget hearing earlier this month.

She spoke about advances in small modular nuclear and fusion technologies, adding, "I think we should be exploring all of these things and supporting all of these things. I do think, in fairness about any vote to the residents, it's our responsibility as electeds to have that conversation, to answer questions, and to make sure that there is education about this. Because, you know, there's real concerns not just with leaks and the spectacle of disasters, but just storage of spent fuel, right, which needs to be accounted for, which we need to address. So, I'd like to see us continue with those discussions."