Call to Action July 2024

We are in the home stretch of the legislative calendar—and we need your help once again to get the Drought Bill across the finish line. Contact your legislators to advocate for key provisions to be included in the final Climate Bill.

Different versions of the Climate Bill (S.2838/H.4884) have been passed by the Massachusetts House and Senate. A Conference Committee has been assembled to work out the differences and decide on a final proposal that will become law. Please contact the Conference Committee Members AND your own legislators (see below) to ask them to retain two important amendments to the Senate Bill:

• Drought Bill: Section 5 of the Senate Climate Bill. This bill has been a top priority of NepRWA for several years. Massachusetts faces increasing climate challenges, including more frequent and severe droughts that impact our state’s rivers, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and drinking water supplies. This bill is a small yet crucial step toward creating a proactive, coordinated, statewide drought response that safeguards our environment, public health, and the sustainability of our water supplies. Read more about the legislation from MassRivers by clicking here.
• Wetlands Restoration: Section 139 of the Senate Climate Bill. This provision would remove a barrier to restoring wetlands by resolving a conflict between two separate state programs that protect wetlands. Wetlands across the state provide innumerable resiliency benefits, protecting our communities from sea level rise and extreme weather events. They also store massive amounts of carbon, providing a low-cost source of emissions reductions and a crucial piece of our path to net zero by 2050. Restoration of degraded wetlands is essential for climate resilience, particularly for our coastal communities.

Urge your legislators to advocate to the Conference Committee to include these provisions in the final Climate Bill they refer out of Committee. The bill must be passed by July 31st, so please take action today!

Find your Senator and Representative by clicking here >>

Here’s a sample email to send to each of them (make sure you use the right title!):

Dear Senator/Representative,

Thank you for supporting strong climate legislation. I would like to make sure the final proposal addresses both climate adaptation and mitigation. Please contact the the Climate Bill Conference Committee and urge them to include the following in the final version of the bill:

Drought Bill: Section 5 of the Senate Climate Bill. This bill is a small yet crucial step toward creating a proactive, coordinated, statewide drought response that safeguards our environment, public health, and the sustainability of our water supplies. Massachusetts faces increasing climate challenges, including more frequent and severe droughts that impact our state’s rivers, wetlands, wildlife habitat, and drinking water supplies.

Right now the state can only require water conservation during a drought emergency – this amendment provides that authority earlier so we don’t have to wait until an emergency strikes–which is too late. The conservation measures would apply only to non-essential water use, leaving more water available for drinking, growing food, and public safety. Coordinating our response to drought will yield more sustainable waterways – and the people and wildlife that depend on them.  

Wetlands Restoration: Section 139 of the Senate Climate Bill. This provision would remove a barrier to restoring wetlands by resolving a conflict between two separate state programs that protect wetlands. Wetlands across the state provide innumerable resiliency benefits, protecting our communities from sea level rise and extreme weather events. They also store massive amounts of carbon, providing a low-cost source of emissions reductions and a crucial piece of our path to net zero by 2050. Restoration of degraded wetlands is essential for climate resilience, particularly for our coastal communities.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

As with the Climate Bill, the House and Senate each adopted a separate version of a Housing Bond Bill–a bill which authorizes the state to borrow money to help fund critical projects. A conference committee has therefore been appointed to work out the differences between the two bills and will decide on a final version. We ask that you contact your legislators and ask them to urge the Conference Committee to:

• SUPPORT the House earmark of $1 million for an MWRA connection for Walpole of the House version (line item 1599-1953). This will allow Walpole to continue to invest in housing to meet the crisis, while protecting local water supplies.

• OPPOSE Section 146 of the Senate version. Massachusetts is in a housing crisis, but the InterBasin Transfer Act (IBTA)–a law that regulates the movement of water resources from one watershed to another–has not been a barrier to housing development. This provision is aimed at undermining the important water resource protections included in the IBTA and should not be included in this bill.

The bill must be passed by July 31st, so please take action today!

Find your Senator and Representative by clicking here >>

Here’s a sample email to send to each of them (make sure you use the right title!):

Dear Senator/Representative:

Thank you for meeting the housing crisis head on with your support of a Housing Bond bill to support Massachusetts communities.

Our limited water resources are critical for public health, public safety, fish and wildlife, and recreation. I want to draw your attention to two provisions in the Housing Bond Bill with implications for water resources and ask that you urge the Conference Committee to:

• SUPPORT the House earmark of $1 million for an MWRA connection for Walpole of the House version (line item 1599-1953). This will allow Walpole, an important part of the Neponset River Watershed community, to continue to invest in housing to meet the crisis, while protecting local water supplies.
• OPPOSE Section 146 of the Senate version. This section is aimed at undermining the important water resource protections contained in the Inter Basin Transfer Act (IBTA). The IBTA has not been a barrier to housing development (only three (3) applications have ever been denied). The study proposed is aimed at undermining the important water resource protections included in the IBTA and should not be included in the bill.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.