The legislative process is still ongoing. The House and Senate must reconcile their versions of the energy affordability legislation before a final bill can move forward.

As the conference committee continues its work, we’ll be advocating to ban predatory third-party energy suppliers and protecting the great climate progress our Commonwealth has made through the Mass Save program.

Ban Predatory Third-Party Energy Suppliers

Both the House and Senate versions of the legislation include language allowing cities and towns to ban third-party energy suppliers. This is an important step toward giving communities more power to protect residents from deceptive and costly energy contracts.

The final legislation could still change as it moves through the conference committee process. That’s why we’ll continue pushing for strong local authority and consumer protections.

Mass Save Reform

Mass Save helps Massachusetts residents lower their energy bills, improve home comfort, and reduce climate pollution. However, there is still work to do to make sure the program is accessible and works for all communities.

This blog from Green Energy Consumers Alliance discusses the potential $1 billion Mass Save cut and its impact on the program and workforce. It’s a good read for understanding what’s at stake.

As lawmakers continue discussing energy affordability, we must advocate for:

• No cuts to the Mass Save Budget: The State House has proposed a $1B cut, nearly 40% of the remaining budget. The State Senate has not proposed any cuts.

• Keep the Program Simple: The State House and State Senate propose adding unnecessary red-tape that will increase wait times and make it harder for Boston families to use Mass Save. Specifically, Section 103 of the legislation will mean

• Renters face new paperwork barriers.

• Moderate income households lose access to weatherization benefits.

• NOAH properties (Naturally Occurring Affordable Housing) become nearly impossible to serve.

• Marketrate households continue to dominate upgrades funded by lower income ratepayers.

• We must oppose section 103 so Mass Save can build on the progress it’s already made.