[ad_1]
Heeding Gov. Maura Healey’s call for the Bay State to become more competitive for federal funding, lawmakers are moving ahead with one of the governor’s plans to attract more money to the state from Washington. ing.
In October, Mr. Healy proposed using interest earned from the state’s rainy day fund as matching funds for federal grants. This policy proposal was proposed to better help Massachusetts compete for billions of federal dollars in interstate competition.
The Senate Ways and Means Committee advanced its own version of the Healey bill (S 2482) on Monday, and the Senate added it to its agenda for formal legislative action scheduled for Thursday.
The bill would require the State Comptroller to transfer Stabilization Fund interest quarterly to new federal matching debt, as long as the Stabilization Fund has not decreased in the prior year and its balance exceeds 10 percent of the state budget. It will be transferred to the reduction fund. income. The state’s stabilization fund, or “rainy day” fund, is now at an all-time high of $8.1 billion, Secretary of Administration and Finance Matt Gorzkowitz said Monday.
As states seek federal funding, the bill would make $750 million in state funds available over the next three years, as well as $50 million in matching for local government-led projects seeking federal funding. Funds may become available.
Money from Washington could go toward infrastructure projects related to road, bridge, and public transportation repairs, investments related to climate change impacts, power grid modernization, broadband expansion, and other related investments. be.
Money in the new fund could also be used to reduce state debt or reduce or eliminate long-term state debt without further appropriation by Healey’s administration or Secretary of the Treasury, according to the bill’s summary.
Doug Howgate, president of the Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation, said the portion of the bill that would allow the fund to pay off its debt is also intended to help attract federal funding.
“Part of that has to do with the need to make sure these resources are adaptable. The way we pursue federal funding often ends up proving alignment with the states. “But it could also make sense for us to pay off debt sooner than expected, potentially freeing up other areas of our capital budget,” Howgate said.
Officials estimate that Massachusetts could secure more than $17 billion in aid through the federal Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the Inflation Control Act, and the CHIPS and Science Act, and Healey’s proposal already provides $2 billion in matching funds identified in the current funding pool will be augmented. Revenue designed to leverage more federal aid.
“We have to be aggressive, and we know other states are doing the same,” Goshkovic said at a news conference in October. “This bill will help separate Massachusetts from the rest of the country by putting substantial dedicated resources on the table. It will also help to ensure that we are serious and ready to take on these projects.” It sends a clear message to Washington:
Mr. Healy introduced the bill in the Senate. Rather than refer the bill to a joint committee (the route most bills go), the Senate sent the bill to the Ways and Means Committee. The bill appears to be moving forward without the benefit of public hearings to get feedback on it.
Asked about the bill moving forward without a public hearing, a spokesperson for Senate Ways and Means Chairman Michael Rodriguez said in an emailed statement: “As is common with bills introduced by governors, this bill was initially referred to the Committee on Ways and Means.”After careful consideration with internal and external stakeholders, the State of Means announced that the current We were able to make recommendations to wisely invest interest from the Stabilization Fund to ensure the states’ fair share of federal funds. ”
The Senate’s maneuvering against the Healey bill produced no public response from the House.
Although much of the Healey bill and the Senate appropriations bill overlap, there are some differences related to the long-term planning of the fund.
“After three years, the Healey government would have allowed the fund to continue and be used for so-called PAYGO capital, with ongoing infrastructure maintenance costs. I think the Senate would abolish the fund after three years,” Howgate said. he said. “But I think the most important thing right now is the approach related to federal funds. If stabilization interests continue to be a strong source of resources, rather than committing to that, a longer-term approach. I think it makes sense to give ourselves time to think about something now. ”
Howgate said lawmakers should focus on how to prioritize putting Massachusetts in the lead in raising federal funds when the amount of aid currently coming out of Washington is a “unique opportunity.” said.
“The bill the committee reported today provides prudent fiscal measures that can be used to effectively stretch and maximize taxpayer dollars to put the Commonwealth in the best position to compete for these lucrative federal funds. At the same time, it guarantees our continuity,” Rodriguez said in a statement, “to protect our rainy day savings and adhere to sound fiscal discipline. I thank the Administration and the Senate President for taking this cost-saving initiative to maximize federal benefits.” We offer funding opportunities to support projects throughout our state. ”
[ad_2]
Source link
