Ballot Questions 4-6

Same day voter registration, more frequent tax refunds, freeing up sales tax to pay for more conserved land for recreation.

For a comprehensive explainer on the 2027 Massachusetts ballot questions, see the Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis.

Paid subcribers will get the Village Green’s nuanced editorial stances on the 9 questions later in the month.

Send your own letters to the editor to: 413villagegreen@gmail.com.

QUESTION 4: SAME DAY VOTER REGISTRATION

Nearly half of the US states offer same-day voter registration, but Massachusetts does not. Under current law citizens must register to vote at least 10 days ahead of time.

A YES on Question 4 would allow you to register on the same day you vote for most elections, starting in 2028.

The impact of this decision will likely be pretty small, as most voters in the state can register almost passively, through the Registry of Motor Vehicles.

A downside would be an added financial burden on local officials. They will have to come up with new procedures to enable same-day voter registration and pay for them without state aid, as no state funding would accompany a YES cote on Question 4.

QUESTION 5: MAKING TAX REFUNDS MORE FREQUENT

This question is not as straightforward as the prior questions.

Voters in 1986 enacted a tax law called Chapter 62F, whose purpose is to put more money into the hands of state taxpayers when times are good. But in fact the law has only been used twice, once when it was first enacted and once during COVID.

A YES vote on Question 5 would link payments directly to annual revenue, which would make payments more frequent than they’ve been, but not as dependable.

Taxpayers could expect a refund of between $200-$250, averaged out over the years when they do and do not get a refund check.

With these more frequent refunds state revenue would be reduced by .15%-.2%.

The organizations who brought Question 5 forward to voters are:

• Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance. This group includes the High Tech Council, the Pioneer Institute and the Massachusetts Competitive Partnership.

• Taxpayers for an Affordable Massachusetts. This is the ballot committee running the campaign, which received $1.6 million from the Massachusetts Opportunity Alliance.

It’s a small measure designed to get more money into the hands of taxpayers, but it would introduce instability into the system and likely trigger refunds even in low revenue years.

Note that, as Tufts points out, “The Massachusetts Legislature is currently working on a bill that would add new 62F refund requirements. If it passes, the impact of Question 5 might be more limited.”

QUESTION 6: SALES TAX DIVERTED TO FREE UP MORE LAND FOR CONSERVATION AND RECREATION

There is currently no dedicated funding mechanism for land and water conservation in Massachusetts. The state does fund grants to land trusts and communities, but it’s subject to the legislature’s discretionary appropriations each year.

Question 6 would create a dedicated stream to supplement that discretionary spending.

The money would come from sales tax on recreational equipment, such as camping gear, ski boots, golf clubs, fishing equipment, kayaks, canoes, paddleboards, and RVs. (Clothing is not included.) In other words, no new tax would be collected through Question 6, but a YES vote would redirect existing revenue from the general fund into the “Nature for All Fund.”

The fund would be phased in, getting 50% of the relevant revenue starting July 1, 2027 and rising to 100% after July 1, 2028.

I spoke to Wendy Ferris for background on #6, as she’s been the measure’s spokesperson in our area. She is the Regional Vice President for The Trustees of Reservations, for the Central and Valley regions of Massachusetts.

The coalition she’s part of estimates the Fund would collect up to $100 million a year, but that the Department of Revenue considers that number ambitious and puts it closer to $60 million.

The money would pay for two things:

1. New conservation and trails, with an explicit aim of reaching places that haven’t traditionally enjoyed such access, meaning cities and less affluent communities.

2. Stewardship of existing conserved land, to fight invasive plants and maintain and build trails. She called these “ongoing needs forever.”

Geographic and equity priorities are not explicit in the legislation. Rather, if Question 6 passes, a commission of between 12 and 15 members would be created to establish the implementation criteria, including how to weight geography and climate factors.

Ferris has not seen any organized opposition to Question 6, although, she says, some state legislators don’t like to obligate funds in this way. They want to make the appropriations decisions themselves, while the enactment of Question 6 would commit existing operating budget revenue to a specific purpose.

Question 6 is on the ballot through a grassroots, citizen petition, with a coalition of the Trustees, Mass Audubon, recreation groups and land trusts collecting roughly 300,000 signatures. It requires a simple majority vote to pass.