Question 6: Natural Resource Conservation Fund
Statewide — all of Massachusetts
General election · Tuesday, November 3, 2026
- Placed on the ballot by initiative petition: the Information for Voters labels it a law proposed by initiative petition on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 6, 2026. The Legislature's Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions issued the legislative reports reproduced in the same booklet.[1]
The question on the ballot
Do you approve of a law summarized below, on which no vote was taken by the Senate or the House of Representatives before May 6, 2026? Natural Resource Conservation Fund: This proposed law would establish a Nature for All Fund that, subject to appropriation by the Legislature, would receive 50% of state taxes collected from the sale and use of sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses for the first year of its operation. After July 1, 2028, the Nature for All Fund would begin receiving, subject to appropriation by the Legislature, 100% of state taxes collected on the sale and use of sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses. The sales tax revenue received by the Nature for All Fund would exclude sales tax revenue transferred to the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority State and Local Contribution Fund and the School Modernization and Reconstruction Trust Fund. The proposed law would allow the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs to spend the money in the Nature for All Fund for natural resource conservation. The proposed law would allow public and private donations to the Nature for All Fund. The proposed law would prevent the state comptroller from transferring surplus funds in the Nature for All Fund at the end of the fiscal year. It would also allow state agencies, municipalities, public charities involved in natural resource conservation, tribal governments, and other regional public entities to receive money from the Nature for All Fund. Natural resource conservation would include the conservation or restoration of land to protect drinking water, streams, rivers, lakes, coasts, farms, forests, connectivity between open spaces, and lands and natural resources of indigenous cultural significance. Natural resource conservation would also include the creation, improvement, and management of parks, trails, greenspaces or outdoor recreation access. The proposed law would establish a 15-member Nature for All Board that consists of five state officials and ten members of the public appointed by the Governor. The proposed law would require the ten members of the public to include representatives of underserved communities and indigenous peoples and at least one person with expertise or experience in natural resource conservation. The proposed law would allow the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs to spend money from the Nature for All Fund to hire staff to manage the fund. The proposed law would also require the Nature for All Board to establish rules about how the money in the Nature for All Fund should be spent, including rules regarding alignment with environmental justice principles, access to and restoration of lands and natural resources of indigenous cultural significance, promotion of affordable housing development, and other matters regarding spending and bond issuance. The proposed law would require the state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs to submit an annual report to various state committees regarding the funds spent to buy or improve land in cities and towns containing environmental justice populations. The proposed law would take effect on July 1, 2027.[1]
The measure would create a Nature for All Fund that, subject to appropriation by the Legislature, would receive 50% of state taxes on sales and use of sporting goods, recreational vehicles and golf courses in its first year and 100% after July 1, 2028, for natural resource conservation. A 15-member Nature for All Board would set spending rules, and the fund could receive public and private donations. It would take effect July 1, 2027. Statement of fiscal consequences (Executive Office for Administration and Finance): The proposed law would have a significant impact on state and local budgets. While a full fiscal analysis is not feasible, it is estimated that, on an annual basis, the proposed law would automatically divert tens of millions of dollars of tax receipts that are currently supporting the state operating budget to the new fund. This proposed law would also have substantial implementation costs.[1]
A YES vote means
A YES VOTE would create a fund that could be utilized for natural resource conservation that would receive some state taxes collected on the sale and use of sporting goods and recreational vehicles, and the use of golf courses.
A NO vote means
A NO VOTE would not create this natural resource conservation fund or change how sales and use taxes are spent.
The law today
Under the fiscal statement, the sales and use tax receipts the measure would direct to the Nature for All Fund are "currently supporting the state operating budget." A No vote "would not create this natural resource conservation fund or change how sales and use taxes are spent" (official statement).[1]
Official fiscal estimate
Executive Office for Administration and Finance: the proposed law "would have a significant impact on state and local budgets." A full fiscal analysis is not feasible, but it is estimated that annually it "would automatically divert tens of millions of dollars of tax receipts that are currently supporting the state operating budget to the new fund," and it "would also have substantial implementation costs."[1]
Arguments made for
- In the 150-word argument in favor signed by Mass Audubon, as printed in the Information for Voters: "Question 6 doesn’t raise taxes or create a new tax. It dedicates the sales tax we already pay on sporting goods to protecting water and nature, and requires strict oversight and annual reporting so we can see how funds are spent."[1]
Arguments made against
- In the majority report of the Legislature's Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions, as printed in the Information for Voters: "after careful consideration, a majority of the Committee concludes that the Petition, as written, raises questions regarding fiscal impacts, programmatic displacement, and constraints on administrative flexibility."[1]
On record in support
On record in opposition
- A majority of the Legislature's Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions voted May 4, 2026 to recommend that the General Court take no action on the petition (majority report). The Information for Voters states there was no organized group urging a No vote when it was printed[1]
Campaign money
Receipts reported to the Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance (OCPF) by committees registered for this question, calendar years 2025 and 2026 combined, as published in OCPF's ballot question reports and retrieved Oct 19, 2026 (through each committee's most recent filing). Supporting ($2,934,989 total): Vote Yes for Water and Nature $2,934,989 | Opposing: no committees registered with OCPF. Committees registered on more than one question report one total for all of them, so these figures overlap across questions.[2]
Research notes & limits
Ballot text, official yes/no statements and fiscal statements are taken from the Secretary of the Commonwealth's 2026 Information for Voters booklet (PDF text extracted and checked by script). Arguments are quoted from the signed 150-word pro/con statements, which the Commonwealth states reflect the authors' opinions and are not certified as accurate. No signed argument against appears: the booklet states there was no organized group urging a No vote and prints text compiled by the Secretary's office, which is not quoted here. The booklet's own summary is the Attorney General's; the Secretary's page and Ballotpedia could not be fetched (bot protection), so the ballot list was confirmed from the booklet itself, which covers nine questions. Added Oct 19, 2026: supporters/opponents are the signers of the Information for Voters arguments, committees registered with OCPF for each question (OCPF lists each committee as supporting or opposing), and the Legislature's committee reports printed in the booklet; no endorsement lists from other organizations were verified. Campaign-finance figures are from the OCPF reports API, which publishes year-to-date totals by committee and does not state a single as-of date.
Sources · 2
Researched 2026-10-19. Green citations are official government records.
- 1.2026 Massachusetts Information for Voters (State Election, November 3, 2026) · Secretary of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts Official record
- 2.OCPF ballot question committee reports, 2026 (committees and year-to-date receipts) · Massachusetts Office of Campaign and Political Finance · 2026-10-19 Official record