BOSTON (WHDH) - From the rocky shoreline of Nantasket Beach to the wooded trails of Blue Hills Reservation and the quiet waters of Walden Pond, Massachusetts offers a rich patchwork of natural beauty that invites people to slow down and take notice. But maintaining these public lands and recreational spaces requires funding and decisions about how state money should be spent. That debate is at the center of Question 6.
The ballot question would dedicate a tax consumers already pay when buying sporting goods, recreational vehicles, or while at a golf course to land conservation. The proposed Nature for All Fund would support efforts to protect farms, forests, lakes, rivers, trails, and lands with cultural significance.
If approved, 50% of the revenue collected would go to the fund starting on July 1. After the first year, the Natural for All Fund would start to receive 100% of the state taxes collected.
Currently, that revenue goes into the Massachusetts general fund, where it can be used for a wide range of government programs and services. Supporters estimate the ballot question could generate $100 million annually, while a study by the Tufts Center for State Policy projects that revenue would be closer to $65 million.
The Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs would oversee the fund. The measure would also establish a 15-member board comprising five state officials and 10 public members appointed by the governor. These representatives would be from underserved communities, Indigenous populations, as well as at least one person with expertise in environmental conservation.
What supporters are saying
More than 100 environmental and conservation groups are rallying around Question 6. The ballot initiative is being led by Sam Anderson, senior director of government affairs at Mass Audubon.
Supporters say the measure would help Massachusetts meet its climate goals, including protecting 30% of the state’s land by 2030 and 40% by 2050.
“The way that we see it, there’s none of the state budget right now that’s going to natural resource conservation,” Anderson said. “That is something that has been the condition for decades, and we think that this is sort of long overdue and a priority for Massachusetts voters.”
The Trustees, a Massachusetts nonprofit land conservation organization, also supports the measure. Its environmental experts argue conservation initiatives are often among the first to lose funding when governments make budget cuts. They are urging voters to pass Question 6 to help preserve outdoor spaces for future generations.
“When you think about Question 6, think about your favorite place in nature growing up,” said Katie Theoharides, president & CEO of The Trustees. “Think about what it meant to you to be able to get outside and have a beautiful tree to sit under, or a park to walk in, or a beach to go to. That all takes funding, and it takes people like us coming together and saying, no, my community spaces are important.”
What opponents are saying
Question 6 has no formal opposition, but a report from the Legislature’s Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions raised concerns about the potential consequences of redirecting funds currently available for other state programs.
The committee, which reviews proposed ballot questions, warned that the measure could require the state to reallocate funding or reduce spending elsewhere.
“Implementation of the measure would require the reallocation or reduction of funds presently directed toward other state initiatives, including investments administered through agencies such as the Department of Conservation and Recreation,” the report states. “This raises questions of opportunity costs and the potential displacement of existing infrastructure and environmental funding priorities.”
There is also uncertainty about whether the money would ultimately be spent on conservation. Although the ballot measure would earmark the revenue for the Nature for All Fund, it could not guarantee the money would be used for environmental initiatives. Under the state constitution, the Legislature retains authority over spending decisions.
“You can’t force the Legislature to spend money in the way that you want,” said Evan Horowitz, executive director at the Tufts Center for State Policy Analysis. “So the Legislature can also just ignore it.”
Supporters acknowledge that legislative approval would still be necessary, but say they expect to work with lawmakers to secure funding for conservation.
“Obviously the question is subject to appropriation, but the Legislature is a partner in this as well, and they think nature is a priority also,” said Anderson. “So we hope to work with them going forward to implement this and make sure this is fully funded.”
(Copyright (c) 2026 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)