After years of paying into efficiency programs but receiving relatively little back, low-income families are finally receiving a fairer share of investments. The 2025–2027 Mass Save plan included a $1.78 billion equity commitment, the strongest in state history:

  • $1.3 billion for low- and moderate-income families
  • $600 million for renters
  • $72 million for workforce development

Proposed changes to Mass Save and Alternative Compliance Payments would reverse these historic gains, cutting off programs just when they have begun to operate effectively and equitably for low- and moderate-income families.

Mass Save equity tools are working.

  • Demand for low-income programs is surging. LMI incentives now represent 53% of total incentives, up from less than 30% in 2022.
  • “Hard-to-Reach” municipalities have increased program participation rates 42% for gas and 24% for electric, with 98% of them seeing increased participation.

Low-income spending has been rising, not falling.

  • In the 2019-2021 plan, only 12.3% of the budget was allocated to low-income programs.
  • In the 2025-2027 plan, low-income spending is now 26% of the budget.
  • Cutting Mass Save now would undo years of progress in expanding the program’s reach.

These investments are not symbolic.

  • These programs are the financial “teeth” behind the Performance Incentive Mechanism (PIM)—the tool that ties 50% of utility performance incentives to equity outcomes.
  • Without this funding, utilities are effectively relieved of their binding equity mandates.

Cutting ACPs would harm equity communities rather than help them.

  • Returning 70% of ACP revenue to ratepayers would save little money for LMI families.
  • A lack of ACP funds would eliminate programs like Affordable Housing Decarbonization Technical Assistance, Solar for All matching funds, Affordable Housing Decarbonization Grants, and Low-Income Solar Support programs. These programs provide significant, long-lasting benefits rather than just temporary bill credits.

The consequences of defunding or removing equity provisions from Mass Save & ACPs would be immediate and deeply felt among those who need its help the most. If we care about genuine equity and affordability, we’ll strengthen these programs, rather than gut them.

Sources: