I’m a tree-hugging nature lover and yet I will be voting against Question 6 in November. Why? Question 6 diverts up to $100 million in tax revenue to fund pro-environmental projects. While I strongly support the idea of spending money to help the environment, as usual, the devil is in the details. First, that $100 million is being diverted from the general fund. As such, funding for other things will likely need to be cut. This isn’t just “free money”.

Who will decide how this money will be spent? This is where I have a major problem which solidified my decision to vote No. The law creates a 15-member board, including ten members of the public appointed by the Governor. Ten well-connected people will get plum jobs spending our money. Could we find a better way to promote nature without creating a bunch of patronage jobs?

Gary Chase

West Roxbury

Advertisement