Question 6 would dedicate sales tax on sporting goods to a conservation fund
(6-minute read)
This series, examining the nine statewide ballot questions on the November 3, 2026, Massachusetts ballot, continues with Question 6, which asks voters whether to create a Nature for All Fund that would receive state sales tax revenue from sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf vehicles, and golf courses to pay for natural resource conservation.
What Question 6 would do
Question 6, titled “Nature for All Fund Initiative,” is an initiative petition that would create a new state fund for natural resource conservation. Subject to appropriation by the Legislature, the fund would receive 50% of the state sales and use tax collected on sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses during its year of operation. After July 1, 2028, it would receive 100% of that revenue. The law would exclude money already directed to the MBTA and the School Modernization and Reconstruction Trust Fund, and it would take effect July 1, 2027.
The state Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs would spend the money on natural resource conservation, which the petition defines as protecting drinking water, streams, rivers, lakes, coasts, farms, and forests, connecting open spaces, preserving lands of indigenous cultural significance, and creating or improving parks, trails, greenspaces, and outdoor recreation access. State agencies, municipalities, regional public entities, tribal governments, and public charities focused on conservation would be eligible to receive funding. The fund could also accept public and private donations, and unspent money would stay in the fund instead of returning to the state’s general fund at the end of the fiscal year.
A 15-member Nature for All Board made up of five state officials and ten public members appointed by the Governor would write the rules for how the money is spent. The public members would include representatives of underserved communities and indigenous peoples and at least one person with conservation expertise. Those rules would address environmental justice, access to and restoration of lands of indigenous cultural significance, and conservation alongside affordable housing development. The Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs would also report annually to legislative committees with environmental justice populations.
The state’s Executive Office of Administration and Finance found the measure would significantly impact state and local budgets, diverting tens of millions of dollars in tax receipts that currently support the state operating budget to the new fund, and could carry substantial implementation costs.
A yes vote would create that fund. A no vote would not create the fund or change how sales and use taxes are spent.
How other states handle it
Question 6 would not create a new tax. It would redirect sales tax revenue the state already collects. Nature for Massachusetts, the campaign supporting the measure, estimates that, if it had been applied in 2022, about $118M would have gone to the fund, based on $2.5B in sporting goods sales that year, according to Ballotpedia. Supporters have said the fund could receive more than $100M a year.
Three other states dedicate sporting goods tax revenue to conservation, according to Ballotpedia. Georgia places 75% of its sales tax revenue from outdoor recreation equipment in a conservation trust fund, Virginia directs sales tax of up to 2% of the sales price on specified outdoor equipment to its game protection fund, and Texas dedicates all of its sporting goods sales tax revenue to its parks and wildlife and historical commissions after voters approved the change in 2019 with 88% in favor. Colorado voters will also decide a question this November on retaining and spending sporting goods sales tax revenue for water, land, and outdoor recreation purposes.
Path to the ballot
The Attorney General announced the petition in August 2025 and cleared it for signature collection that September. In January 2026, the state certified sufficient valid signatures, sending the proposal to the Legislature as House Bill 5005.
The Special Joint Committee on Initiative Petitions held a hearing on March 23, 2026. On May 4, a majority of the committee voted to recommend that the Legislature take no action, writing that the measure would rely on existing revenue already supporting other programs and could displace funding for existing priorities, including work done through the Department of Conservation and Recreation. The committee also noted that because the petition is subject to appropriation, passage would not itself require the money to be spent and would “neither guarantee additional funding nor materially change the status quo.” The Legislature did not act by the May 5 deadline, and organizers gathered additional signatures to qualify Question 6 for the ballot on July 17, 2026.
The case in favor
Supporters include Governor Maura Healey, Mass Audubon, The Trustees, The Nature Conservancy, the Appalachian Mountain Club, the Conservation Law Foundation, and REI, according to Ballotpedia, and the official argument cites more than 90 conservationists and businesses in support. They say the measure protects clean drinking water, prevents flooding and storm damage, reduces pollution in rivers, lakes, and the ocean, and conserves forests, farms, and wildlife habitat without raising taxes.
In the official argument filed with the state, supporters write that the measure “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.” Katie Theoharides, CEO of The Trustees, said the state has “a very limited window to protect” the last large tracts of open space in urban communities, according to Ballotpedia.
The case against
No organized group filed an argument against Question 6 in the state voter guide, so the Secretary of the Commonwealth’s office compiled the opposing argument in part from the Legislature’s majority report. It argues the measure creates an “unstable fiscal framework” by permanently earmarking up to 100% of the sales tax revenue from sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses, which would require reallocating or reducing money now directed to other state priorities. It also notes that because the Legislature keeps exclusive authority over appropriations, the money might not actually be allocated to the fund even if voters approve it.
The Republican Party of Massachusetts opposes the measure, arguing that “earmarking dollars for a single purpose reduces the flexibility lawmakers need to address the Commonwealth’s most pressing priorities each year,” according to Ballotpedia.
Where to find the full guide
The Information for the Voters guide is available online through the Secretary of the Commonwealth's Elections Division. It is offered in English, Spanish, Traditional Chinese, Vietnamese, and Khmer, and an audio version is available. Residents with questions can contact the Elections Division at 617-727-2828.
The series continues later this week with Question 7.
