Natural Resource Conservation Fund
Would create no new tax, but redirect existing sales tax revenue from sporting goods, RVs, and golf courses into a dedicated conservation fund.
A YES vote
Creates a dedicated "Nature for All" fund financed by sales tax revenue already collected on sporting goods, recreational vehicles, and golf courses — half of that revenue before July 2028, and all of it afterward. A 15-member commission would oversee how the roughly $65 million a year gets spent. It doesn't require the Legislature to increase total conservation spending, only to spend this earmarked slice on it.
A NO vote
That sales tax revenue keeps flowing into the state's General Fund, as it does today, with no dedicated conservation earmark.
Who this affects
- Hunters, anglers, hikers, and outdoor recreation users
- Land conservation and recreation programs, which currently get about $400 million a year from general revenue
- The state's General Fund, which would lose this revenue stream
Who's for it, who's against it
Supporters say
The Nature for Massachusetts coalition — including Mass Audubon, The Nature Conservancy, and the Appalachian Mountain Club — sponsored the petition through its ballot committee, Vote Yes for Water and Nature.
Opponents say
No organized opposition campaign had surfaced as of August 2026.
Who's paying for the campaigns
Funding the YES side
Backed by the Nature for Massachusetts coalition (Mass Audubon, The Nature Conservancy, Appalachian Mountain Club) through its committee, Vote Yes for Water and Nature; exact totals weren't broken out in available filings.
Funding the NO side
No opposition spending has been reported.
Figures reflect filings as of late August 2026 and will shift before Election Day.
Official summary and full text: Secretary of the Commonwealth, Information for Voters. Background and funding figures compiled from nonpartisan research by Tufts University's Center for State Policy Analysis and OCPF campaign finance filings.