My Turn: Climate bill gives hope to opponents of Hanscom expansion

By Alex Chatfield, Trish O’Hagan, Lara Sullivan, and Kati Winchell

The climate bill just signed by Gov. Healey contains a provision that was not noted in the official summary but is profoundly important — an update to the Massport charter. From now on, Massport will be required to promote “environmental protection and resilience, reductions in greenhouse gas emissions, and environmental justice principles” in its decisions regarding its responsibilities and the entities with which it does business. Massport’s responsibilities, currently limited to the narrow roles of promoting commerce and economic growth, will therefore expand to include climate priorities. 

This update is encouraging to advocates across Massachusetts who oppose the proposed expansion of private jet infrastructure at Massport-owned Hanscom Field (separate from Hanscom Air Force Base). Massport is currently working with private developers to build a 522,380-square-foot expansion in hangar space for private jets — the largest such expansion in Hanscom’s history. An October 2023 study documented that at least half the private jet flights out of Hanscom go to vacation destinations like Martha’s Vineyard or the Super Bowl. They are airborne yachts for the ultra-wealthy.

Massport’s and Runway Realty Venture Inc.’s proposal for expansion has generated a storm of controversy. Opposition has been led by Stop Private Jet Expansion at Hanscom or Anywhere (SPJE). SPJE observes, based on an April independent analysis, that the proposed private jet hangar development at Hanscom alone could result in as many as 6,000 additional private jet flights annually, producing about 150,000 tons of carbon equivalent emissions every single year. If the expansion goes forward, private jet emissions from Hanscom alone could cancel nearly 70% of the environmental benefits of all the solar PV ever installed in Massachusetts and would offset the investment and hard work of many towns and cities to help the state meet the goals of its ambitious climate plans.

The legislation updating Massport’s charter follows EEA Secretary Tepper’s rejection of the developers’ draft environmental impact report (DEIR) in June. More than 1,500 public comments and over 13,500 petition signatures critical of the developers’ plans were submitted to MEPA (Mass. Office of Environmental Policy Act). Based in part on the volume of public response, as well as on independent analyses that were submitted, Tepper criticized the developers’ argument that the massive hangar expansion would decrease operations and reduce greenhouse gas emissions, calling it unsupported. She found that the report did not meet the requirements of Massachusetts law and directed the developers to produce a Supplemental DEIR that would address the many questions that the initial draft failed to consider adequately.

This was the context in which state Sen. Mike Barrett and Reps. Simon Cataldo, Michelle Ciccolo, Carmine Gentile, Ken Gordon, and Alice Peisch introduced language into the Mass. Climate Bill that would update Massport’s charter to prioritize reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. The Senate passed the bill on October 24 with a vote of 38-2, followed by a House vote of 128-17 on November 14. And on November 20, Gov. Healey signed it.

Sen. Barrett left no doubt that he expected the new language to prompt Massport to reconsider the project. “We live in an age where rampant economic growth is no longer sufficient as a raison d’etre for public agencies,” he said. “The governor has said that an all-government approach to climate change is needed, so now we ask of every single organization — Massport included — ‘What’s your role in fighting the existential crisis of our time?’” 

This is a pivotal moment. The legislature’s overwhelming support for a change in Massport’s charter sends a powerful message that the agency needs to align its own approach to climate change with the approach taken by the rest of the state. Massport’s first chance to show that it understands this new environment will be its stance toward the proposed Hanscom expansion. It’s already clear that that expansion is completely inconsistent with state climate change policy. It’s time for Massport to just say no.

“My Turn” is a forum for readers to offer their letters to the editor or views on any subject of interest to other Lincolnites. Submissions must be signed with the writer’s name and street address and sent via email to lincolnsquirrelnews@gmail.com. Items will be edited for punctuation, spelling, style, etc., and will be published at the discretion of the editor. Submissions containing personal attacks, errors of fact, or other inappropriate material will not be published.