WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 2222

Relates to the retention of state records; repealer

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Leroy Comrie and 6 co-sponsors

Authorizes and regulates public-private partnerships for water-related infrastructure, enabling private design, financing, construction, operation, and maintenance under a formal p

REFERRED TO INVESTIGATIONS AND GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 2222

Summary — S.2222 (Senate No. 2222, 2025)

An Act providing for alternative delivery of infrastructure projects (creates Chapter 40X — “Public‑Private Partnerships”)

Note: the supplied materials contain some inconsistent metadata (dates/committees/sponsors). This summary is based on the bill text filed as Senate No. 2222 (Commonwealth of Massachusetts, filed 1/9/2025) presented by Senator Bruce E. Tarr. The bill text in the file establishes a statutory framework for public‑private partnerships (P3s) for water‑related infrastructure.

Purpose and intent

To authorize and regulate public‑private partnership agreements between public agencies and private entities for the design, construction, financing, operation, maintenance, repair or replacement of certain water‑related infrastructure (an “eligible project”), and to establish procurement, performance, revenue and default rules applicable to such agreements.

Key definitions

  • Eligible project: buildings or facilities (and related collection/distribution infrastructure) used for public water supply/treatment, stormwater treatment/disposal, wastewater treatment/disposal, or flood control.
  • Public agency: municipality(s), redevelopment authority, or water/sewer/district authorities.
  • Public‑private partnership agreement: contract between a public agency and private entity covering lease, operation, financing, design, construction, maintenance, and related services.
  • Operator / Offeror / Responsible offeror; Material default; Revenue; Service payment; User fee — all explicitly defined.

Main provisions and changes

  • Creates a new Chapter 40X authorizing P3 agreements for eligible projects.
  • Exempts such agreements from specific bidding/statute provisions (sections of chapters 149A, 7C, 30, and parts of chapter 149), but generally subjects procurements to chapter 30B (procurement law) with enumerated exceptions.
  • Procurement process:
    • Public agencies must solicit competing proposals via an RFP; unsolicited proposals may be rejected and cannot be approved without following specified procedures.
    • RFPs must specify how proposals will be evaluated and how “responsible offerors” are identified.
    • RFPs must set mandatory performance guarantees and minimum design requirements, and require acceptance testing after construction.
    • If the selected responsible offeror is not the lowest overall cost (including capital, O&M, life‑cycle costs), the agency must explain the award in writing (per chapter 30B language).
  • Financial and service arrangements:
    • Defines revenue sources as user fees and/or service payments.
    • Allows for performance‑based service payments from public agencies to operators.
    • Authorizes user fees or rate structures imposed by the agency or operator under the P3 agreement (subject to agreement terms).
  • Default and oversight:
    • Defines “material default” and requires notice and cure periods; material defaults include failures that jeopardize public service or materially harm agency finances or users.
    • Places many determinations (e.g., responsible offeror, material adverse impacts) in the public agency’s discretion, within procedures in the agreement.

Who is affected

  • Municipalities, regional water/sewer/flood control districts and redevelopment authorities (public agencies) — may use P3s.
  • Private entities (designers, builders, financiers, operators) — can submit proposals, finance, construct and/or operate eligible projects.
  • Ratepayers and users of water/stormwater/wastewater/flood control systems — could experience changes in service delivery and fee structures.
  • State and local oversight entities — responsible for procurement compliance and monitoring performance guarantees.

Potential impacts and considerations

  • Potential benefits: access to private capital and project management expertise, performance‑based delivery, accelerated project timelines, and possibly innovation in design and operations.
  • Potential risks: transfer of operational control to private parties, changes to user fees or rate structures, long‑term contractual obligations and contingent liabilities for public agencies, and the need for strong procurement transparency and contract oversight to protect public interest.
  • The bill emphasizes agency discretion in evaluation and contracting; robust RFP drafting, performance guarantees, acceptance testing, and clear default/remedy terms will be important to manage risks.

Procedural status (from provided materials)

  • Filed as Senate No. 2222 (1/9/2025). Presented by Bruce E. Tarr; referred to relevant committee(s) per the file. (The supplied legislative actions list multiple and partly inconsistent referrals/hearings; consult the official legislative docket for up‑to‑date status.)

Caveat: The supplied bill text is truncated in places. Review of the full enacted text or the complete bill draft is recommended to confirm additional provisions (e.g., term limits, transfer/termination rights, indemnities, finance specifics, reporting/audit requirements).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.