Sen. Sal DiDomenico announced he secured $10 million in the Senate’s new environmental bond bill for the Island End River Coastal Resilience Project, the flood-control effort along the Everett-Chelsea line.
That is real money for a real problem. Anybody who has watched that stretch during heavy rain or coastal flooding knows this is not one of those invented crises cooked up for a petition link. Water goes where it goes, and in this case it goes toward homes, roads, and businesses in Everett and Chelsea.
According to the Everett Independent, the funding was included in S.3050, the Senate’s “Mass Ready Act,” a $3.94 billion environmental bond bill. DiDomenico said the local earmark will help “address and prevent severe flooding along the coastline.”
He also put the broader point plainly enough: “Climate change is bringing severe and more frequent flooding to my district, so I am proud to bring funding directly to my communities to support their project that will protect residents and businesses along the coast.”
That is the part worth paying attention to. Protect residents and businesses. Not hold a forum. Not issue a statement. Not build an email list. Actual flood protection.
The bill still has a long list of statewide items attached to it, because Beacon Hill never misses a chance to stuff a big bond bill with everything from PFAS cleanup to trails, dams, culverts, and a retail plastic bag ban. Some of that may be useful. Some of it is the usual grab bag. But for Everett, the question is simpler: does this money get a vulnerable area fixed or not?
The Senate package includes $225 million for coastal infrastructure and resilience overall, plus $500 million for the Municipal Vulnerability Preparedness program, $120 million for PFAS remediation, and $521.6 million for dams. There is also $800.5 million for Department of Conservation and Recreation properties and roadways, which tells you the state at least understands that crumbling infrastructure and extreme weather are now a combined problem, not two separate ones.
DiDomenico also referenced “federal funding cuts” and said he was “heartened to see so many government leaders and community partners continuing to work together and fight for this essential development.”
Fine. But Everett should be less interested in the sentimental language and more interested in whether the state actually moves the project. Bond authorization is not the same thing as a bulldozer showing up. It means permission to borrow and spend. The real test comes later: design, permitting, contracting, and whether the money gets out the door before the next nasty storm reminds everyone why the project exists.
Still, if Beacon Hill is going to borrow money, this is a far better use of it than the usual ribbon-cutting nonsense. Flood protection along the Island End River is basic government work. It protects property, public infrastructure, and the people who pay the bills here.
That should not be controversial. In Everett, that alone almost makes it news.