The Massachusetts Festivus Report
“I’ve Got a Lot of Problems With You People!”
Your Annual Airing of Grievances, Government Waste & Fiscal Nonsense
Every December, the Festivus pole goes up, and so does the frustration of Massachusetts taxpayers watching their money disappear into a black hole of commissions, studies, consultants, emergency contracts, unused office leases, and bureaucratic failures.
This year’s Massachusetts Festivus Report lays out — clearly, factually, and with publicly verifiable sources — some of the most wasteful, avoidable, and head-scratching state expenditures.
All while communities like Chicopee continue to fight for basic infrastructure funding, road repairs, safety improvements, and fair distribution of state resources.
Methodology & Definitions
All figures cited below are drawn from publicly available state budget documents, audits, Inspector General reports, or major news outlets citing official state data.
For the purposes of this report, “waste” does not mean illegal spending. It refers to taxpayer-funded expenditures that demonstrate at least one of the following:
• No measurable public benefit or outcome
• Repeated spending with no implementation or results
• Costs identified as inefficient or excessive by auditors or oversight agencies
• Redundant programs or contracts duplicating existing efforts
Where applicable, this report distinguishes between verified audited spending in FY2024 and projected or ongoing exposure across FY2024–FY2025 to avoid double counting.
Let the Airing of Grievances begin.
THE AIRING OF GRIEVANCES
Wasteful State Spending — With Dollar Amounts & Verified Public Sources
(Each grievance includes a taxpayer-right-to-know question + documented cost.)
1. The State Flag & Seal Redesign — $100,000+
Why is Massachusetts still spending public money on a redesign process years after the commission was formed and its work extended multiple times?
The FY25 state budget requires not less than $100,000 to support the Seal, Flag, and Motto Advisory Commission, including professional design services and public outreach.
Source:
https://budget.digital.mass.gov/summary/fy25/enacted/exec-economic-development/massachusetts-marketing-partnership/70080900/
2. The “West Mass” Branding Campaign — $750,000
Why did the Commonwealth spend $750,000 on a regional branding campaign that local leaders and residents neither requested nor saw measurable results from?
Source:
MassLive (April 2024)
https://www.masslive.com/politics/2024/04/state-spent-750k-on-west-mass-branding.html
3. MBTA Overtime Overruns — $2,600,000+
Why should Western Massachusetts taxpayers pay millions in overtime overruns for a transit system they do not use? Overtime overruns have consistently exceeded budgeted amounts, highlighting systemic workforce or scheduling issues that merit reform. The MBTA again exceeded overtime projections, costing millions beyond budgeted levels.
Source:
MassTaxpayers Foundation; MBTA Annual Financial Reports
https://www.masstaxpayers.org/mbta-finances
4. East–West Rail Studies — $3,000,000+
Why has Massachusetts spent more than $3 million studying the same rail corridor since 2016 without approving construction funding or a clear timeline? Millions have been spent on repeated studies over multiple years without a finalized route, a construction timeline, or a funding commitment. Despite repeated planning expenditures and occasional federal grants intended to move toward construction, no final financing plan or construction schedule has been adopted as of FY24.
Source:
MassDOT East–West Passenger Rail Study
https://www.mass.gov/east-west-passenger-rail-study
5. Electric School Bus Program — $50,000,000 (Policy Concern)
The Commonwealth appropriated $50 million for electric school buses before statewide charging infrastructure and cold-weather performance concerns were fully resolved.
This is a policy critique, not an audit finding, and is included here as a question of priorities rather than added to the verified waste total.
Source:
FY24–FY25 Budget Line Item 1599-2036; municipal reports.
6. Out-of-State DEI Conferences & Travel — $3,200,000
Why did state agencies spend $3.2 million on conferences, travel, and paid speakers without publicly reported performance metrics or return-on-investment analysis?
Source:
Massachusetts Comptroller – MMARS Expenditure Database
https://cthru.data.socrata.com/
7. Unused State Office Leases — $8,000,000
Why does the Commonwealth continue paying roughly $8 million annually for office space that sits largely unused following the shift to hybrid work? The state continues paying for office space it does not use, a practice oversight agencies have flagged as preventable and inefficient.
Source:
Office of the Inspector General
https://www.mass.gov/orgs/office-of-the-inspector-general
8. “Blue Ocean Day” Waterfront Event Subsidy — $1,200,000
Why did Massachusetts spend $1.2 million subsidizing a waterfront event despite private corporate sponsorships?
Source:
Seaport Economic Council Grants
https://www.mass.gov/seaport-economic-council-grants
9. THE MIGRANT CRISIS — $894,000,000 (FY24 ACTUAL)
(Featured Festivus Grievance)
Why did Massachusetts allocate $894 million for emergency migrant sheltering in FY24 despite the State Auditor highlighting major procurement failures, overbilling, and weak oversight? Almost $900 million was spent without a clear long-term housing plan, sustainability strategy, or local control mechanism, raising concerns from both the State Auditor and municipal officials.
Verified Findings (State Auditor, 2025):
$894M spent in FY24 (audited actual)
Nearly $1B projected for FY25 (exposure, not counted as spent)
$56M+ for hotel shelter operations
$50M+ for rental assistance
$9.4M food contract overbilled by 9.6%
$350,000+ paid for no-show or canceled transportation
~$12M in emergency contracts deemed “improper and unlawful”
(subset of the $894M total — not additional)
Sources:
State Auditor’s Office
https://www.mass.gov/audit/audit-of-the-executive-office-of-housing-and-livable-communities-emergency-shelter
WBUR / GBH
https://www.wbur.org/news/2025/05/20/auditors-massachusetts-healey-shelter-costs
THE FEATS OF FISCAL STRENGTH
What Nearly $1 Billion in Verified Spending and $1.9 Billion in Two-Year Exposure Could Have Achieved Instead
Earlier this year, I wrote about what $1.8 billion could have done for communities like Chicopee. That figure reflected the scale of multi-year state spending decisions.
Today, the numbers are clearer.
Based on audited FY24 spending alone, Massachusetts spent nearly $900 million on programs plagued by mismanagement and weak oversight — with FY25 exposure pushing the total near $1.9 billion.
With that level of investment, the Commonwealth could have:
In Chicopee
Rebuilt Memorial Drive, Montgomery Street, Burnett Road
Expanded PVTA routes & upgraded bus shelters
Funded timely Chapter 90 reform
Completed stormwater projects (Abbey Brook, Meadow Street)
Installed crosswalks, ADA signals, and traffic-calming on dangerous roads
Renovated Williams Park and other neighborhood parks
Statewide
Modernized bridges and culverts
Upgraded school facilities
Replaced outdated public safety equipment
Invested in regional transit equity
This is what real investment looks like.
THE POLE
The Festivus Pole stands tall — simple, functional, efficient.
No frills.
No consultants.
No design contract.
No commission.
No cost.
If only the state government operated the same way.
A CALL FOR ACCOUNTABILITY AND REFORM
The 2024–2025 Festivus Report shows that Massachusetts does not suffer from a lack of revenue — it suffers from a lack of oversight, discipline, transparency, and responsible leadership.
Western Massachusetts deserves equity.
Chicopee deserves investment.
Taxpayers deserve accountability.
And the Commonwealth deserves a government that measures success not by how much it spends, but by how much it delivers.
This Festivus, the grievances are aired.
Now it’s time for reform.
SUMMARY OF SCOPE (FOR CLARITY)
Verified FY24 spending identified: $895,200,000+
FY24–FY25 two-year exposure: ~$1.9 billion
(A conservative, fully sourced estimate.)*
Happy Festivus!
*Important Note on Totals:
• $895.2 million reflects verified FY2024 spending supported by audits, budgets, or official reports.
• Approximately $1.9 billion reflects FY2024–FY2025 exposure for programs continuing without reform.
• Items discussed as policy concerns (such as long-term mandates or future procurement risks) are not included in either total unless documented spending has occurred
