Yet, the full 10-person panel has not gathered in a meeting since, nor has the commission held a series of legally mandated hearings to gather public input ahead of a Dec. 15 deadline to produce its recommendations.
It appears unlikely the panel actually will do so. A commission spokesperson told the Globe that the panel intends to seek a second extension, and is “aiming” to have its next full commission meeting at some point in December.
“The Seal, Flag and Motto Advisory Commission has been hard at work engaging experts and the public about what they want to see in our state’s symbols,” Alana Davidson, the commission spokesperson, said in a statement. “We believe that more time is needed to ensure robust community engagement.”
Davidson did not respond to a question about how much more time the commission would seek from the Legislature, which wrapped up formal sessions for the year earlier this month.
Advertisement
The panel, similar to the one before it, has been trying to navigate a fraught debate about representation and potential erasure in the iconography the state assigns itself.
The effort to replace the flag dates back decades, but it gained traction in 2020, when the murder of George Floyd sparked a nationwide reexamination of race and historical emblems, including the Massachusetts seal.
Members of the state’s Indigenous community are themselves split on how to replace the state’s current 19th-century emblem, which sits on the state flag and depicts a colonist’s arm holding a sword above the image of a Native American. The image is draped by a Latin motto that roughly translates to: “By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under liberty.”
The design draws on the original seal of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, which featured a Native American man, naked but for some shrubbery around his groin, saying, “Come over and help us.” And the sword depicted once belonged to Myles Standish, a 17th-century military commander for the Plymouth Colony known for his brutality toward the Indigenous population.
The three highest-scoring options for the new Massachusetts state seal released in August by the state Seal, Flag, and Motto Advisory Commission.
When the panel released a set of new designs in August it had culled from public submissions, commission members cautioned that the proposals — which rated the highest during a round of internal scoring — were not the finalists from which a final recommendation would emerge.
Advertisement
In the months since, a group of commissioners have met in subcommittee meetings, during which members lamented moving too quickly to ask for ideas without better educating the public — and commission appointees themselves — about the problematic history of the state’s official emblem.
The commission’s work is also unfolding during a different time than in 2020. Over the last five years, the racial reckoning that helped spur the first commission has largely receded from the public view.
The debate over changing the flag has also since migrated onto the campaign trail, where some of Governor Maura Healey’s Republican opponents — both past appointees of former governor Charlie Baker, who signed the initial measure in January 2021— have cast the state’s effort as an attempt to erase the state’s own history.
“There’s a public misunderstanding about why the current flag is not appropriate,” Kate Fox, the executive director of the state’s Office of Travel and Tourism and the commission’s co-chair, said during a Sept. 9 meeting.
Critics have long said that the placement of a broadsword above the Native American figure is racist imagery and symbolizes the violence inflicted on Native American populations. Still others, both on and off the commission, have warned against eliminating Massachusetts’ Indigenous communities from the seal entirely.
Advertisement
The first iteration of the commission voted unanimously in 2022 for replacing the state’s motto and seal, but it disbanded the next year without offering specific substitutes for either.
Summer Confuorto, a current commission member, said in a late September subcommittee meeting that she’s heard pushback casting the panel’s effort to rethink the flag as a “liberal state that wants to make this change” and that Native Americans themselves aren’t driving it. In fact, she said, Indigenous leaders have been talking for decades about why the imagery needs to change.
“It’s not to waste people’s time and . . . there’s a purpose and intent” behind the commission’s work, said Confuorto, who has Gros Ventre, Cree, Mi’kmaq heritage, according to her employer, the Mass Cultural Council.
In a late October meeting, Rhonda Anderson, an Iñupiaq – Athabascan commission member who also is the Western Massachusetts Commissioner on Indian Affairs, said the advisory panel needs to both educate and reframe its work, including to other Native Americans, that “we’re actually providing something better” with a new emblem.
“When people believe that we’re taking something away, they just really clutch tighter,” Anderson said. “I don’t want to take anything away from anyone, but I do want to do better.”
Advertisement
Efforts to reach Confuorto, Anderson, and other members of the advisory commission for this story were not successful.
John “Jim” Peters, the executive director of the Commission on Indian Affairs and a state seal advisory commission member, said in a phone interview that the panel is tackling a “difficult question” and he himself is at odds with others on a path forward.
He said he’s made his preference clear: The “most effective” option, he said, is to simply remove the disembodied arm and sword from the state, and change the state motto.
Actually changing the seal and flag, however, is “something that the citizens of the state need to be on the same page [for],” he said.
Whenever the panel does submit its recommendations, the governor is required to submit legislation “to codify the new state motto and designs for the seal and flag,” though the law does not dictate when it must be submitted. The Legislature ultimately would then have to approve any changes.
Advertisement
Peters is not among the commission members who’ve sat in on subcommittee meetings in recent months, the last of which fell shortly before Halloween. But told the Globe he was aware that the advisory panel planned to seek an extension.
“Another holdup,” he said.
Matt Stout can be reached at matt.stout@globe.com. Follow him @mattpstout.
When the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) denied voters the ability to support a popular tax cut this November, it was more than a temporary loss for residents of one of America’s most overtaxed states. Barely a generation removed from its “Taxachusetts” moniker, the Commonwealth’s competitiveness suffered a setback with long-lasting implications.
That is why even if this battle is over, the broader fight must go on.
Recent polling from the Mass Opportunity Alliance (MOA), a nonprofit advocating for state competitiveness, found that 82% of voters supported lowering the state income tax rate from 5% to 4%. Even a poll from the Boston Globe/Suffolk University released days before the SJC decision showed 66% supporting the tax cut.
Terrified by the threat to the status quo, entrenched special interests spearheaded a legal challenge not based on the merits of the tax cut or fiscal policy whatsoever. The issue was a technicality in summary of the question written by the Attorney General. As a retired SJC justice explained, “neither logic nor law” supported removing the tax cut from the ballot.
Advertisement
The Court’s ruling does not change the underlying issue. The same Suffolk survey showed a majority (54%) of respondents had considered leaving the state in the last year. Nearly six in ten cited taxes and high cost of living.
This trend is well underway. Following the Commonwealth’s last tax hike in 2022, roughly 30,000 more people exited Massachusetts than arrived the following year — one of the country’s highest population exoduses. The outflow took $4.2 billion dollars’ worth of taxable income with them.
It’s no mystery as to why we’re losing residents. Survey research from MOA showed high taxes were a key driver. Not coincidentally, the top two states welcoming Massachusetts expatriates, Florida and New Hampshire, both have no income tax.
By contrast, Massachusetts has the second highest effective tax rate in the country. The Commonwealth is ranked in the bottom 10 for competitiveness.
The impact of this tax burden extends far and wide. Businesses are choosing to leave or relocate elsewhere. Iconic brands like Cape Cod Potato Chips have had enough, announcing the closing of their Hyannis facility earlier this year. Even international soccer players are not safe, learning that 90 minutes of participation in this year’s World Cup can subject them to crushing Beacon Hill tax policies.
Advertisement
Massachusetts is not alone in the blue state exodus. Frustrated by high taxes, endless regulation and overall unaffordability, families and businesses are fleeing California, Illinois and New York for friendlier terrain.
What are the consequences of fewer residents? For starters, less people to tax. Smaller tax bases means less resources for schools, roads and public safety – investments that tax hike advocates typically claim to care about.
Smaller populations also mean less national influence. In 2010, the congressional delegation shrank from 10 to 9 members, and only narrowly avoided losing another member in 2020. It’s anyone’s guess what the end of this decade will bring, but current trends are not encouraging.
So what’s next?
Fortunately, a second common sense tax proposal remains on track for the ballot this fall. By reforming the state tax revenue limit, the initiative would put the brakes on spendthrift politicians and return money to the taxpayers who earned it.
Advertisement
To be clear, the court’s ruling does not excuse the role of the legislators. Their constituents were denied the right to make their voices heard. As their elected representatives, members of the Massachusetts legislature should be fighting for families struggling with high taxes and some of the highest costs in the nation.
“Affordability” cannot just be a political buzz word; it must be a governing principle.
Two hundred fifty years ago, Massachusetts started a revolution against an oppressive government that led to the founding of our nation. That spirit lives on today, and so does the need for change. That starts by continuing the fight for common sense tax relief by every available avenue to keep the Commonwealth competitive for the next 250 years and beyond.
Colin Reed is a senior advisor to the Mass Opportunity Alliance
BOSTON (WHDH) – Just over one week after Massachusetts lawmakers announced a new, statewide initiative to combat wrong-way driving and improve roadway safety, law enforcement responded to another deadly wrong-way crash in Northboro Wednesday night.
With all of the recent tragedies, including the death of Massachusetts State Police trooper Kevin Trainor in Lynnfield last month, officials said they have pinpointed 100 locations to put on the priority list to make important safety changes as quickly as possible.
The $75-million detection and prevention program includes advanced detection technology, enhanced roadway signage, infrastructure improvements, and targeted safety upgrades across Massachusetts.
“They’ve been demonstrated to work in other places where they’ve been implemented, and even in Massachusetts the ones that are already in place, there is plenty of documented evidence showing people realizing they’re going the wrong way when those systems are activated,” said Mark Schieldrop of Triple A.
Advertisement
In Barnstable, those changes have already been implemented along Route 6. State Representative Steven Xiarhos said the area can be tricky to navigate.
“Lots of moving parts, a college right down the road, and someone could make the wrong move when they’re confused, and that’s one of those interactions that could be confusing,” Xiarhos said.
Schieldrop said there are many reasons for wrong-way driving, but one stands out above the rest.
“When we look at the typical wrong-way driver who’s causing these crashes, by and large alcohol impairment is a factor in the vast majority of them,” Schieldrop said.
Xiarhos said the prorgam is worth every penny if it will save lives.
Advertisement
“It’s frustrating when a horrible thing happens, you can’t turn back the clock,” he said. “So as an elected offical now, as a former police officer, let’s do everything we can to prevent this.”
The safety installations around the state will continue into 2027.
(Copyright (c) 2026 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)
Join our Newsletter for the latest news right to your inbox
