At Deerfield’s Annual Town Meeting on May 11, residents will chose the future standard of building construction in town. Three options lie before us: Maintain the current “Stretch Energy Code,” adopt the new “Specialized Energy Code” to achieve Climate Leader Status and set a higher standard for energy efficient buildings, or repeal all energy codes and go back to the “Base Code.”
Option 1: Maintaining the status quo means keeping the current building energy code, the “Stretch Energy Code,” which Deerfield adopted in 2011. Keeping the Stretch Code in place ensures Deerfield will maintain Green Communities status and avail of all the grant funding that comes with it (over $600,000 to date).
Option 2: Others have written about the “Specialized Energy Code” and the resulting benefits if Deerfield adopts this new standard, so I won’t repeat them here. Suffice it to say that the Specialized Energy Code sets a higher energy efficiency standard for new construction, ensuring that any new buildings feature tight envelopes and fossil fuel-free heating technologies (or include infrastructure to convert to fossil fuel-free options in the future to comply with Massachusetts’ 2050 decarbonization goals). As a bonus, if Deerfield adopts this new code, it brings it one step closer to “Climate Leader” status, unlocking access to an additional $1 million in grants the town can use to deploy solar energy and improve the energy efficiency of town-owned buildings.
Option 3: Through a citizens petition, some residents have added an option to this year’s town meeting to repeal the Stretch Energy Code and return to the “Base Code.” Perhaps there is a belief that returning to the Base Code will make it less expensive to construct new buildings? Or maybe building less efficient buildings will somehow lower our taxes?
Both of those assumptions would be incorrect.
A 2025 study completed by the Department of Energy Resources found that a small single-family home with heat pumps built to Stretch Energy Code standards is about $19,000 cheaper than one built to the Base Code, while delivering around $66 in energy cost savings per year. Meeting the Stretch Energy Code is only more expensive than Base Code when heating with natural gas, but with a moratorium on natural gas infrastructure in the region and rising gas rates as new ports integrate with the U.S. gas market worldwide, this is not going to be the case for long.
As for our taxes, a move to the “Base Code” would result in the loss of Deerfield’s Green Communities status. Deerfield’s previous grant awards resulted in street light replacements, refrigeration controls in multiple municipal facilities, new condensing boilers, hybrid vehicle purchases, and more, all of which reduce energy costs for taxpayers. The town is currently applying for a $250,000 grant to cover the full cost of replacing the failing Building Management System at Frontier Regional School, a system necessary to maintain heating and cooling loads that it is projected to save $21,500 in energy costs every year. Without Green Communities status and its grant funding, residents will have to foot that $250,000 bill.
There’s a reason only about 9% of Massachusetts state residents live in a town with the Base Energy Code. From the Cape to the Berkshires, residents overwhelmingly support high energy efficiency standards for their homes. After all, if you were buying a new home, wouldn’t you want it to be built to the highest possible standards with the lowest possible annual energy costs?
Do you want to increase our energy bills and leave state grant dollars on the table? That’s what would happen if we repeal the Stretch Code. Or do you want to set a higher standard for energy efficient buildings while unlocking access to an additional $1 million in state grants? If so, vote for the Specialized Energy Code at Deerfield’s Town Meeting on May 11.
Ryan Kingston lives in Deerfield.