MATCH Act Lets Locals Start Emergency Watershed Cleanup Early, But Federal Funding Isn't Guaranteed

The "Making Access To Cleanup Happen Act of 2025," or MATCH Act, aims to speed up recovery after natural disasters like floods or fires damage watersheds. It amends the Agricultural Credit Act of 1978 to allow sponsors – think state governments, local municipalities, or Indian Tribes – to start certain emergency protection measures before getting a formal funding agreement signed with the U.S. Secretary of Agriculture. The goal is to get cleanup and protection work going faster when time is critical.

Getting a Head Start on Cleanup

Here's how it's supposed to work: The Secretary of Agriculture will create a list of pre-approved emergency watershed protection actions that sponsors can initiate right away. If a disaster requires something not on the list, sponsors can petition the Secretary (through a state-level process with deadlines) to get approval for those specific measures. If, and only if, a formal agreement is eventually reached, the money the sponsor already spent could count towards their share of the project cost. Think of it like starting emergency roof repairs after a storm before the insurance adjuster officially approves the claim – you're trying to prevent further damage quickly.

The Big Catch: Who Pays if the Feds Say No?

The major point to understand here is the financial risk. The MATCH Act is crystal clear: sponsors who jumpstart work before an agreement is finalized bear all the costs if the Secretary ultimately decides not to enter into an agreement. There's no obligation for the federal government to reimburse pre-agreement expenses if a deal isn't struck. This could be a significant gamble, especially for smaller towns or tribal governments with tighter budgets. They might hesitate to start crucial work if there's a chance they'll be left holding the entire bill.

Flexibility vs. Uncertainty

While the bill provides flexibility for faster local action, it also introduces uncertainty. The Secretary has the final say on whether to approve an agreement, and the bill doesn't spell out rigid criteria for that decision. This discretion means approvals could potentially vary. Furthermore, the exact definition and scope of eligible "emergency watershed protection measures" will depend on the lists and processes established by the Secretary. Essentially, the bill opens the door for quicker local responses but puts the financial onus squarely on those local entities until federal approval is secured.