Energy and Environmental Affairs Secretary Kathleen Theoharides said that Gov. Charlie Baker's infrastructure bond bill would help Massachusetts meet its benchmarks on the way toward a net-zero carbon emissions goal by 2050. Image by Sam Doran/State House News Service

Gov. Charlie Baker has linked his $9.7 billion infrastructure bond bill to efforts to limit the impact of climate change and reduce its disproportionate impacts on certain populations, but one environmental advocate told lawmakers Tuesday that the proposal’s language “fall(s) short on these priorities.”

Calling for the Legislature to think bigger, Conservation Law Foundation Staff Attorney Johannes Epke said Baker’s proposal includes an important focus on the transportation sector but does not go far enough to take advantage of a “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity.”

“Sprinkling a little climate change or equity into an otherwise pretty status quo bill that focuses a lot on highways and internal combustion engines is not going to get us where we need to go,” Epke said, stressing that CLF still supports Baker’s proposal. “We applaud the investments in public transit and vehicle charging stations and regional transit authorities, as well as active modes of transportation – biking, walking, multimodal investments are all really important. We just think there needs to be a lot more of that in this bill.”

Lawmakers dove into the wide-ranging borrowing bill (H 4561) on Tuesday, slightly less than a month after Baker filed it with a call for prompt action to ensure Massachusetts does not miss an opportunity to dollars in the new federal infrastructure law to work.

The bill, which is likely to earn approval in some form from lawmakers, aims to maximize the impact of the billions of dollars Massachusetts expects to receive to modernize rail, repair aging highways and prepare the infrastructure to survive in the face of climate change.

The bond bill calls for $5.4 billion in highway funding, $2.2 billion for the MBTA, $591 million for regional transit authorities, and $1.4 billion to improve environmental infrastructure.

Baker has described the total funding in two buckets: about $6.2 billion reflects combined state and federal formula funds set to flow over the next five years, and the remaining $3.5 billion would put on the table the matching funds and new staff needed for Massachusetts to compete for additional federal grants.

Transportation Secretary Jamey Tesler said about $4.1 billion of the total bottom line represents “pure federal aid,” and another $5.6 billion would be state borrowing authorization.

Tom Ryan, a senior advisor with the A Better City business group, told lawmakers the competitive grants represent “the biggest opportunity in the bipartisan infrastructure bill.”

The U.S. Department of Transportation will have the authority to carve up $105 billion of discretionary grants, significantly more than was available during the Obama administration, Ryan said.

“The magnitude of this opportunity cannot be overstated,” he said. “There is a nationwide competition for this $105 billion, and Massachusetts must be prepared to take full advantage. This means having funding ready, applying with our best projects, and being ready to deliver on the construction of these plans if we win an award.”