Connect with us

Massachusetts

As legislative session winds to a close, Mass. lawmakers still have big policymaking to do. Here’s what they have left. – The Boston Globe

Published

on

As legislative session winds to a close, Mass. lawmakers still have big policymaking to do. Here’s what they have left. – The Boston Globe


The Senate approved six new significant bills Monday — covering issues as diverse as domestic violence and sexual assault awareness, liquor licenses in Boston, and legal parentage for families that have children through means such as in-vitro fertilization or surrogacy — voted on three others Tuesday. Representatives also pursued their own batch of late-session legislation. On Thursday, the House teed up and approved nine bills, including a string of proposals related to the welfare of animals.

Here are some of the larger bills left to be hammered out between the chambers if a compromise is to land on Governor Maura Healey’s desk before the formal session comes to an end.

Housing policy

Healey’s first big swing on housing policy, a multibillion dollar bond bill, is coming down to the wire as well. Bond bills for housing come up every five years, typically for the Legislature to reauthorize bond spending for housing programs and development. Healey however, has turned this bill into a vehicle for wide-ranging housing policy legislation, which has complicated its path and drawn intense lobbying from real estate interests and housing advocates.

Advertisement

While the House and Senate are in agreement on most of the major policies and spending commitments — such as legalizing Accessory Dwelling Units and rejecting the prospect of a new fee on high-dollar real estate transactions — there are a few major sticking points.

The House, for example, proposed spending $6.2 billion on housing programs, while the Senate only proposed $5.2 billion. The $1 billion difference between the two versions is a proposal in the House that is a priority of Speaker Ron Mariano to help expand the Massachusetts Water Resources Authority’s water service area, making housing production easier in some municipalities.

The Senate version of the bill proposes to reduce a fund to jumpstart paused mixed-income developments from the House’s proposed $250 million to $50 million, and removes a clause from the House version that would give renters the opportunity to buy their unit if their landlord wants to sell.

The Senate bill favors a provision from Healey’s initial proposal that would allow for the sealing of renters’ past eviction records in some cases. The House did not include that policy.

The two chambers also differ over a policy that would allow cities and towns to pass rules that mandate certain ratios of affordable housing in new market rate developments by simple majority instead of a two-thirds vote.

Advertisement

Liquor licenses

The Legislature is weighing plans to add more than 200 liquor licenses to Boston, where permits to serve alcohol are expensive, in short supply, and especially rare in communities of color.

In May, the House recommended creating 205 permits in total. That would include 180 restricted liquor licenses for 12 ZIP codes (Roxbury, Roslindale, Mattapan, Hyde Park, West Roxbury, East Boston, Dorchester, Jamaica Plain, Charlestown). Those permits cannot be bought and sold to other businesses, as Boston licenses typically are, and they must be returned to the city after a business closes. In the House plan, six licenses would be distributed annually to each neighborhood for three years. The House version also created 15 restricted licenses for nonprofit agencies, such as zoos and small theaters; three restricted license for Oak Square in Brighton; and seven unrestricted licenses to be used anywhere in the city.

The Senate came back with an expanded plan on Monday, looking to add more licenses to Boston than the City Council asked for in its original home-rule petition.

In that version, lawmakers created 264 restricted permits for the same areas the House identified, plus parts of the South End, with the same rollout schedule. The additional 15 licenses for nonprofits would also be made available to quasi-government and government agencies. The Senate also chose to create 12, rather than seven, unrestricted permits citywide. Another three restricted licenses would remain for Oak Square.

Advertisement

Both versions would mark the largest effort to expand licenses in Boston since Prohibition. Advocates hope that introducing more permits will aid disadvantaged restauranteurs, enliven quiet neighborhoods, and help narrow the racial wealth gap.

Economic development

Both chambers have also passed sweeping economic development bills that tuck in hundreds of millions for the life sciences industry, though they vary drastically in funding levels.

The Senate’s $2.8 billion economic development package dramatically scaled back what Healey and the House sought for life sciences. Senate lawmakers propose to borrow $225 million over five years for the sector — less than half of the $500 million over a decade that Healey and House lawmakers sought.

In its version of the economic development bill, the House also sought to increase tax incentives for life sciences companies by $200 million.

Advertisement

Senate leaders skipped that measure in their proposal, instead proposing to keep the tax incentives at their current level.

The Senate also includes language that would allow the Kraft Group to build a new soccer stadium for the New England Revolution near the Encore Boston Harbor casino in Everett — a key provision left out of the House’s version.

The House, on the other hand, included a proposal to rename the Seaport convention center after late Boston mayor Thomas M. Menino while the Senate did not.

Climate bill

Negotiators from the House and Senate are still at work on a climate bill. The main thrust of bills passed in both houses would reform the process for approving new energy infrastructure in the state — cutting the time to less than half of the current rate, while adding in assurances to consider the needs of environmental justice communities and the environment.

Advertisement

But the rest of the bill has proven harder to nail down. The Senate is seeking a broader bill that would rein in natural gas infrastructure, ban the ability of third party competitive electric suppliers to sell directly to residents, update the state’s bottle bill, and more.

The House, meanwhile, has pushed for a bill that would call for the procurement of additional clean energy, including long-duration battery storage, and introduce measures to boost the availability of electric vehicle chargers in the state.

At stake is the state’s ability to pass its third successive major climate bill, and continue its momentum on slashing emissions and greening the electricity supply.

Opioid bill

Massachusetts senators approved a bill that would allow cities or towns to approve sites that could offer supervised consumption of drugs, marking an 11th-hour push for a provision that surprised House leaders who passed their own opioid-related bill earlier this summer.

Advertisement

The provision allowing for so-called overdose prevention centers, more commonly known as safe consumption sites, is part of a larger package released by the Senate on Monday aimed at treating substance abuse. Senate leaders had supported a measure six years ago to create a supervised consumption site pilot program before they stripped it from a bill amid opposition from then-governor Charlie Baker, a Republican, and the Massachusetts US attorney’s office.

Members of the House did not make a push for the idea this session. Neither did Healey, though late last year her administration signaled its support for the concept.


Samantha J. Gross can be reached at samantha.gross@globe.com. Follow her @samanthajgross. Diti Kohli can be reached at diti.kohli@globe.com. Follow her @ditikohli_. Andrew Brinker can be reached at andrew.brinker@globe.com. Follow him @andrewnbrinker. Sabrina Shankman can be reached at sabrina.shankman@globe.com. Follow her @shankman.





Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Massachusetts

Olympic gymnasts from Massachusetts boost Team USA to bronze medal – Boston News, Weather, Sports | WHDH 7News

Published

on

Olympic gymnasts from Massachusetts boost Team USA to bronze medal – Boston News, Weather, Sports | WHDH 7News


STERLING, MASS. (WHDH) – Massachusetts Olympic gymnasts Stephen Nedoroscik and Frederick Richard helped clinch a bronze medal for Team USA Monday, with the moment making its rounds online and across TV channels.

Now, Nedoroscik, 25, of Worcester, and Richard, 20, of Stoughton, will be returning to the state as hometown heroes.

As soon as Nedoroscik dismounted from the pommel horse — his specialty — during the men’s gymnastics team final at the Paris 2024 Olympics, his teammates hugged him with great fervor.

Some are calling the Worcester gymnast Clark Kent, because he took off his glasses and became a hero up there on the gym floor.

Advertisement

“He just fell in love with the pommel horse and kind of just became obsessed,” said Jon Rydzefski, who trained with him at Sterling Gym, north of Worcester. “And that was his thing, that’s what he only wanted to do, all the time. He’d get pried away to do the other events, because you had to at that age.”

“But, his heart, that’s what he wanted to go to and all that work paid off,” Rydzefski continued.

Also making his mark, Richard competed in the floor exercise, parallel bars, horizontal bar, and still rings events, pushing his team to a solid bronze medal — the first U.S. men’s gymnastics team medal since 2008.

Stoughton Public Schools hosted an Olympics watch party Monday night, with Richard’s family members, former teachers, and local community members in attendance. On the district’s Facebook page, Richard’s headshot sits front and center as the account’s cover photo.

Stoughton High School Principal Juliette Miller couldn’t be prouder.

Advertisement

“He met with me around his sophomore year or late freshman year, told me that he was going to be in the Olympics. That’s what his goal was. He was striving for that. We’ve known all along to expect great things from him,” Miller said.

Back at the Sterling gym, young gymnasts said they were determined to follow in the Olympians’ footsteps.

“It’s pretty crazy to think about an Olympian doing gymnastics where I’m doing gymnastics,” said Jacob Jones.

Richard is scheduled to compete again Wednesday, and Nedoroscik will be back on the pommel horse Saturday.

(Copyright (c) 2024 Sunbeam Television. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.)

Advertisement
Join our Newsletter for the latest news right to your inbox



Source link

Continue Reading

Massachusetts

Massachusetts Democrats want gun law opponents threatening lawsuit to ‘bring it on’

Published

on

Massachusetts Democrats want gun law opponents threatening lawsuit to ‘bring it on’


Massachusetts Democrats who helped pass a sweeping update to the state’s gun laws want opponents who have threatened to file a legal challenge to the new statute to “bring it on,” arguing the measure is rock solid and meant to save lives.

Originally Published:



Source link

Continue Reading

Massachusetts

What's in the Massachusetts Senate bill to allow overdose prevention sites?

Published

on

What's in the Massachusetts Senate bill to allow overdose prevention sites?


Jeremy Siegel: You’re listening to GBH’s Morning Edition. The Massachusetts Senate is set to pass a bill today that would give cities and towns the authority to open overdose prevention centers, facilities where people can use illegal drugs under the supervision of medical personnel. Supporters say overdose prevention centers, also known as safe injection sites, can be a way to help stem the tide of drug deaths. But there are a number of obstacles to opening them, including a rocky path ahead at the statehouse. We’re joined now for more by GBH statehouse reporter Katie Lannan. Good morning. Katie.

Advertisement

Katie Lannan: Hey, Jeremy. Good morning.

Siegel: So these types of overdose prevention centers are illegal under federal law. What exactly is the Senate looking to do here, at the state level?

Lannan: Yeah. So obviously the Senate can’t speak to federal law, but they’re looking at adding kind of explicit permission into Massachusetts state law for an array of things that goes beyond just overdose prevention centers. Their bill would give cities and towns the authority to pursue various harm reduction strategies to help decrease the negative consequences of substance use disorder and drug use. So that’s not just overdose prevention centers. It’s needle exchanges, drug testing programs, overdose reversal care using Narcan and treatments like that, and referral to treatment and other services. And under the Senate’s bill, the Department of Public Health would need to report how these programs work, study them in their first year up and running. And they couldn’t just open automatically. A city or town that wants to host a site like this would need to sign off from both its board of health and its city council or its select board. So it’s not a requirement that any community operate them, but it’s an option available for those that do want to try it out. The fact this is in the bill indicates that a majority of senators support the idea. And I talked to really the point person on this issue, State Senator Julian Cyr. Here’s what he had to say about why.

State Senator Julian Cyr: It’s about both saving lives. It’s also about providing a gateway to critical services, and helping getting people into treatment. I do want to really be clear, right. You know, there’s not one tool, including overdose prevention centers, that alone can solve this addiction crisis, but I’ve really come to believe that they are a crucial harm reduction tool.

Siegel: So it appears there is support in the Senate. A handful of cities in Massachusetts, including Cambridge and Somerville, have already been exploring the idea of opening overdose prevention centers. What’s stopped them from actually forging ahead?

Advertisement

Lannan: So one big barrier, at least as the state government sees it, is the risk of legal liability for health care providers, volunteers and other people who work at these sites. Last winter, a Department of Public Health report found that it would be feasible to open overdose prevention centers in Massachusetts and that they could be an effective intervention. But that report said that state legislators first would need to write some sort of liability protections into law. So that’s what the Senate is hoping to do here. Their bill would provide some limited legal protections for both people who work in overdose prevention centers and for the people who use there, who go there to use drugs, they’ve obtained from somewhere else.

Siegel: Now, as you mentioned, this bill goes beyond just overdose prevention centers. In the 30 seconds we have left here, Katie, what’s next for the bill after the Senate’s vote later today?

Lannan: Yeah. There’s no guarantee that the House and Senate are going to reach agreement here at all. The House has passed an overdose prevention bill that takes some different tacks, and they’re facing an extreme time crunch with a deadline to finish legislation by tomorrow. And the House seems pretty frustrated that the Senate is coming up with a new idea this late in the game.

Siegel: That is GBH statehouse reporter Katie Lannan on a push for overdose prevention centers in Massachusetts. Katie, thanks so much for your time.

Lannan: Thank you.

Advertisement

Siegel: You’re listening to GBH’s Morning Edition.

The Massachusetts Senate is set to pass a bill today that would give cities and towns the authority to open overdose prevention centers, facilities where people can use illegal drugs under the supervision of medical personnel.

Supporters say overdose prevention centers, also known as safe injection sites, can be a way to help stem the tide of drug deaths. They would allow people to use illegal drugs under the eye of trained medical workers and volunteers, who can step in to help in the event of an overdose.

But there are a number of obstacles to opening them, including a rocky path ahead at the State House.

Advertisement

Here’s what to know about the legislation.

It would permit supervised injection sites — and more

Overdose prevention centers are illegal under federal law.

The Massachusetts Legislature cannot amend federal law, but it can explicitly permit overdose prevention centers within state lines, GBH State House reporter Katie Lannan said.

“Their bill would give cities and towns the authority to pursue various harm reduction strategies to help decrease the negative consequences of substance use disorder and drug use,” Lannan said. “It’s needle exchanges, drug testing programs, overdose reversal care using Narcan and treatments like that, and referral to treatment and other services.”

The Senate’s bill would require the Massachusetts Department of Public Health to study such programs in their first year and report on their outcomes.

Advertisement

The bill doesn’t require supervised use sites to open, Lannan said. It only allows cities and towns to opt in if they wish, with support from both their local board of health and the city council or town select board.

State Senator Julian Cyr said the initiative is “about saving lives.”

“It’s also about providing a gateway to critical services, and helping getting people into treatment,” Cyr said. “There’s not one tool, including overdose prevention centers, that alone can solve this addiction crisis, but I’ve really come to believe that they are a crucial harm reduction tool.”

Legal liability is a hurdle

A handful of cities in Massachusetts, including Cambridge and Somerville, have already been exploring the idea of opening overdose prevention centers.

But one big barrier, at least in the eyes of state government, is legal liability for the medical professionals.

Advertisement

Last winter, a Department of Public Health report found that it would be feasible to open overdose prevention centers in Massachusetts and that they could be an effective intervention — but state legislators first would need to write some sort of liability protections into law.

“That’s what the Senate is hoping to do here,” Lannan said. “Their bill would provide some limited legal protections for both people who work in overdose prevention centers and for the people who use there, who go there to use drugs they’ve obtained from somewhere else.”

Next steps: No guarantee of passage

With two days left in this year’s session, legislators will have to act fast.

“The House has passed an overdose prevention bill that takes some different tacks, and they’re facing an extreme time crunch with a deadline to finish legislation by tomorrow,” Lannan said. “And the House seems pretty frustrated that the Senate is coming up with a new idea this late in the game.”

Advertisement





Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending