Massachusetts police chiefs are in familiar territory as they fight for funding for a mental health program that seeks to divert individuals in crisis from arrest, as Gov. Maura Healey looks to slash roughly $15 million from the initiative.

The Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association is leading the call for Beacon Hill lawmakers to restore full funding for the so-called jail and arrest diversion program in the governor’s budget proposal for next fiscal year.

Healey has requested $63.4 billion for next year’s budget, a proposal that would raise current spending by 3.8% but lower funding for jail diversion programs from $19.1 million to $4 million.

A spokesperson for the state Department of Mental Health says the proposed allotment matches funding levels from before the pandemic, when the state did not have one-time federal American Rescue Plan Act dollars.

Michael Bradley, who leads the Chiefs of Police Association, looks at jail diversion programs as an effective collaboration between law enforcement and behavioral health providers that helps de-escalate mental health crises through specialized training and clinical partnerships.

More than 150 clinicians are embedded in police departments serving over 250 communities across the state, Bradley highlighted in a letter to lawmakers earlier this month.

Bradley provided numbers from the Department of Mental Health that showed the state’s $17.2 million investment in the program in Fiscal Year ’25 “supported more than 29,000 documented crisis interventions, diverted over 3,300 individuals from arrest, and prevented more than 6,500 emergency department visits.”

Overall, the program helped save the state an “estimated $42.8 million” that fiscal year, Bradley stated.

Under Healey’s $4 million request, Bradley fears the program would suffer from limited training capacity and fewer available clinicians and diversion options across Massachusetts.

“The need for crisis response will not diminish,” Bradley stated in his letter to lawmakers. “Instead, the burden will shift back to patrol officers without adequate clinical support, leading to increased emergency department utilization, unnecessary arrests, greater correctional involvement, and higher long-term state costs.”

Police chiefs had to fight for funding for the program last year, when Healey looked to restore spending on the initiative to pre-pandemic levels.

In response to a LinkedIn post that Bradley made highlighting this year’s proposed spending reduction, Mansfield Police Chief Ron Sellon commented, “It’s utterly ridiculous that we have to fight for this over and over.”

At the local level, the Watertown Police Department deployed 401 co-response interventions in 2025, diverting 30 individuals from arrest and 129 individuals from “unnecessary hospitalizations,” according to a department Facebook post in February.

Those diversions led to a total cost savings of $497,322, the department added.

The Department of Mental Health has highlighted that the program received a $15.1M expansion through the legislative budget process. A spokesperson added that it is “encouraged” to see more police departments participating in the program.

“The Department of Mental Health is committed to working with law enforcement to help make sure people in need of mental health or substance use treatment get the care they need as an alternative to incarceration,” the spokesperson told the Herald Friday evening.

NORTH ATTLEBOROUGH, Mass. (WJAR) — Changes could be on the way in Massachusetts when it comes to where you buy ‘Buddy’ or ‘Rocky’ as the Senate passes legislation banning pet stores from selling dogs and cats.

It’s part of the ‘PETS Act’, which still needs approval from the House of Representatives and Gov. Maura Healey.

Several municipalities including Attleboro have already adopted similar regulations at a local level, with the goal being to prevent a puppy mill to pet shop pipeline.

Alisa Clements, the Director of Government Affairs for the Pet Advocacy Network spoke with NBC 10’s Devin Bates about the bill. (WJAR)

“If it will help stop puppy mills and maybe help put a crimp in that distribution and force people to think of other ways to acquire pets, especially rescues, that would be great,” said dog owner Linda Taylor.

However, those against the legislation claimed it would hurt small businesses who rely on pet sales. The non-profit Pet Advocacy Network believes it could even end up shifting demand to shady online sellers or out-of-state dealers.

“New York’s ban went into effect a little over a year ago, and we’re already seeing folks selling dogs out of their cars in Manhattan and importing dogs from Taiwan to apartments in Queens and selling them,” said Alisa Clements, the Director of Government Affairs for the Pet Advocacy Network.

Clements said these sellers are not inspected or regulated.

“All the things that our pet stores do, because they are the most highly regulated and inspected place to get a dog in this country,” she said.

The MSPCA has voiced its support for the PETS Act, adding that state and federal records show dogs from, “some of the worst puppy mills in the country have been sold to Massachusetts consumers at pet shops.”

The Pet Advocacy Network, while agreeing with some other measures of the sweeping PETS Act, like allowing seniors in state-funded housing to have a companion animal of their choosing, was disappointed the ban on dog and cat sales was included in the package.

Instead, the organization is throwing its support behind another bill under consideration, H.2256, which would essentially require pet stores to source their dogs and cats from U.S.D.A-licensed breeders while tightening up inspection requirements.

“They’re going to have to be licensed, inspected and transparent about the health and origins of every animal that they sell, so it’s really this great, comprehensive bill that will strengthen the regulations,” Clements said. “This is actually something that will help increase protections, would do something for animal welfare and help combat that problem we’re seeing of bad actors.”

If the PETS Act does pass, store owners who sell a dog or a cat could face a $1,000 fine, with repeat offenders risking losing their shop’s license altogether.