 |
Post Office Box 1147
▪
Marblehead, Massachusetts 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
“Every Tax is a Pay Cut ... A Tax Cut is a Pay Raise”
48 years as “The Voice of Massachusetts Taxpayers”
— and
their Institutional Memory — |
|
CLT UPDATE
Monday, June 27, 2022
Court Decisions Rule The
Week
Jump directly
to CLT's Commentary on the News
|
Most Relevant News
Excerpts
(Full news reports follow Commentary)
|
|
The
Massachusetts House took a major step Thursday
toward injecting billions of dollars into work on
the state's transportation and environmental
infrastructure, sending to the Senate a rewritten
borrowing bill that includes hundreds of millions of
dollars to fix glaring safety issues at the MBTA and
explore a rail expansion in western Massachusetts.
The House
voted 155-0 in favor of a nearly $11 billion
infrastructure bond bill (H 4897) after approving a
mega-amendment that tacked on about $560
million in additional spending, mostly consisting of
local earmarks, as well as new reporting
requirements for the beleaguered MBTA amid a
blistering federal investigation.
Transportation Committee Co-chair Rep. William
Straus called the legislation "this session's
signature transportation bond bill." ...
Baker
kicked off debate by filing a $9.7 billion bond bill
in March (H 4561) that he and his deputies said
would maximize the impact of federal dollars flowing
to Massachusetts under a new infrastructure law and
also position the Bay State to compete for
additional grant funding.
State
House News Service
Thursday, June 23, 2022
House Drives
Infrastructure Bill Up To $11 Bil
The odds
of estate tax reform appeared to improve Tuesday,
and a potential tax relief package could also
feature some ideas that haven't yet been publicly
floated, Senate President Karen Spilka said Tuesday.
With
inflation high and the state on track for another
major revenue surplus this fiscal year, legislative
leaders for weeks have been saying they plan to
produce a tax relief package but a plan has not
surfaced with less than six weeks remaining to get a
bill through the Legislature and to Gov. Charlie
Baker.
Spilka, at
a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast,
teased some areas under consideration.
"We are
currently in discussions about a tax relief
proposal, which may include changes to the Earned
Income Tax Credit and the estate tax, among others
-- some of which you may have heard suggestions,
some of which not," she said. "And we will continue
to ensure that Massachusetts is open, competitive
and inclusive and that these same values will guide
our tax relief proposal." ...
Spilka on
Tuesday tied the estate-tax issue to rising home
prices and property values in Massachusetts.
The median
single-family home sale price in Massachusetts hit
$590,000 last month, according to The Warren Group,
and it was higher in some parts of the state --
$800,000 in Middlesex County, for instance.
"There's
so many seniors who bought their houses ten, 20, 30
years ago, when their house was maybe either
$15,000, 20, 25, that is now worth about a million,
so having a house at that value does not necessarily
indicate wealth, particularly if they are in their
elder years," Spilka told reporters after her
speech. "So we are definitely taking a good look at
that."
Baker, in
his bill, blended policies that would span across
tax brackets, proposing changes that would benefit
some of the state's lowest-income workers and others
that would offer relief to wealthier residents. As
lawmakers craft their plans, one looming question is
which populations they will steer their efforts
toward.
"I want to
focus on tax relief, not only for something maybe
like the estate tax, but especially our low-income
residents and families in our time," Spilka said.
"That's why the Senate a few years back, when I was
chair of Ways and Means, we did an increase in the
EITC. That's something that all research shows is
one of the best tax relief to give to folks because
it not only goes directly into their pockets, but in
turn then it is spent on Main Street."
State
House News Service
Tuesday, June 21, 2022
Estate Tax Changes Appearing More Likely
Spilka Confirms Senate Talks, Suggests There May Be
Surprises
The
Supreme Judicial Court rejected the latest legal
challenge to the blockbuster ballot question asking
voters if they support a new surtax on household
income above $1 million, ruling Wednesday that the
summary Attorney General Maura Healey has prepared
for the ballot is fair and suitable to be presented
to voters.
The high
court's ruling clears the way for a summary and
statements of what a 'yes' and 'no' vote would do
that were prepared by Healey, a surtax supporter who
expects to be on the ballot herself as a candidate
for governor, to be printed alongside the question
when it is put before voters this November. The
surtax is estimated to bring in $1.3 billion a year
and the text of the amendment calls for the revenue
to go towards transportation and education.
Opponents
of the surtax proposal argued that the summary and
'yes' and 'no' vote statements that Healey prepared
for Secretary of State William Galvin to include in
a voter information booklet and on the November
ballot itself were unfair and misleading largely
because they do not explicitly state that the
Legislature retains the ultimate decision-making
power over state spending and theoretically could
use money the surtax brings in to supplant existing
state funding for transportation and education.
Writing
for the court, Justice David Lowy stated simply, "We
disagree."
State
House News Service
Wednesday, May 22, 2022
SJC Upholds Healey’s Income
Surtax Description
Court Stands By Fairness Of "Subject To
Appropriation" Clause
The
state’s high court on Wednesday cleared the
millionaire tax question to appear on the November
ballot — over the objections of several prominent
business and tax policy groups that say it will
drive people from the state.
“The
summary closely tracks the language of the proposed
amendment and thus “fairly informs voters” of its
operation,” the Supreme Judicial Court wrote in
their decision....
“The
Attorney General, the Secretary of the Commonwealth,
and the Supreme Judicial Court have all dropped the
ball. The language being used to describe the
question is extremely leading,” said Paul Craney,
spokesman for the Foundation said in a release.
According
to [Paul Craney, spokesman for the Fiscal Alliance
Foundation], the money appropriated by the Fair
Share amendment, even if spent as indicated, will
still allow the legislature to move funds to other
projects.
“Once the
funding is appropriated, the legislature is free to
do whatever it wishes. This amendment allows
lawmakers to play a shell game and by moving money
around, the legislature could spend the new tax
revenues on whatever it wants,” he said....
Daniel
Ryan, a tax partner at Sullivan & Worcester who also
filed a brief in the case, noted the court has
simply followed their own precedent in the case....
“Should
the amendment pass, there is no guarantee that state
expenditures for education and transportation will
increase. The education and transportation
expenditures could remain the same, and the
legislature could use funds formerly allocated to
those areas to entirely unrelated areas. This was
the experience in California following the passage
of a similar ballot initiative,” he said.
Voters
will decide in November whether the tax becomes part
of the state’s constitution.
The
Boston Herald
Wednesday, June 22, 2022
High court clears
millionaire tax question for Massachusetts ballot
Despite
concerns by members of his own party, Gov. Charlie
Baker, a Republican, signed a law Wednesday making
voting by mail permanent.
Massachusetts allowed early voting by mail for the
first time during the COVID-19 pandemic, and
Democrats and voting rights activists have been
pushing to make the reforms permanent in order to
increase voter turnout.
The new
law will permanently allow voting by mail for any
state or presidential primary or general election.
It shortens the voter registration window to 10
days, although it does not allow for same-day voter
registration, as some advocates had hoped.
The bill
expands early voting by providing early voting for
two weeks prior to a general election and one week
prior to a primary. It allows electronic voting for
the first time for overseas military voters, and
people with disabilities who request an
accommodation....
The final
bill passed the House 126-29 with every Republican
and one Democrat voting against it. It passed the
Senate 37-3 with the Senate’s three Republicans
opposed.
However,
those margins were large enough that Baker’s veto
would not actually matter, since the Democrats have
a two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.
CommonWealth Magazine
Wednesday, June 22, 2022
Bucking party, Baker makes
vote-by-mail permanent
Republicans in Legislature opposed the policy
And on
Beacon Hill, an annual state budget is due by
Friday, but it's looking like it may not be in place
on time again, not that lawmakers or Gov. Charlie
Baker are too concerned about it. And budget writers
are mindful that, following an economic contraction
in the first quarter, next week's end of the second
quarter could mean a recession is already underway.
Even if a
budget accord is reached next week, a budget law
seems unlikely to be in place on July 1 since the
governor gets 10 days to review the nearly $50
billion plan and offers his amendments and vetoes.
It's more likely that the Legislature will approve
an interim budget to prevent any lapses in
government services in July while they work with the
governor on a final annual budget.
The
six-person budget conference is one of six
conference committee panels that are actively
working toward compromise bills, with the other five
working on a climate and energy bill, marijuana
industry reforms, bills to expand access to mental
health, a sports betting legalization plan, and
improvements at the state's two long-term care homes
for veterans.
State
House News Service
Friday, June 24, 2022
Advances - Week of June 26, 2022
The
Massachusetts Legislature has been winding through a
buffet line over the last few months, loading its
plate up with things like the annual state budget,
offshore wind and climate policy, sports betting
legalization and mental health care.
But this
week, as lawmakers started to look towards digesting
those servings by the end of July, the U.S. Supreme
Judicial Court plopped mostly unwanted helpings of
two significant and controversial issues onto Beacon
Hill's plate with rulings upending precedent around
gun control and abortion access.
"This is a
big deal and I am emotional right now because I am
really upset about it. And I'm really upset about it
because I hope people understand what's happened in
this country and how important our elections are,
how important it is to fight for democracy,"
Attorney General Maura Healey said Friday on GBH
Radio. She added, "This is the direct output of
failures, of breakdowns in our democracy. We have a
politicized Supreme Court that is doing things that
are against the will of the vast majority of people.
Yesterday's Bruen decision undermining strong gun
laws in this country, when the vast majority of
Americans -- Republicans and Democrats -- support
commonsense gun laws. And today, the overturning of
Roe vs. Wade."
The
Supreme Court on Friday struck down the decades-old
precedent of Roe v. Wade, a decision that has been
considered a real possibility since Justice Anthony
Kennedy retired in 2018 and which became more
certain when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in
2020, allowing President Donald Trump, following his
2016 victory over Hillary Clinton, to cement the
court's conservative and anti-Roe majority.
Massachusetts Democrats acted preemptively, with the
Senate folding protections for providers of
reproductive and gender-affirming health care and
their patients into the state budget that's under
negotiation and House Speaker Ronald Mariano
telegraphing that his chamber is interested in "one
big package that addresses a lot of the issues" that
arise from the SCOTUS ruling....
Near the
center of the state's reactions to both rulings was
Healey, who said Thursday that the Supreme Court's
ruling striking down New York's concealed-carry gun
licensing law "poses a grave danger to Americans as
they go about their daily lives in public spaces
like supermarkets, hospitals, and playgrounds." She
did not offer any specific plans, but said she
stands ready "to vigorously defend and enforce" the
Bay State's gun laws.
State
House News Service
Friday, June 24, 2022
Weekly Roundup - Trump Court
Speaks
In a
ruling praised by gun rights advocates, the U.S.
Supreme Court on Thursday struck down New York's
concealed-carry gun licensing law with a decision
that Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey
said flouts hundreds of years of state-level gun
regulation and "poses a grave danger" to people
traveling in public spaces.
The New
York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen
decision holds that New York could not
constitutionally require citizens to demonstrate a
"special need" before they could receive a license
to carry firearms in public for self-defense.
"Nothing
in the Second Amendment's text draws a home/public
distinction with respect to the right to keep and
bear arms, and the definition of 'bear' naturally
encompasses public carry," Justice Clarence Thomas
wrote for the majority. "Moreover, the Second
Amendment guarantees an 'individual right to possess
and carry weapons in case of confrontation,' .. and
confrontation can surely take place outside the
home." ...
The 6-3
ruling appears likely to force states, including
Massachusetts, to rethink their gun laws.
Hannah
Hill, research and policy director for The National
Foundation for Gun Rights -- the legal arm of the
National Association for Gun Rights -- said the
ruling "overturns similar laws" in California,
Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, and
Massachusetts.
"The
Foundation will be doing everything in its power to
help restore the right to carry for law-abiding
Americans in these states, and we're eager to work
with our members who've had their rights denied for
far too long," Hill said.
But a Gov.
Charlie Baker spokesman said the ruling on New
York's law "has no immediate effect on the
Commonwealth's gun laws, which all remain in place."
"The
Baker-Polito Administration is proud of the
Commonwealth's nation-leading gun laws and history
of enacting bipartisan gun reform legislation,"
Baker press secretary Terry MacCormack said in a
brief statement....
But while
Healey, a leading candidate for governor, warned
that "in a country flooded with firearms, today's
reckless and anti-democratic decision poses a grave
danger to Americans as they go about their daily
lives in public spaces like supermarkets, hospitals,
and playgrounds," the House chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, Rep. Mike Day, promised "we're
not going to see people walking around in churches
and schools with guns on their side." ...
"We'll be
ready to tighten up the nets to the extent that
they're loosened by today's decision," said Day, who
called the Supreme Court a "rogue court" and alleged
that its decision was "intellectually dishonest" and
"cherry picks history, it cherry picks what
regulations they want to pay attention to, which
ones they want to ignore, in order to carry out a
political decision here."
House
Speaker Ron Mariano said a policy response may come
before formal sessions wrap up for the year on July
31.
"It
certainly creates a bit of a cloud as to what's
acceptable," Mariano said....
Healey did
not propose any specific policy response to the
ruling but said she's ready to defend the state's
gun laws.
State
House News Service
Thursday, June 23, 2022
Guns Laws Thrown Into Doubt By
High Court Ruling
Healey Sees "Grave Danger," Lawmakers Mulling
Legislative Response
The U.S.
Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade,
ruling that the constitution does not confer the
right to an abortion and leaving decisions about
regulating abortion up to the states.
The
court's ruling had been expected since a draft
opinion leaked in early May, and reaction from
Massachusetts, where abortion remains legal under
state law, was swift.
Gov.
Charlie Baker, within moments of the decision in
Dobbs v. Jackson, signed an executive order that
bars Massachusetts from cooperating with extradition
attempts from other states that may pursue criminal
charges in connection with receiving or performing
reproductive health services that are legal here.
Baker's
order also protects Massachusetts reproductive
health care providers from losing their licenses or
receiving other professional discipline because of
out-of-state charges, and prohibits agencies under
the state's executive department from assisting
another state's investigation into a person or
entity for receiving or delivering reproductive
health services in Massachusetts, the governor's
office said.
"I am
deeply disappointed in today's decision by the
Supreme Court which will have major consequences for
women across the country who live in states with
limited access to reproductive health care
services," Baker said in a statement.
State
House News Service
Friday, June 24, 2022
U.S. Supreme Court
Overturns Roe v. Wade
Abortion Remains Legal Under Mass. Law, Baker Signs
Executive Order
Massachusetts is now in a glaring spotlight.
Gov.
Charlie Baker signed an executive order Friday
following the U.S. Supreme Court decision on
abortion that will protect Bay State health care
providers who perform abortion services for
out-of-state women.
But the
last thing this state needs is to become an abortion
destination.
A dozen
states permit abortion prior to viability — 24 weeks
— or when necessary to protect the life or health of
the pregnant woman. That’s the law in Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Maine, Connecticut and New York.
Abortion is also legal in New Hampshire, with a few
restrictions, and in Vermont.
The
Guttmacher Institute found just under 50 abortion
facilities in Massachusetts in a recent survey. The
Washington, D.C., nonprofit bills itself as a
research and policy organization committed to
advancing sexual and reproductive health.
The ROE
Act in Massachusetts further solidifies abortion
rights.
A Boston
Herald editorial
Sunday, June 26, 2022
Abortion move puts Bay State
on front lines |
Chip Ford's CLT
Commentary |
|
The State
House News Service reported on Thursday ("House Drives
Infrastructure Bill Up To $11 Bil"):
The
Massachusetts House took a major step Thursday
toward injecting billions of dollars into work on
the state's transportation and environmental
infrastructure, sending to the Senate a rewritten
borrowing bill that includes hundreds of millions of
dollars to fix glaring safety issues at the MBTA and
explore a rail expansion in western Massachusetts.
The House
voted 155-0 in favor of a nearly $11 billion
infrastructure bond bill (H 4897) after approving a
mega-amendment that tacked on about $560
million in additional spending, mostly consisting of
local earmarks, as well as new reporting
requirements for the beleaguered MBTA amid a
blistering federal investigation.
Transportation Committee Co-chair Rep. William
Straus called the legislation "this session's
signature transportation bond bill." ...
Baker
kicked off debate by filing a $9.7 billion bond bill
in March (H 4561) that he and his deputies said
would maximize the impact of federal dollars flowing
to Massachusetts under a new infrastructure law and
also position the Bay State to compete for
additional grant funding.
That reference to a
"mega-amendment" caught my attention; seemed to be a likely place to hide
one or more of the bills that assault Proposition 2½
(a transportation bond bill was where the last one was
buried in 2020). Exploring that possibility wasn't easy,
required an excruciating amount of time and work. CLT and I
did it — so you wouldn't need to. For you to appreciate what
it required on this end to save you from doing it yourself — if you
ever need to — here's what was necessary.
The State House News Service
reported ("House Session Summary - Thursday, June 23, 2022;
Reps Expand Infrastructure Bill With $560 Mil Amendment"):
[ - EXCERPT - ]
CONSOLIDATED "A":
At 4:45 p.m., Rep. Hogan banged the gavel and said, consolidated
amendment A is available to the right of the rostrum.
The House then
returned to a period of inactivity while representatives in the
chamber flipped through the consolidated amendment text....
RETURNS: The House
returned to order at 6:02 p.m.
CONSOLIDATED "A":
Question came on consolidated amendment A filed by Rep.
Michlewitz.
Question then came
on a further amendment to the consolidated amendment.
The House adopted
the further amendment. Rep. Hogan ordered a roll call vote on
the underlying consolidated amendment as amended.
BY A ROLL CALL VOTE
of 155-0, consolidated amendment ADOPTED as amended. Time was
6:14 p.m.
Question then came
on engrossment of the bill as amended.
BY A ROLL CALL VOTE
of 155-0, bill ENGROSSED. Time was 6:21 p.m.
At 4:45 p.m. state
representatives were introduced for the first time to Consolidated
Amendment "A" and voted to pass it unanimously an hour and 29
minutes later, after representatives "flipped through" its pages (no
doubt simply to assure that their earmarks were included as
leadership had promised). How long would it take to read and digest it,
couldn't take much time, right? I chased it down, found it at:
https://malegislature.gov/Bills/GetAmendmentContent/192/H4897/A/House/Preview
For your
convenience, you can find the text
below in a format that makes
reading it somewhat easier than that version on the Legislature's website.
But the multitude of
numbered amendments still didn't tell me what those 369 amendments
themselves within the consolidated mega-amendment actually
provided, so next I had to find the Rosetta Stone to translate, then scan over all of them, from:
https://malegislature.gov/Bills/192/H4897/Amendments/House
I haven't uncovered any
obvious stealth attacks on Proposition 2½
hidden within — but please let me know if you do.
In March Gov. Baker filed his transportation bond
bill for $9.7 Billion of borrowing and spending. The House
just increased it to $11 Billion and sent it to the Senate
— where it'll increase even more to
include senators' own individual earmarks.
The "Tax Relief" circus
continues performing in its three rings, running out the clock.
But perhaps there's some hope for reforming the estate tax before
the Legislature shuts down for the rest of the year so legislators
can get home and campaign for reelection fulltime.
The News Service reported on Tuesday ("Estate Tax Changes Appearing More Likely
—
Spilka Confirms Senate Talks, Suggests There May Be
Surprises"):
The odds
of estate tax reform appeared to improve Tuesday,
and a potential tax relief package could also
feature some ideas that haven't yet been publicly
floated, Senate President Karen Spilka said Tuesday.
With
inflation high and the state on track for another
major revenue surplus this fiscal year, legislative
leaders for weeks have been saying they plan to
produce a tax relief package but a plan has not
surfaced with less than six weeks remaining to get a
bill through the Legislature and to Gov. Charlie
Baker.
Spilka, at
a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast,
teased some areas under consideration.
"We are
currently in discussions about a tax relief
proposal, which may include changes to the Earned
Income Tax Credit and the estate tax, among others
-- some of which you may have heard suggestions,
some of which not," she said. "And we will continue
to ensure that Massachusetts is open, competitive
and inclusive and that these same values will guide
our tax relief proposal." ...
Spilka on
Tuesday tied the estate-tax issue to rising home
prices and property values in Massachusetts.
The median
single-family home sale price in Massachusetts hit
$590,000 last month, according to The Warren Group,
and it was higher in some parts of the state --
$800,000 in Middlesex County, for instance.
"There's
so many seniors who bought their houses ten, 20, 30
years ago, when their house was maybe either
$15,000, 20, 25, that is now worth about a million,
so having a house at that value does not necessarily
indicate wealth, particularly if they are in their
elder years," Spilka told reporters after her
speech. "So we are definitely taking a good look at
that."
Baker, in
his bill, blended policies that would span across
tax brackets, proposing changes that would benefit
some of the state's lowest-income workers and others
that would offer relief to wealthier residents. As
lawmakers craft their plans, one looming question is
which populations they will steer their efforts
toward.
"I want to
focus on tax relief, not only for something maybe
like the estate tax, but especially our low-income
residents and families in our time," Spilka said.
"That's why the Senate a few years back, when I was
chair of Ways and Means, we did an increase in the
EITC. That's something that all research shows is
one of the best tax relief to give to folks because
it not only goes directly into their pockets, but in
turn then it is spent on Main Street."
There's nothing like
legislators having some skin in the game to get their attention
— like being threatened by an estate
tax on their own estates going back to the first dollar they leave behind
when they've gone to their just reward. The remainder of "tax
relief" being discussed so far apparently will transfer money from
the over-taxation surplus to those who didn't pay into it
— leaving those from whom it was
extracted with little if any relief. That would actually
become simply more
spending by the Legislature, not a refund of tax over-payment
— classic redistribution of wealth in
its most socialistic ugliness.
This was the week of big,
even cataclysmic court decisions. On Wednesday the state's
Supreme Judicial Court ruled against us graduated income tax
opponents in the challenge of the constitutional amendment ballot
question's language as it will appear on the ballot and in the
Secretary of State's voter information booklet, shot it down.
The Boston Herald reported the breaking news on
Wednesday ("High court clears
millionaire tax question for Massachusetts ballot"):
The
state’s high court on Wednesday cleared the
millionaire tax question to appear on the November
ballot — over the objections of several prominent
business and tax policy groups that say it will
drive people from the state.
“The
summary closely tracks the language of the proposed
amendment and thus “fairly informs voters” of its
operation,” the Supreme Judicial Court wrote in
their decision....
“The
Attorney General, the Secretary of the Commonwealth,
and the Supreme Judicial Court have all dropped the
ball. The language being used to describe the
question is extremely leading,” said Paul Craney,
spokesman for the Foundation said in a release.
According
to [Paul Craney, spokesman for the Fiscal Alliance
Foundation], the money appropriated by the Fair
Share amendment, even if spent as indicated, will
still allow the legislature to move funds to other
projects.
“Once the
funding is appropriated, the legislature is free to
do whatever it wishes. This amendment allows
lawmakers to play a shell game and by moving money
around, the legislature could spend the new tax
revenues on whatever it wants,” he said....
Daniel
Ryan, a tax partner at Sullivan & Worcester who also
filed a brief in the case, noted the court has
simply followed their own precedent in the case....
“Should
the amendment pass, there is no guarantee that state
expenditures for education and transportation will
increase. The education and transportation
expenditures could remain the same, and the
legislature could use funds formerly allocated to
those areas to entirely unrelated areas. This was
the experience in California following the passage
of a similar ballot initiative,” he said.
Voters
will decide in November whether the tax becomes part
of the state’s constitution.
So this bait-and-switch
scam has now been sanctioned by the state's highest court. I'm
not surprised, but we opponents will need to double and triple our
efforts to educate voters on this pig-in-a-poke they'll be voting
on.
Up to that point it had
been a good week for Attorney General Maura Healey. Her rival
in the race for governor in the Democrat primary,
Sen. Sonia Chang-Díaz, threw in the towel, announced she was
withdrawing from the campaign. Healey's good week ended on
Wednesday, hard. But for constitutionalists the
remainder of the week turned into a stunning celebration restoring
some faith in the judicial branch, at least in Washington.
Thursday brought the U.S.
Supreme Court's decision on firearms rights, overturning New York's
licensing scheme as unconstitutional (which, along with other
states, will affect Massachusetts' restrictive licensing scheme as
well), then the next day the nation's high court overturned Roe v.
Wade as well (which will not affect Massachusetts).
On Thursday the State
House News Service reported ("Guns Laws Thrown Into Doubt By
High Court Ruling — Healey Sees "Grave Danger," Lawmakers Mulling
Legislative Response"):
In a
ruling praised by gun rights advocates, the U.S.
Supreme Court on Thursday struck down New York's
concealed-carry gun licensing law with a decision
that Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey
said flouts hundreds of years of state-level gun
regulation and "poses a grave danger" to people
traveling in public spaces.
The New
York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen
decision holds that New York could not
constitutionally require citizens to demonstrate a
"special need" before they could receive a license
to carry firearms in public for self-defense.
"Nothing
in the Second Amendment's text draws a home/public
distinction with respect to the right to keep and
bear arms, and the definition of 'bear' naturally
encompasses public carry," Justice Clarence Thomas
wrote for the majority. "Moreover, the Second
Amendment guarantees an 'individual right to possess
and carry weapons in case of confrontation,' .. and
confrontation can surely take place outside the
home." ...
The 6-3
ruling appears likely to force states, including
Massachusetts, to rethink their gun laws.
Hannah
Hill, research and policy director for The National
Foundation for Gun Rights -- the legal arm of the
National Association for Gun Rights -- said the
ruling "overturns similar laws" in California,
Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, and
Massachusetts.
"The
Foundation will be doing everything in its power to
help restore the right to carry for law-abiding
Americans in these states, and we're eager to work
with our members who've had their rights denied for
far too long," Hill said.
But a Gov.
Charlie Baker spokesman said the ruling on New
York's law "has no immediate effect on the
Commonwealth's gun laws, which all remain in place."
"The
Baker-Polito Administration is proud of the
Commonwealth's nation-leading gun laws and history
of enacting bipartisan gun reform legislation,"
Baker press secretary Terry MacCormack said in a
brief statement....
But while
Healey, a leading candidate for governor, warned
that "in a country flooded with firearms, today's
reckless and anti-democratic decision poses a grave
danger to Americans as they go about their daily
lives in public spaces like supermarkets, hospitals,
and playgrounds," the House chairman of the
Judiciary Committee, Rep. Mike Day, promised "we're
not going to see people walking around in churches
and schools with guns on their side." ...
"We'll be
ready to tighten up the nets to the extent that
they're loosened by today's decision," said Day, who
called the Supreme Court a "rogue court" and alleged
that its decision was "intellectually dishonest" and
"cherry picks history, it cherry picks what
regulations they want to pay attention to, which
ones they want to ignore, in order to carry out a
political decision here."
House
Speaker Ron Mariano said a policy response may come
before formal sessions wrap up for the year on July
31.
"It
certainly creates a bit of a cloud as to what's
acceptable," Mariano said....
Healey did
not propose any specific policy response to the
ruling but said she's ready to defend the state's
gun laws.
The
State
House News Service reported on Friday ("U.S. Supreme Court
Overturns Roe v. Wade —
Abortion Remains Legal Under Mass. Law, Baker Signs
Executive Order"):
The U.S.
Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade,
ruling that the constitution does not confer the
right to an abortion and leaving decisions about
regulating abortion up to the states.
The
court's ruling had been expected since a draft
opinion leaked in early May, and reaction from
Massachusetts, where abortion remains legal under
state law, was swift.
Gov.
Charlie Baker, within moments of the decision in
Dobbs v. Jackson, signed an executive order that
bars Massachusetts from cooperating with extradition
attempts from other states that may pursue criminal
charges in connection with receiving or performing
reproductive health services that are legal here.
Baker's
order also protects Massachusetts reproductive
health care providers from losing their licenses or
receiving other professional discipline because of
out-of-state charges, and prohibits agencies under
the state's executive department from assisting
another state's investigation into a person or
entity for receiving or delivering reproductive
health services in Massachusetts, the governor's
office said.
"I am
deeply disappointed in today's decision by the
Supreme Court which will have major consequences for
women across the country who live in states with
limited access to reproductive health care
services," Baker said in a statement.
While the overturning of
Roe v. Wade as unconstitutional will not affect Massachusetts, the
response to it very well might. California is planning to set
itself up as a "safe haven" for abortions, an abortion magnet.
The Guardian reported last
month ("California proposes new funding to help low-income and out-of-state
abortion seekers"):
California’s
governor has announced a new reproductive health spending plan,
dedicating an additional $57m to prepare for an influx of people
from other states seeking abortions in California....
The state’s
governor and legislators have vowed to make California a safe
haven for abortion care in anticipation of a supreme court
ruling this summer that could end federal protections for
abortions. No other US state does more to protect abortion
rights, according to a report by the Guttmacher Institute, a
pro-choice research group.
“California will
not stand idly by as extremists roll back our basic
constitutional rights; we’re going to fight like hell, making
sure that all women – not just those in California – know that
this state continues to recognize and protect their fundamental
rights,” Newsom said in a statement....
If the supreme
court rolls back federal protections for abortion, officials and
reproductive health advocates expect thousands of people to come
to California from more conservative states to access abortion
care. Newsom’s proposed grants could help lower the costs for
those people, who wouldn’t otherwise qualify for state health
subsidies or coverage.
California taxpayers are
about to be forced by Gov. Gavin Newsom and its Democrat legislature
to start funding the cost of importing and providing abortions to
those from other states across the nation where they are prevented
in their home states. It usually doesn't take long for the
radicals of Massachusetts to adopt and implement the craziness of
California liberals, so keep a weather eye open for the "safe haven"
concept and cost to be imposed on Bay State taxpayers too.
A decade ago it was
finally pried
out of the Patrick administration that the de facto "sanctuary
state" of Massachusetts was spending some $2 Billion on state
benefits and services for illegal immigrants. Over the past decade,
especially since Biden was installed in the White House and erased
the U.S./Mexico border for the invasion, do you suppose the number
of immigrants in Massachusetts and the amount in taxpayer-funded
handouts has decreased, or increased?
A Boston
Herald editorial on
Sunday ("Abortion move puts Bay State
on front lines") noted:
Massachusetts is now in a glaring spotlight.
Gov.
Charlie Baker signed an executive order Friday
following the U.S. Supreme Court decision on
abortion that will protect Bay State health care
providers who perform abortion services for
out-of-state women.
But the
last thing this state needs is to become an abortion
destination.
A dozen
states permit abortion prior to viability — 24 weeks
— or when necessary to protect the life or health of
the pregnant woman. That’s the law in Massachusetts,
Rhode Island, Maine, Connecticut and New York.
Abortion is also legal in New Hampshire, with a few
restrictions, and in Vermont.
The
Guttmacher Institute found just under 50 abortion
facilities in Massachusetts in a recent survey. The
Washington, D.C., nonprofit bills itself as a
research and policy organization committed to
advancing sexual and reproductive health.
The ROE
Act in Massachusetts further solidifies abortion
rights.
|
 |
 |
|
Chip Ford
Executive Director |
|
|
|
State House News
Service
Thursday, June 23, 2022
House Drives Infrastructure Bill Up To $11 Bil
Free or Discounted Fare Plan Shelved In Favor Of More Study
By Chris Lisinski
The Massachusetts House took a major step Thursday toward
injecting billions of dollars into work on the state's
transportation and environmental infrastructure, sending to
the Senate a rewritten borrowing bill that includes hundreds
of millions of dollars to fix glaring safety issues at the
MBTA and explore a rail expansion in western Massachusetts.
The House voted 155-0 in favor of a nearly $11 billion
infrastructure bond bill (H 4897) after approving a
mega-amendment that tacked on about $560 million in
additional spending, mostly consisting of local earmarks, as
well as new reporting requirements for the beleaguered MBTA
amid a blistering federal investigation.
Transportation Committee Co-chair Rep. William Straus called
the legislation "this session's signature transportation
bond bill."
After an eleventh-hour gubernatorial veto doomed last
session's legislative push to require offering low-income
fares across the MBTA, the House decided against making
another pass at the issue.
East Boston Rep. Adrian Madaro filed an amendment that would
have ordered the T to launch a free or discounted transit
fare program for all qualifying low-income riders, roughly
similar to language both the House and Senate approved in
the dying hours of the 2019-2020 lawmaking session, but
representatives quietly disposed of the proposal by omitting
it from the single consolidated amendment.
Instead, the bill calls for creation of a "mobility pricing
commission" that would study congestion pricing -- a
practice in which roadway tolls rise or fall depending on
traffic conditions to incentivize travel at off-peak times
-- and public transit pricing. That group's work would
investigate "the feasibility of means-tested fares" as well
as ridership forecasts and emissions impacts, and file a
report by July 1, 2023.
"It is disappointing that the House chose to exclude from
the final transportation bond bill a low-income fare program
that would help thousands who are struggling with the burden
of transit costs and the high cost of gasoline, is proven to
increase transit ridership, and is supported by more than 80
percent of people across the Commonwealth," the Transit is
Essential coalition said. "More than 90 percent of
low-income MBTA riders don't qualify for the limited
existing low-income programs -- for youth and seniors. This
current system is simply not equitable. We will advocate
vigorously for a low-income fare program as the bill moves
to the Senate."
The House choice on low-income fares could create friction
between the branches if and when legislative leaders send
the underlying bill into conference committee negotiations.
Senate President Karen Spilka, whose chamber will soon roll
out and debate its version of the infrastructure bond bill,
on Tuesday said she was disappointed by Gov. Charlie Baker's
2021 low-income fares veto and is "looking forward to
continuing that conversation."
Other additions that featured in the House's mega-amendment
include $50 million to support electrification of the
commuter rail's Framingham/Worcester Line, another $50
million for electrification and rapid transit service on the
Fairmount Line, and $50 million in grants and zero-interest
loans to help commercial fishers purchase more efficient
equipment.
Before sending it to the floor for Thursday's debate, House
leaders bulked up the bill with $250 million for early steps
toward a western Massachusetts rail extension and $400
million that the MBTA would use to correct harrowing safety
problems identified in an ongoing federal investigation.
The Federal Transit Administration last week ordered the
MBTA to take immediate action to address a staffing shortage
in the agency's control center, insufficient protections
against runaway trains, and a backlog of delayed
maintenance. Two days later, T officials announced they
would slash weekday frequency on the Red, Orange and Blue
Lines to avoid overworking dispatchers to an unsafe level.
Asked what prompted House leaders to fold the money for the
T's safety response into the bill, House Speaker Ronald
Mariano smiled and referenced coverage of the FTA
directives, "Do you read the paper?"
"We are in a situation where the feds have come in and said
that our trains are unsafe. We've had two fatalities in the
last six months," Mariano told reporters after a Democratic
caucus. "We wanted to weigh in as having a source of money
if we need to make some fixes to get this thing to a place
where public confidence is restored. That's what this is all
about. We've heard from the T that the ridership has been
down since the pandemic. Well, maybe there's good reasons
why it's down, and we have to start to address this."
The House added language via amendment to the bill that will
require the MBTA to publish biweekly reports tallying the
number of unfilled jobs across the agency, how long those
positions have been open, how many hires it made in the past
two weeks, and the amount of time it would take to train new
personnel.
That would give a clearer glimpse into the staffing outlook
at the T, where federal investigators warn the shorthanded
workforce poses safety risks, as the agency careens toward
an operating budget cliff.
Mariano called the $400 million figure "a placeholder" until
investigators "identify the seriousness of the problem."
Straus, who along with his counterpart Sen. Brendan Crighton
will lead an oversight hearing into the MBTA, added that the
money "doesn't translate at the moment to a known, specific
list" of fixes.
"What we've seen is, across the board, different kinds of
safety-related issues: escalators, fixed stairways, brakes,
tracks, staffing levels. The list goes on and on. Doorways
to subway cars. Different kinds of safety issues that have
different causes have been happening at the T," Straus said.
"Before the oversight is done and the FTA's final report is
done, we don't know the exact financial number or the
specific management recommendations that need to be made,
but the $400 million should help the public realize that the
Legislature takes it seriously."
The infrastructure bond bill now heads to the Senate, where
top Democrats have not signaled if they support setting
aside a pool of money for the MBTA's safety response.
A Spilka spokesperson did not directly answer a question
about whether she supports the additional MBTA dollars,
saying only that the Senate president "looks forward to
reviewing the bond bill in its entirety."
The spokesperson also pointed to a joint Mariano and Spilka
statement from Tuesday in which the duo announced they would
seek an MBTA oversight hearing but stopped short of taking a
position on funding to respond to FTA findings. Their
statement did make clear that both leaders "expect to
increase the amount of available funding" for East-West
Rail.
Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, one of the chamber's
three Republicans, said he believes "the T does need
funding."
"The T has needed additional infusions of resources for
quite some time, and the Baker-Polito administration has
been making some of those infusions together with the
Legislature," Tarr said Thursday. "It seems to me that we
have some serious safety issues that need to be addressed at
the T. Part of the consideration here needs to be: how will
the additional resources be used to improve safety as
opposed to just expanding the system?"
"That's particularly my concern with the western expansion,"
Tarr added. "I think there is good reason to proceed with
that, cautiously, but first and foremost we need to think
about how we improve the safety of the MBTA. We need to
think about resources that need to go to that, but we also
need to think about the continuing levels of subsidy for the
operation. Years ago, we had agreed to forward funding in
trying to make the T self-sufficient. Given what's happened
with the pandemic, that simply is not possible, and we're
still in a period of recovery, in my opinion, but we need to
think about how those dollars are used."
The latest crisis at the MBTA could reopen debate atop
Beacon Hill about not only a one-time injection but the
ongoing, permanent funding for the system as well,
particularly as T officials brace for an operating budget
gap of hundreds of millions of dollars to hit next year.
In March 2020, the House approved a package of tax and fee
increases that Democrats said would have generated more than
half a billion dollars per year to put toward transportation
needs including the T, but the bill died in the Senate and
legislative leaders have not embraced a new proposal since
then.
"Obviously, it's been an ongoing problem, and we have to
think of alternative solutions," Mariano said Thursday when
asked if the problems at the MBTA would prompt his chamber
to revisit a long-term revenue debate.
The infrastructure bill would steer about $2.8 billion
toward the federal highway system in Massachusetts and
another $1.35 billion to non-federally aided roads and
bridges here.
It also calls for more than $1.3 billion to support MBTA
capital improvements such as electrifying commuter rail
trains and replacing the Green Line fleet, $200 million to
promote or support electric vehicle rollout, nearly $65
million for regional transit networks and authorities, and
several other spending provisions.
Baker kicked off debate by filing a $9.7 billion bond bill
in March (H 4561) that he and his deputies said would
maximize the impact of federal dollars flowing to
Massachusetts under a new infrastructure law and also
position the Bay State to compete for additional grant
funding.
The bipartisan infrastructure law made billions of dollars
available to states in competitive grants, but to get in the
running, the Legislature needs to approve all of the
spending upfront before the federal government reimburses.
About $3.5 billion of the original pot Baker proposed would
put state dollars on the table toward grants.
— Sam Doran contributed
reporting.
State House News
Service
Tuesday, June 21, 2022
Estate Tax Changes Appearing More Likely
Spilka Confirms Senate Talks, Suggests There May Be
Surprises
By Katie Lannan
The odds of estate tax reform appeared to improve Tuesday,
and a potential tax relief package could also feature some
ideas that haven't yet been publicly floated, Senate
President Karen Spilka said Tuesday.
With inflation high and the state on track for another major
revenue surplus this fiscal year, legislative leaders for
weeks have been saying they plan to produce a tax relief
package but a plan has not surfaced with less than six weeks
remaining to get a bill through the Legislature and to Gov.
Charlie Baker.
Spilka, at a Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce breakfast,
teased some areas under consideration.
"We are currently in discussions about a tax relief
proposal, which may include changes to the Earned Income Tax
Credit and the estate tax, among others -- some of which you
may have heard suggestions, some of which not," she said.
"And we will continue to ensure that Massachusetts is open,
competitive and inclusive and that these same values will
guide our tax relief proposal."
Baker filed his own nearly $700 million relief package in
January, which featured breaks for seniors, renters,
parents, and low-income workers. Baker's bill, one of dozens
still before the Revenue Committee, also proposed lowering
the short-term capital gains tax rate and changing the
threshold where the state's estate tax kicks in -- currently
$1 million.
Estate tax changes appear to be emerging as a broad area of
consensus, though the Democrats who control the Legislature
may differ in their precise approach from what Baker
proposed. The estate tax is a transfer tax on the value of a
decedent's estate before distribution to any beneficiary.
The Massachusetts Taxpayers Foundation has described
Massachusetts as an "outlier among the states" on the estate
tax, noting that the Bay State and Oregon's $1 million
taxation thresholds are the lowest of the 12 states with
estate taxes.
Under Baker's plan, the threshold at which the estate tax
kicks in would double to $2 million. While the current tax
applies to the full value of estates over $1 million,
Baker's bill (H 4361) would tax only the amount above $2
million.
Last month, after his own address to the Greater Boston
Chamber, House Speaker Ron Mariano said the idea of changing
the threshold at which the estate tax kicks in "was
something that jumped out at us right away."
Spilka on Tuesday tied the estate-tax issue to rising home
prices and property values in Massachusetts.
The median single-family home sale price in Massachusetts
hit $590,000 last month, according to The Warren Group, and
it was higher in some parts of the state -- $800,000 in
Middlesex County, for instance.
"There's so many seniors who bought their houses ten, 20, 30
years ago, when their house was maybe either $15,000, 20,
25, that is now worth about a million, so having a house at
that value does not necessarily indicate wealth,
particularly if they are in their elder years," Spilka told
reporters after her speech. "So we are definitely taking a
good look at that."
Baker, in his bill, blended policies that would span across
tax brackets, proposing changes that would benefit some of
the state's lowest-income workers and others that would
offer relief to wealthier residents. As lawmakers craft
their plans, one looming question is which populations they
will steer their efforts toward.
"I want to focus on tax relief, not only for something maybe
like the estate tax, but especially our low-income residents
and families in our time," Spilka said. "That's why the
Senate a few years back, when I was chair of Ways and Means,
we did an increase in the EITC. That's something that all
research shows is one of the best tax relief to give to
folks because it not only goes directly into their pockets,
but in turn then it is spent on Main Street."
The fiscal 2019 state budget increased the state Earned
Income Tax Credit, available to eligible low- and
moderate-income families, to 30 percent of the federal
credit level. That boost came after lawmakers and Baker in
2015 expanded the EITC from 15 to 23 percent of the federal
credit.
A further expansion of the EITC was among the suggestions
members of the Revenue Committee heard in February, when
they held a hearing on Baker's plan.
The Revenue Committee, chaired by Braintree Rep. Mark Cusack
and Pittsfield Sen. Adam Hinds, gave itself until Friday,
July 1 to report on Baker's bill.
The Legislature has been reviewing hundreds of tax-related
bills since the start of the session in January 2021, and
formal lawmaking business ends this year on July 31, setting
that as a deadline for passage of major bills.
Asked when a bill might come out of committee, Spilka said,
"It's almost July."
"I could just say to you 'In July,' which is very soon, but
we are in discussions not only internally in the Senate but
in the House to try to help spur movement along," she said.
State House News
Service
Wednesday, May 22, 2022
SJC Upholds Healey’s Income Surtax Description
Court Stands By Fairness Of "Subject To Appropriation"
Clause
By Colin A. Young
The Supreme Judicial Court rejected the latest legal
challenge to the blockbuster ballot question asking voters
if they support a new surtax on household income above $1
million, ruling Wednesday that the summary Attorney General
Maura Healey has prepared for the ballot is fair and
suitable to be presented to voters.
The high court's ruling clears the way for a summary and
statements of what a 'yes' and 'no' vote would do that were
prepared by Healey, a surtax supporter who expects to be on
the ballot herself as a candidate for governor, to be
printed alongside the question when it is put before voters
this November. The surtax is estimated to bring in $1.3
billion a year and the text of the amendment calls for the
revenue to go towards transportation and education.
Opponents of the surtax proposal argued that the summary and
'yes' and 'no' vote statements that Healey prepared for
Secretary of State William Galvin to include in a voter
information booklet and on the November ballot itself were
unfair and misleading largely because they do not explicitly
state that the Legislature retains the ultimate
decision-making power over state spending and theoretically
could use money the surtax brings in to supplant existing
state funding for transportation and education.
Writing for the court, Justice David Lowy stated simply, "We
disagree."
Healey's summary reads: "This proposed constitutional
amendment would establish an additional 4% state income tax
on that portion of annual taxable income in excess of $1
million. This income level would be adjusted annually, by
the same method used for federal income-tax brackets, to
reflect increases in the cost of living. Revenues from this
tax would be used, subject to appropriation by the state
Legislature, for public education, public colleges and
universities; and for the repair and maintenance of roads,
bridges, and public transportation. The proposed amendment
would apply to tax years beginning on or after January 1,
2023."
"This decision is a victory for everyone who wants
Massachusetts to be a place where the very rich pay their
fair share to make our schools great and our roads and
transit safe and efficient," Fair Share for Massachusetts
spokesperson Steve Crawford said. "The ballot's simple
language accurately describes what the Fair Share Amendment
will do. The very rich, who now pay a smaller share of their
income in taxes than the rest of us, will pay a little more.
The money raised is constitutionally guaranteed to be spent
on education and transportation to build a stronger economy
for all."
Having successfully kept the so-called millionaire's tax off
the ballot in 2018 with a successful legal challenge,
Massachusetts High Tech Council President Chris Anderson and
a group of state representatives and right-leaning groups
lodged a complaint earlier this year that the surtax
summary that Healey prepared for voters would misguide them
and could lead to "the nightmare scenario of the
Constitution being amended based not on the will of the
people, but because the people were misled."
The Coalition to Stop the Tax Hike Amendment, the group of
small businesses, chambers of commerce, some of the state's
most influential trade organizations, retirees and concerned
citizens that is working to defeat the surtax question, said
Wednesday that it "strongly disagrees" with the SJC's ruling
because "the ballot summary fails to explain to
Massachusetts voters that revenue from this massive tax hike
can be redirected by the Legislature for anything as money
is fungible."
"Because of a loophole in this constitutional amendment,
there is no guarantee that money from this huge tax increase
would actually increase spending on education and
transportation," anti-surtax campaign spokesman Dan Cence
said. "Instead, the politicians who put this on the ballot
are giving themselves a blank check to redirect existing
funding for education and transportation to their own pet
projects, with no accountability."
The Mass. High Tech Council said that, while it was
disappointed in the SJC's decision, it views its litigation
as a success "in an important way: it has revealed, beyond
any reasonable dispute, that the Amendment, if adopted by
voters, would not require increased spending on education
and transportation."
The lawsuit sought to have the SJC order that ballot
materials tell voters that "the Legislature could choose to
reduce funding on education and transportation from other
sources and replace it with the new surtax revenue because
the proposed amendment does not require otherwise."
When they heard
oral arguments on the case last month, the justices
zeroed in on the phrase "subject to appropriation by the
state Legislature" in Healey's summary with Justice Scott
Kafker suggesting less than two minutes into the
presentation from the plaintiffs' attorney that the phrase
indicates that "this could pass and we wouldn't have the 4
percent actually appropriated, right?"
In the ruling he wrote, Lowy said the SJC considered two
1992 cases that concerned an initiative petition proposing
to raise revenue through an excise and channel that revenue
into a specific fund to be spent on specific purposes
subject to appropriation by the Legislature. One dealt with
the establishment of a health fund financed by an excise tax
on certain tobacco products and the other concerned an
excise tax on oil and hazardous material, and in both cases
plaintiffs argued that the attorney general's summary was
misleading by not mentioning that the Legislature could
spend money differently.
But the SJC ruled in both 1992 cases that the summaries met
muster under Article 48 of the Constitution because they
closely tracked the language of the proposed amendment by
"accurately describing that the revenues were subject to
appropriation." Lowy also wrote that his predecessors on the
SJC in 1992 "held that the summaries need not address the
plaintiffs' assertions that the raised revenues could, in
theory, be spent by the Legislature for nondesignated
purposes" if the text of the ballot proposal did not
expressly address that possibility.
He said that same reasoning was "equally applicable" in the
surtax case before the 2022 edition of the SJC, even though
the surtax is proposed as a Constitutional amendment as
opposed to the 1992 proposals for new state statutes.
"The proposed amendment does not address how the Legislature
may spend monies other than those raised by the amendment.
Consequently, the Attorney General's summary need not opine
on whether, as plaintiffs contend, monies that historically
have been spent on education and transportation could, at
some future point, be spent elsewhere," Lowy wrote. "The
summary need only describe the amendment itself; we hold
that it does so fairly."
During oral arguments, Lowy questioned whether the phrase
"subject to appropriation" was too "inside baseball" and
floated the idea that additional summary language explicitly
about the Legislature's ultimate appropriating power could
be within bounds. He and the SJC more broadly did not pursue
that option.
After the court's ruling was handed down, Mass. Fiscal
Alliance spokesman Paul Craney said he was disappointed
"that the justices are letting political considerations get
in the way of delivering unbiased information to the people
of Massachusetts being tasked with making this decision."
"The language being used to describe the question is
extremely leading," Craney said.
Gov. Charlie Baker, who has been critical of the income
surtax and whose budget chief called it "dangerous policy,"
nominated all seven of the high court's seven justices.
Healey supports the surtax and is running for governor this
year, leading that race in public opinion polls.
The proposal would shift the state away from the flat income
tax rate structure enshrined in the Massachusetts
Constitution. If the amendment is approved by voters, the
first $1 million of household income would still be taxed at
the current 5 percent tax rate and household income above
that first $1 million would be taxed at an effective rate of
9 percent. It would add an estimated $1.3 billion in annual
revenue for the state, according to a report published this
year by the Center for State Policy Analysis at Tufts
University.
The Boston
Herald
Wednesday, June 22, 2022
High court clears millionaire tax question for Massachusetts
ballot
By Matthew Medsger
The state’s high court on Wednesday cleared the millionaire
tax question to appear on the November ballot — over the
objections of several prominent business and tax policy
groups that say it will drive people from the state.
“The summary closely tracks the language of the proposed
amendment and thus “fairly informs voters” of its
operation,” the Supreme Judicial Court wrote in their
decision.
The ballot question will ask voters if they want to amend
the state’s constitution to tax incomes over $1 million.
The Mass. High Tech Council’s President, Chris Anderson,
filed a lawsuit against the attorney general in March
alleging that a 2022 ballot question, as written, does not
fairly inform voters of how the money will be spent.
The ballot question, proposing a so-called “millionaire’s
tax” but officially titled the “Fair Share amendment,” would
amend the state constitution to add a 4% tax on incomes over
$1 million in a given year. The money raised would be spent
on transportation and education, according to supporters, a
claim disputed by critics of the tax.
Proponents, who have maintained the question’s wording is
clear, hailed the court’s decision Wednesday.
“This decision is a victory for everyone who wants
Massachusetts to be a place where the very rich pay their
fair share to make our schools great and our roads and
transit safe and efficient,” a spokesperson for the Fair
Share Campaign, the group behind the ballot question, said
in a release.
Opponents of the question, beyond challenging its wording,
say the tax will lead to flight from the state, that it
negatively impacts more people than proponents estimate, and
that money won’t be spent as indicated.
The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce, Pioneer Legal, the
New England Legal Foundation and the Beacon Hill Institute
for Public Policy Research all filed amicus briefs in the
suit, saying that they agreed with the plaintiffs in the
case. The Fiscal Alliance Foundation, on Wednesday, said
they are disappointed by the court’s decision.
“The Attorney General, the Secretary of the Commonwealth,
and the Supreme Judicial Court have all dropped the ball.
The language being used to describe the question is
extremely leading,” said Paul Craney, spokesman for the
Foundation said in a release.
According to Craney, the money appropriated by the Fair
Share amendment, even if spent as indicated, will still
allow the legislature to move funds to other projects.
“Once the funding is appropriated, the legislature is free
to do whatever it wishes. This amendment allows lawmakers to
play a shell game and by moving money around, the
legislature could spend the new tax revenues on whatever it
wants,” he said.
The Fair Share Campaign says the legislature will be legally
obligated to spend the funds on schools and roads.
“The money raised is constitutionally guaranteed to be spent
on education and transportation to build a stronger economy
for all. The Fair Share Amendment is a win-win for
Massachusetts,” the spokesperson said.
Daniel Ryan, a tax partner at Sullivan & Worcester who also
filed a brief in the case, noted the court has simply
followed their own precedent in the case.
“Under the court’s prior decisions, the attorney general is
granted deference in her description of the proposed
amendment and the yes and no statements. Here, the court was
deferential to the language used by the attorney general
describing the proposed amendment,” he told the Herald.
However, Ryan also noted that plaintiffs are not wrong in
their assertions.
“Should the amendment pass, there is no guarantee that state
expenditures for education and transportation will increase.
The education and transportation expenditures could remain
the same, and the legislature could use funds formerly
allocated to those areas to entirely unrelated areas. This
was the experience in California following the passage of a
similar ballot initiative,” he said.
Voters will decide in November whether the tax becomes part
of the state’s constitution.
CommonWealth Magazine
Wednesday, June 22, 2022
Bucking party, Baker makes vote-by-mail permanent
Republicans in Legislature opposed the policy
By Shira Schoenberg
Despite concerns by members of his own party, Gov. Charlie
Baker, a Republican, signed a law Wednesday making voting by
mail permanent.
Massachusetts allowed early voting by mail for the first
time during the COVID-19 pandemic, and Democrats and voting
rights activists have been pushing to make the reforms
permanent in order to increase voter turnout.
The new law will permanently allow voting by mail for any
state or presidential primary or general election. It
shortens the voter registration window to 10 days, although
it does not allow for same-day voter registration, as some
advocates had hoped.
The bill expands early voting by providing early voting for
two weeks prior to a general election and one week prior to
a primary. It allows electronic voting for the first time
for overseas military voters, and people with disabilities
who request an accommodation.
Baker’s signature was not a given. The debate was heavily
partisan, with Republicans worrying that there were not
enough mechanisms to ensure election security and avoid
voter fraud with mail-in voting.
The final bill passed the House 126-29 with every Republican
and one Democrat voting against it. It passed the Senate
37-3 with the Senate’s three Republicans opposed.
However, those margins were large enough that Baker’s veto
would not actually matter, since the Democrats have a
two-thirds majority needed to override a veto.
Baker’s spokesperson sent out a copy of the signed parchment
without providing a comment from the governor. By signing
the bill rather than letting it become law over his veto,
Baker will give Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin
more time to prepare for the upcoming elections.
Geoff Foster, executive director of Common Cause
Massachusetts, said he is thrilled Baker signed the law. “At
a time when many states are making it harder to vote, this
new law will modernize our elections and make our democracy
more accessible and equitable,” Foster said.
Patricia Comfort, executive director of the League of Women
Voters of Massachusetts, said, “We are proud Massachusetts
is actively supporting voters and appreciate the governor
signing this bill. We expect voters to use the mail and
early voting options as soon as the September 6 primary
election.”
Secretary of the Commonwealth Bill Galvin said he had been
anticipating the new law and “preparations are already well
underway” for the September state primary.
State House News
Service
Friday, June 24, 2022
Advances - Week of June 26, 2022
It's not even close to the big deadline of July 31, but
people throughout state government are feeling the pressure,
and most of it has nothing to do with all of the major bills
they've spent months trying to assemble for final votes.
A blockbuster Supreme Court ruling on Thursday has lawmakers
researching changes to potentially unconstitutional state
gun laws.
The expected overturning of Roe v. Wade on Friday threw
abortion laws back into play, although access to legal
abortion remains in Massachusetts under its own state laws.
The MBTA is facing down federal intervention and trying to
ward it off with a hiring blitz intended to tamp down safety
worries.
Boston Mayor Michelle Wu is trying to prevent a state
takeover of the Boston public schools, which the state
education commissioner is ready to slap with the
underperforming label.
And on Beacon Hill, an annual state budget is due by Friday,
but it's looking like it may not be in place on time again,
not that lawmakers or Gov. Charlie Baker are too concerned
about it. And budget writers are mindful that, following an
economic contraction in the first quarter, next week's end
of the second quarter could mean a recession is already
underway.
Even if a budget accord is reached next week, a budget law
seems unlikely to be in place on July 1 since the governor
gets 10 days to review the nearly $50 billion plan and
offers his amendments and vetoes. It's more likely that the
Legislature will approve an interim budget to prevent any
lapses in government services in July while they work with
the governor on a final annual budget.
The six-person budget conference is one of six conference
committee panels that are actively working toward compromise
bills, with the other five working on a climate and energy
bill, marijuana industry reforms, bills to expand access to
mental health, a sports betting legalization plan, and
improvements at the state's two long-term care homes for
veterans.
State House News
Service
Friday, June 24, 2022
Weekly Roundup - Trump Court Speaks
Recap and analysis of the week in state government
By Colin A. Young
The Massachusetts Legislature has been winding through a
buffet line over the last few months, loading its plate up
with things like the annual state budget, offshore wind and
climate policy, sports betting legalization and mental
health care.
But this week, as lawmakers started to look towards
digesting those servings by the end of July, the U.S.
Supreme Judicial Court plopped mostly unwanted helpings of
two significant and controversial issues onto Beacon Hill's
plate with rulings upending precedent around gun control and
abortion access.
"This is a big deal and I am emotional right now because I
am really upset about it. And I'm really upset about it
because I hope people understand what's happened in this
country and how important our elections are, how important
it is to fight for democracy," Attorney General Maura Healey
said Friday on GBH Radio. She added, "This is the direct
output of failures, of breakdowns in our democracy. We have
a politicized Supreme Court that is doing things that are
against the will of the vast majority of people. Yesterday's
Bruen decision undermining strong gun laws in this country,
when the vast majority of Americans -- Republicans and
Democrats -- support commonsense gun laws. And today, the
overturning of Roe vs. Wade."
The Supreme Court on Friday struck down the decades-old
precedent of Roe v. Wade, a decision that has been
considered a real possibility since Justice Anthony Kennedy
retired in 2018 and which became more certain when Justice
Ruth Bader Ginsburg died in 2020, allowing President Donald
Trump, following his 2016 victory over Hillary Clinton, to
cement the court's conservative and anti-Roe majority.
Massachusetts Democrats acted preemptively, with the Senate
folding protections for providers of reproductive and
gender-affirming health care and their patients into the
state budget that's under negotiation and House Speaker
Ronald Mariano telegraphing that his chamber is interested
in "one big package that addresses a lot of the issues" that
arise from the SCOTUS ruling.
Rep. Tricia Farley-Bouvier, co-chair of the House
Progressive Caucus, suggested Friday that there will be a
lot of work to do on that front. "On day 1 of a post Roe
world, take care of yourself and each other. On day 2, we
come out swinging," she tweeted.
Republican Gov. Charlie Baker also got involved Friday,
signing an executive order within moments of the decision in
Dobbs v. Jackson to bar Massachusetts from cooperating with
extradition attempts from other states that may pursue
criminal charges against people who receive or perform
reproductive health services that are legal here.
Near the center of the state's reactions to both rulings was
Healey, who said Thursday that the Supreme Court's ruling
striking down New York's concealed-carry gun licensing law
"poses a grave danger to Americans as they go about their
daily lives in public spaces like supermarkets, hospitals,
and playgrounds." She did not offer any specific plans, but
said she stands ready "to vigorously defend and enforce" the
Bay State's gun laws.
The chances of Healey having the chance to do that as
governor got better this week, when her only remaining
Democratic opponent, Sen. Sonia Chang-Díaz, ended her
campaign and with it the Democratic primary. Gun control is
likely to feature prominently in Healey's remarks on the
campaign trail and the issue has always been an issue that
Healey has been eager to engage on. But it is also one that
riles up groups and people who don't like her.
Recall the summer of 2016, when Healey drew the ire of
Second Amendment advocates and sportsmen when she heightened
her office's enforcement of an assault weapons ban that had
been on the books for years by cracking down on copycat
assault weapons.
Republican legislators filed legislation to strip the
attorney general's office of the authority to regulate
firearms, the Baker administration waded into the fray with
its own legal concerns, and gun rights groups rallied
outside the State House with signs that said things like
"Maura Bans Freedom," "Tyranny. It's Back.," and "Maura
Healey Hurts Families." There was at least one sign reading
"Heil Healey" depicting Healey with a Hitler mustache, an
obvious reference to the Nazi dictator responsible for the
Holocaust.
"I think that Maura Healey really stepped in it,"
Massachusetts Gun Rights President Christopher Pinto told
the News Service in 2016. "This is like the day of infamy
for Maura Healey. She's going to awaken the sleeping giant
of gun owners in Massachusetts. There's nearly half a
million of us in Massachusetts - Republican, Democrat and
Independent -- and she's really woken up a sleeping giant,
and her chances of getting elected governor or keeping her
office could be over."
Well, Healey kept her job two years later when she trounced
Republican Jay McMahon by about a million votes. And now
that Healey appears to be on a glidepath to the governor's
office, gun rights again being catapulted into the forefront
could dredge up some of that same anti-Healey sentiment and
motivate those people to work and vote against her.
At the same time, there is no doubt that gun control and
abortion access are two issues that also energize liberal
activists and voters, and Beacon Hill Democrats might be
more interested in talking about those topics than they are
in talking about the pocketbook issues that are stressing
families, like the price of gas.
President Joe Biden's call this week for states to suspend
their own gas taxes or provide residents with similar relief
put House Speaker Ronald Mariano and Senate President Karen
Spilka -- who have repeatedly rejected and even mocked the
idea in Massachusetts -- in a bit of an awkward spot.
This week's pump politics also highlighted how the matter
has led to some strange bedfellows. For example, who said
about a gas tax suspension, "I know it might sound good and
feel good, but you are not providing any real relief."? That
would be Sen. Michael Rodrigues, a leader of the Democratic
supermajority in the Massachusetts Senate. And who said, "It
might sound good in a press release, but the kids in
Greybull, Wyoming know it's not going to help."? That'd be
Republican U.S. Sen. John Barrasso of, well, Wyoming.
OK, here's another one. "We'll still be able to fix our
highways and bring down prices of gas. We can do both at the
same time ... we can bring down the price of gas and give
families just a little bit of relief." That was Biden this
week as he called on Congress to suspend the federal gas tax
through the summer. And who said, "We have produced a plan
that: supports our state's road and bridge program; affirms
our strong credit rating while keeping our borrowing costs
from rising; and, puts real savings where it is needed - in
the hands of those who are working to keep our economy
strong in the face of soaring inflation."? Why, that would
be Mass. Senate Republican leader Bruce Tarr.
One more: "It's a gimmick that doesn't even make sense when
you read it." That was Braintree Democrat Rep. Mark Cusack.
Republican U.S. Sen. Marco Rubio shared a similar sentiment
on Twitter this week: "The gas tax holiday is stupid."
So the establishment Democrats of Beacon Hill and the
hardcore Republicans of the U.S. Senate are largely on the
same page when it comes to a gas tax holiday while the GOP
caucus at the Massachusetts State House echoes the moderate
Democrat who occupies the White House. Got it?
This week also proved that nobody likes to be on the losing
end of a decision and that both sides of the aisle generally
go to the same talking points when they find themselves
there.
Upset this week with the Supreme Judicial Court's ruling
that the summary of the income surtax ballot question that
Healey plans to present to voters is fair, right-leaning
Mass. Fiscal Alliance spokesman Paul Craney said he was
disappointed "that the justices are letting political
considerations get in the way..."
The very next day, it was Mariano who used similar language
to criticize the U.S. Supreme Court, saying the court's gun
rights ruling was a "blatantly political decision that's
been crafted by the leaders of the Republican Party in the
Senate."
The MBTA might be happy to have the bulk of the attention
focused on the Supreme Court as this week ends; it was a
brutal one for the T. It started with service on major
subway lines curtailed to weekend levels for the foreseeable
future, saw the T's new Red and Orange Line trains pulled
from the tracks, and came to a close with service in the
heart of downtown Boston either suspended or replaced with
shuttle buses as the T and a developer argue over who is to
blame.
STORY OF THE WEEK: Court rulings make major waves -- The
Mass. Supreme Judicial Court dismissed a challenge related
to the income surtax proposal on November's ballot and the
U.S. Supreme Court upended decades of precedent around
abortion access and gun laws.
State House News
Service
Thursday, June 23, 2022
Guns Laws Thrown Into Doubt By High Court Ruling
Healey Sees "Grave Danger," Lawmakers Mulling Legislative
Response
By Michael P. Norton
In a ruling praised by gun rights advocates, the U.S.
Supreme Court on Thursday struck down New York's
concealed-carry gun licensing law with a decision that
Massachusetts Attorney General Maura Healey said flouts
hundreds of years of state-level gun regulation and "poses a
grave danger" to people traveling in public spaces.
The New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. Bruen
decision holds that New York could not constitutionally
require citizens to demonstrate a "special need" before they
could receive a license to carry firearms in public for
self-defense.
"Nothing in the Second Amendment's text draws a home/public
distinction with respect to the right to keep and bear arms,
and the definition of 'bear' naturally encompasses public
carry," Justice Clarence Thomas wrote for the majority.
"Moreover, the Second Amendment guarantees an 'individual
right to possess and carry weapons in case of
confrontation,' .. and confrontation can surely take place
outside the home."
Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan, the court's
only justices appointed by Democrat presidents, were the
three dissenting justices.
"Many States have tried to address some of the dangers of
gun violence just described by passing laws that limit, in
various ways, who may purchase, carry, or use firearms of
different kinds," Breyer wrote. "The Court today severely
burdens States efforts to do so."
The 6-3 ruling appears likely to force states, including
Massachusetts, to rethink their gun laws.
Hannah Hill, research and policy director for The National
Foundation for Gun Rights -- the legal arm of the National
Association for Gun Rights -- said the ruling "overturns
similar laws" in California, Connecticut, Delaware, Hawaii,
Maryland, and Massachusetts.
"The Foundation will be doing everything in its power to
help restore the right to carry for law-abiding Americans in
these states, and we're eager to work with our members
who've had their rights denied for far too long," Hill said.
But a Gov. Charlie Baker spokesman said the ruling on New
York's law "has no immediate effect on the Commonwealth's
gun laws, which all remain in place."
"The Baker-Polito Administration is proud of the
Commonwealth's nation-leading gun laws and history of
enacting bipartisan gun reform legislation," Baker press
secretary Terry MacCormack said in a brief statement.
Guns On Their Side?
But while Healey, a leading candidate for governor, warned
that "in a country flooded with firearms, today's reckless
and anti-democratic decision poses a grave danger to
Americans as they go about their daily lives in public
spaces like supermarkets, hospitals, and playgrounds," the
House chairman of the Judiciary Committee, Rep. Mike Day,
promised "we're not going to see people walking around in
churches and schools with guns on their side."
Day didn't specify a policy response to the decision and
said analysts are still digging through the ruling,
including a concurring opinion written by Justice Samuel
Alito, and planned to talk with police chiefs, who play a
significant role in gun licensing in Massachusetts.
"We'll be ready to tighten up the nets to the extent that
they're loosened by today's decision," said Day, who called
the Supreme Court a "rogue court" and alleged that its
decision was "intellectually dishonest" and "cherry picks
history, it cherry picks what regulations they want to pay
attention to, which ones they want to ignore, in order to
carry out a political decision here."
House Speaker Ron Mariano said a policy response may come
before formal sessions wrap up for the year on July 31.
"It certainly creates a bit of a cloud as to what's
acceptable," Mariano said. "It's always been a sticking
point around the Second Amendment, and the presumption of
the qualifications to carry, so now we're in this never-neverland,
and I'll leave it to the attorneys to read the law a lot
closer than I could ever read it. But I do know that
whatever road we take, it's not going to be easy. It's going
to require a little bit of work."
Defenders of Massachusetts gun laws credit those laws with
lower rates of gun violence, and Mariano knocked the
"activism" and "political agenda" that he sees on the high
court. He called the ruling a "blatantly political decision
that's been crafted by the leaders of the Republican Party
in the Senate."
"The Supreme Court's decision in New York State Rifle &
Pistol Association v. Bruen marks a significant expansion of
the Second Amendment right," said Duke University law
professor Jacob Charles, who is executive director of the
Duke Center for Firearms Law.
"In vindicating an individual's right to carry loaded guns
in public without any showing of special need, the court's
decision is likely to call into question the half dozen
other state concealed carry permitting laws similar to New
York's," Charles said. "Though these constitute a minority
of states, a sizeable portion of the population -- around 25
percent of Americans -- live in jurisdictions with these
more restrictive laws."
Healey did not propose any specific policy response to the
ruling but said she's ready to defend the state's gun laws.
"Gun violence is a public health epidemic, and I remain
committed to doing everything I can to keep our residents
and our communities safe," she said. "Massachusetts has one
of the lowest gun death rates in the country because we know
that strong gun laws save lives. I stand by our commonsense
gun laws and will continue to vigorously defend and enforce
them."
"All That We Decide"
Justice Alito devoted part of his concurring opinion to
attacking arguments of the dissenting justices, including
arguments about mass shootings.
"Why, for example, does the dissent think it is relevant to
recount the mass shootings that have occurred in recent
years?" Alito wrote. "Does the dissent think that laws like
New York's prevent or deter such atrocities? Will a person
bent on carrying out a mass shooting be stopped if he knows
that it is illegal to carry a handgun outside the home? And
how does the dissent account for the fact that one of the
mass shootings near the top of its list took place in
Buffalo? The New York law at issue in this case obviously
did not stop that perpetrator."
Alito said amicus briefs in the case described situations
where citizens "used firearms to protect themselves from
criminal attack," including "incidents in which a potential
victim escaped death or serious injury only because carrying
a gun for self-defense was allowed in the jurisdiction where
the incident occurred." He concluded, "All that we decide in
this case is that the Second Amendment protects the right of
law-abiding people to carry a gun outside the home for
self-defense and that the Sullivan Law, which makes that
virtually impossible for most New Yorkers, is
unconstitutional."
In his dissent, Breyer said the court in its new ruling
failed to discuss "the nature or severity" of gun violence,
which he said had surpassed car crashes as the leading cause
of death in children and adolescents. The U.S. "suffers a
disproportionately high rate of firearm-related deaths and
injuries," Breyer wrote, citing a 2017 estimate of 393.3
million civilian-held firearms in the U.S., or about 120
firearms per 100 people. In 2015, about 36,000 people were
killed by firearms nationwide, a number that rose to 45,222
in 2020.
In a September 2021 brief with 19 other attorneys general,
Healey had urged the court to affirm that the Second
Amendment does not prohibit states and local governments
from regulating the public carry of firearms "as they have
done for hundreds of years."
The brief argued that public carry regulations have varied
from region to region through the history of the U.S., and
said that "tradition" goes back more than 700 hundred years
to England and pre-dates the founding of the United States.
Regulations today and centuries ago, Healey's office said,
"varied substantially between and within the States -- the
result of accountable policymakers enacting regulatory
schemes tailored to local needs and conditions."
Interim Suffolk County District Attorney Kevin Hayden said
he had "grave concern" about impacts of the ruling, which
comes as the U.S. Senate is advancing a bill drafted in
response to the recent school shootings in Uvalde, Texas.
"It's ironic, and perhaps tragic, that just as the nation's
top legislative body is formulating sensible firearm
regulations, its top judicial body is undoing them," Hayden
said. "We must never forget that included in the 2nd
Amendment's establishment of citizen gun ownership are the
words 'well-regulated.'"
U.S. Sen. Edward Markey said the ruling undermines community
safety, called for Congress to pass a gun safety bill, and
said "we must commit to expanding" the Supreme Court to
"reclaim the stolen seats, bring balance to an illegitimate
far-right bench, and restore the American public's faith in
the Court."
"This decision places at risk Massachusetts laws that have
effectively driven down the rate of gun in our Commonwealth,
like those giving local police chiefs the authority to issue
gun licenses, including after interviewing an applicant, and
those that bar the concealment of deadly weapons in public,"
Markey said. "We know concealed weapons near schools or on
street corners across Massachusetts -- or anywhere in our
country -- won't make parents or their children feel any
safer. The Supreme Court has now placed the safety of these
families at risk."
Saying "lives are on the line," a disappointed President Joe
Biden urged states "to continue to enact and enforce
commonsense laws to make their citizens and communities
safer from gun violence" and called on Americans "to make
their voices heard on gun safety."
The Gun Owners' Action League in Massachusetts described
itself as "absolutely thrilled" by Thursday's ruling.
"While this decision will certainly have an impact on our
rights as lawful and responsible gun-owners in
Massachusetts, it is important that we take some time to
digest and figure out what it actually means for
Massachusetts license holders and firearms owners," GOAL
said on its website. "We ask our members to be patient as we
work through this process with legal counsel and determine
what the next steps will be. We will keep you up to date as
often as possible as to what our actions will be moving
forward."
State House News
Service
Friday, June 24, 2022
U.S. Supreme Court Overturns Roe v. Wade
Abortion Remains Legal Under Mass. Law, Baker Signs
Executive Order
By Katie Lannan
The U.S. Supreme Court on Friday overturned Roe v. Wade,
ruling that the constitution does not confer the right to an
abortion and leaving decisions about regulating abortion up
to the states.
The court's ruling had been expected since a draft opinion
leaked in early May, and reaction from Massachusetts, where
abortion remains legal under state law, was swift.
Gov. Charlie Baker, within moments of the decision in Dobbs
v. Jackson, signed an executive order that bars
Massachusetts from cooperating with extradition attempts
from other states that may pursue criminal charges in
connection with receiving or performing reproductive health
services that are legal here.
Baker's order also protects Massachusetts reproductive
health care providers from losing their licenses or
receiving other professional discipline because of
out-of-state charges, and prohibits agencies under the
state's executive department from assisting another state's
investigation into a person or entity for receiving or
delivering reproductive health services in Massachusetts,
the governor's office said.
"I am deeply disappointed in today's decision by the Supreme
Court which will have major consequences for women across
the country who live in states with limited access to
reproductive health care services," Baker said in a
statement. "The Commonwealth has long been a leader in
protecting a woman's right to choose and access to
reproductive health services, while other states have
criminalized or otherwise restricted access. This executive
order will further preserve that right and protect
reproductive health care providers who serve out of state
residents."
The roughly $50 billion state budget that a six-person team
of lawmakers is currently negotiating also features a suite
of protections for providers of reproductive and
gender-affirming health care and their patients, which the
Senate added into its version of the spending plan after
last month's court leak. The budget bills also have funding
aimed at "improving reproductive health care access,
infrastructure and security," including grants to three
abortion funds.
Senate President Karen Spilka, who called the court's action
"a 'nightmare scenario' for women and those who can get
pregnant across this nation," said Baker's order aligns
closely with the Senate's budget language.
"There is increased urgency to codify these provisions so
that we can ensure the safety and continued protections of
our residents," she said in a statement.
The two-year legislative session is winding down, with July
31 as the last day of formal lawmaking business. Any further
response from the Legislature would need to materialize
quickly, and House Speaker Ron Mariano earlier this month
raised the prospect that lawmakers could compile "one big
package" once the court's decision landed.
The Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association said it is
not yet clear what the effect of Friday's ruling will be on
"care demand in states like Massachusetts, nor on the
liability of local healthcare providers who perform
abortions."
"We echo the serious concerns of our colleagues across the
country about what this will mean for the safety and
wellbeing of patients in states that are stripping these
fundamental rights away. This much we do know: no law can
prevent someone from terminating a pregnancy. It can only
prevent them from doing so safely with the consult of
experienced, compassionate clinicians," the association said
in a statement.
Attorney General Maura Healey, who is also a candidate for
governor, said the decision marks the first time the high
court "has taken away a constitutional right" and pledged
that Massachusetts will "do everything we can to ensure
patients from across the country can receive needed care and
to support and protect our providers who are offering that
care."
Healey called on Congress to "keep abortion safe and legal"
by codifying Roe, and Sen. Eric Lesser said Massachusetts
should adopt an amendment "to enshrine reproductive freedom
in our state constitution" as a safeguard against potential
efforts to institute a federal abortion ban.
The Massachusetts Family institute, which opposes abortion,
knocked lawmakers for "working to make Boston a hub for
abortions."
MFI president and general counsel Andrew Beckwith said the
institute looks forward "to a reenergized fight to restore a
culture of life to the Commonwealth."
"A child conceived in Massachusetts should have the same
right to be born as a child conceived in Mississippi,"
Beckwith said in a statement. "Tragically, the whole
apparatus of state government in Massachusetts is aligned
against the unborn and aligned with Planned Parenthood and
the abortion industry."
The Beyond Roe Coalition, which includes Reproductive Equity
Now, the ACLU of Massachusetts, and Planned Parenthood
Advocacy Fund of Massachusetts, plans to hold a 1:30 p.m.
press conference outside the State House "to discuss the
decision, what it means for Massachusetts, and necessary
next steps to defend abortion access in a post-Roe world."
The Boston
Herald
Sunday, June 26, 2022
A Boston Herald editorial
Abortion move puts Bay State on front lines
Massachusetts is now in a glaring spotlight.
Gov. Charlie Baker signed an executive order Friday
following the U.S. Supreme Court decision on abortion that
will protect Bay State health care providers who perform
abortion services for out-of-state women.
But the last thing this state needs is to become an abortion
destination.
A dozen states permit abortion prior to viability — 24 weeks
— or when necessary to protect the life or health of the
pregnant woman. That’s the law in Massachusetts, Rhode
Island, Maine, Connecticut and New York. Abortion is also
legal in New Hampshire, with a few restrictions, and in
Vermont.
The Guttmacher Institute found just under 50 abortion
facilities in Massachusetts in a recent survey. The
Washington, D.C., nonprofit bills itself as a research and
policy organization committed to advancing sexual and
reproductive health.
The ROE Act in Massachusetts further solidifies abortion
rights. So getting an abortion here is not at risk. But the
Supreme Court’s decision has ignited the debate over women’s
rights and the rights of the unborn.
Surveys say a lot: 61% of Americans polled say abortion
should be legal in all or most circumstances. That’s
according to the Pew Research Center. A deeper reading shows
it’s more nuanced.
“The public’s attitudes are contingent upon such
circumstances as when an abortion takes place during a
woman’s pregnancy, whether the pregnancy endangers a woman’s
life and whether a baby would have severe health problems,”
Pew states.
Financial stability, timing, parental consent, rape, incest,
the mother’s health, the child’s health — it all plays into
the abortion decision.
Cardinal Sean O’Malley said the court’s ruling creates “the
possibility of protecting human life from conception.” He
adds it also “calls us to recognize the unique burden faced
by women in pregnancy.”
The ruling, he adds, “begins a new chapter” in statehouses,
Congress and courts. It should not place a burden on health
care workers here in Massachusetts, but it should help
evolve health care and contraception.
There’s time now to address alternatives to abortion while
the courts face more challenges.
It’s also time to defend what Massachusetts gets right. That
includes not attacking the Baby Safe Haven law. As the group
wrote Friday, “social media flak about safe haven laws being
the reason for the Roe decision … couldn’t be farther from
the truth.”
The Safe Haven Act of Massachusetts, which took effect on
Oct. 29, 2004, allows a parent to legally surrender infants
7 days old or younger at a hospital, police station or
manned fire station without facing criminal prosecution if
there are no signs of abuse or neglect of the child.
We wrote that after someone left a baby in the parking lot
of a Leominster hospital in 2017.
A nurse returning to her car found the baby boy wrapped in a
blanket and left in a box on the ground next to her vehicle
in the parking lot of the hospital. The infant was
immediately taken into the ER and was declared healthy. That
law has nothing to do with abortion rights. But it does show
Massachusetts deeply cares about children.
As the cardinal said, the Supreme Court’s ruling compels us
to evolve and consider alternatives to abortion. We can
think of no better state to start that discussion.
— RETURN TO
COMMENTARY —
Consolidated Amendment
"A" to H4897
Consolidated Amendment
Fiscal Note: $559,230,635
Amendments: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14,
16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32,
33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47,
48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62,
63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 68, 69, 70, 71, 72, 73, 74, 75, 76, 77,
78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 83, 84, 85, 86, 87, 88, 89, 90, 91, 92,
93, 94, 95, 96, 97, 98, 99, 100, 101, 102, 103, 104, 105,
106, 107, 108, 109, 110, 111, 112, 113, 114, 115, 116, 117,
118, 119, 120, 121, 122, 123, 124, 125, 126, 127, 128, 129,
130, 131, 132, 133, 134, 135, 136, 137, 138, 139, 140, 142,
143, 144, 145, 146, 147, 148, 149, 150, 151, 152, 153, 154,
155, 156, 157, 158, 159, 160, 161, 162, 163, 164, 165, 166,
167, 168, 169, 170, 171, 172, 173, 174, 175, 176, 177, 178,
179, 180, 181, 182, 183, 184, 185, 186, 187, 188, 189, 190,
191, 192, 193, 194, 195, 196, 197, 198, 199, 200, 201, 202,
203, 204, 205, 206, 207, 208, 209, 210, 211, 212, 213, 214,
215, 217, 218, 219, 220, 221, 222, 223, 224, 225, 226, 227,
228, 229, 230, 231, 232, 233, 234, 235, 236, 237, 238, 239,
240, 241, 242, 243, 244, 245, 246, 247, 248, 249, 250, 251,
252, 253, 254, 255, 256, 257, 258, 259, 260, 261, 262, 263,
264, 265, 266, 267, 268, 269, 270, 271, 272, 273, 274, 275,
276, 277, 278, 279, 280, 281, 282, 283, 284, 285, 286, 287,
288, 289, 290, 291, 292, 294, 295, 296, 297, 298, 299, 300,
301, 302, 304, 305, 306, 307, 308, 309, 310, 311, 312, 313,
314, 315, 316, 317, 318, 319, 320, 321, 322, 323, 324, 325,
326, 327, 328, 329, 330, 331, 332, 333, 334, 335, 336, 337,
338, 339, 340, 341, 342, 343, 344, 345, 346, 347, 348, 349,
350, 351, 352, 353, 354, 355, 356, 357, 358, 359, 360, 361,
362, 363, 364, 365, 366, 367
Mr. Michlewitz of Boston and others move to amend H.4897 in
section 2A, in line item 6121-2257, by inserting after the
words “projects under this item” the following:- ; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for
signalization improvements and reconfiguration of roadways
at the intersections of South Main street, Old Post road,
and Interstate 95 in Sharon; provided further, that not less
than $500,000 shall be expended for roadway improvements in
Pembroke; provided further, that not less than $250,000
shall be expended for Plymouth Town Wharf Pedestrian
Improvements and Sidewalk Connectivity Project to establish
sidewalks and crosswalks along Town Wharf roadway in
Plymouth; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for Nicks Rock road and Squanto road
reconstruction project for paving, drainage upgrades, and
sidewalks to improve pedestrian connectivity in Plymouth;
provided further, that not less than $3,712,500 shall be
expended for the design, permitting, construction and
improvement of the intersection of Route 27 and West street
in Medfield; provided further, that not less than $2,000,000
shall be expended for intersection improvements at all
Interstate 395 ramps at Route 16 East Main street and Sutton
road to alleviate congestion and improve intersection safety
in Webster; provided further, that not less than $5,000,000
shall be expended for roadway improvements to remediate
flooding and drainage issues of the intersections of Page
Street and Route 139 and Turnpike Street and Route 139 in
Stoughton;
And further amend the bill in section 2B, in line item
6121-2228, by inserting after the words “when feasible” the
following:- provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
in Athol; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
in Royalston; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
in Erving; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
in Gill; provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall
be expended for roadway and intersection improvements in
Warwick; provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall
be expended for roadway and intersection improvements in
Phillipston; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
in Orange; provided further, that not less than $2,500,000
shall be expended for road surveying, design, construction
and paving on Route 38 between Colonial avenue and Shawsheen
street in Tewksbury; provided further, that not less than
$2,500,000 shall be expended for road surveying, design,
construction and paving on Route 38 between Burlington
avenue and Richmond street in Wilmington; provided further,
that not less than $2,500,000 shall be expended for roadway
surface improvements on Route 3A from Duxbury to Plymouth in
Kingston; provided further, that not less than $750,000
shall be expended for roadway improvements and repairs in
Halifax; provided further, that not less than not less than
$1,200,000 shall be expended for roadway safety improvements
and upgrades of existing traffic signal equipment on Broad
street in Lynn;
And further amend said section 2B, in line item 6121-2238,
by inserting after the words “average of the commonwealth”
the following:- provided further, that not less than
$424,000 shall be expended for Complete Streets: Rank 1:
Wayside Inn Road at Boston Post Road in Sudbury; provided
further, that not less than $672,000 shall be expended for
Complete Streets: Rank 7: Maynard Road Walkway to Hudson
Road in Sudbury; provided further, that not less than
$792,000 shall be expended for Complete Streets: Rank 9:
Morse Road Multi Use Pathway in Sudbury; provided further,
that not less than $970,000 shall be expended for Complete
Streets: Rank 12: Landham road walkway reconstruction and
widening to improve walking and biking conditions, safety,
connectivity and accessibility in Sudbury;
And further amend the bill in section 2C, in line item
6621-2217, by inserting after “improvement program” the
following:- ; provided further, that not less than
$8,000,000 shall be expended for the Massachusetts Bay
Transit Authority to complete construction and upgrades to
South Attleboro Commuter Rail Station ensuring the complete
reopening of the station for commuter rail and commuter
service; provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall
be expended for a multiyear corridor study to identify
rights-of-ways and range of possibilities for a double-track
commuter rail between Braintree Station and South Station
along the Old Colony commuter rail line tracks; provided
further, that not less than $5,000,000 shall be expended for
infrastructure and accessibility improvements to the West
Medford commuter rail station in Medford; provided further,
that not less than $250,000 shall be expended for
improvements to the Berkshire Scenic Railway tourist
excursion station in Southern Berkshire county; provided
further, that not less than $2,500,000 shall be expended for
the design and construction of a commuter rail station at
Wonderland in Revere; provided further, that not less than
$3,000,000 shall be expended for the refurbishment and
maintenance of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation
Authority Rail Bridge adjacent to Route 20 in Worcester;
provided further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be
expended for accessibility upgrades for the commuter rail
station in Wakefield; provided further, that not less than
$10,000,000 shall be expended for accessibility improvements
of three commuter rail stations in Wellesley; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for
the design and construction of Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority commuter rail quiet zone compliant
intersections in Stoughton; provided further, that not less
than $850,000 shall be expended for emergency response and
extraction equipment for New Bedford, Taunton, and Fall
River municipal fire departments to address passenger rail
incidents in Middleborough; provided further, that not less
than $2,000,000 shall be expended for a new multi-modal
roadway at the Mansfield train station in Mansfield;
provided further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be
expended for a study to identify options for the restoration
of a passenger rail service between Worcester and
Providence, Rhode Island;
And further amend the bill in section 2D, in line item
6621-2208, by inserting after the words “pilot services” the
following:- ; provided further, that the Massachusetts
Department of Transportation shall reauthorize tourist
excursion services on the Berkshire Scenic railway in
Southern Berkshire county; provided further, that the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority shall restore a
bus stop in Danvers Square; provided further, for every
planned or unplanned bus route service elimination, the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority shall hold a
mandatory, thirty-day appeal process during which the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority must confer with
city or town planning officials to explore alternatives;
provided further, that funds allocated for transit
electrification in this item shall be prioritized for
spending in environmental justice populations; provided
further, that all transit electrification vehicle
procurements shall be for electric vehicles that include
non-combustion vehicles and other vehicles that do not
produce tailpipe emissions
And further amend the bill in section 2F, in line item
6720-2217, by inserting after the words “management
initiatives” the following:- provided further, that not less
than $2,000,000 shall be expended for noise abatement along
Interstate 95 in Newton Lower Falls; provided further, that
not less than $7,000,000 shall be expended for the
electrification and modernization of the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority Albany Street Garage; provided
further, that not less than $7,500,000 shall be expended for
the design of rehabilitation of Storrow Drive Tunnels in
Boston; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for the construction of a roundabout at
the intersection of Plain Road, Boston Post Road and Old
Connecticut Path in Wayland; provided further, that not less
than $25,000,000 shall be expended for the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority to complete construction and
upgrades to the Newton Commuter Rail Stations in Auburndale,
West Newton and Newtonville in order to ensure ADA
accessibility, address reliability and modernization needs,
improve current operations to enable increased service
frequency and reduced travel times, enhance station
amenities and improve connections to Newton's road network;
provided further, that not less than $3,000,000 shall be
expended for maintenance and improvements to the Minuteman
Bike Path, Alewife Linear Park, and Fitchburg Cutoff bike
path, in Arlington and Cambridge; provided further, that not
less than $50,000,000 shall be expended for the
electrification and development of rapid transportation for
the Fairmount commuter rail line; provided further, that not
less than $5,000,000 shall be expended for roadway and
intersection improvements near the intersection of Route 152
and Route 106 in North Attleborough and Plainville; provided
further, that not less than $5,000,000 shall be expended for
the rehabilitation and box widening of Route 20 from Route 9
to South street in Shrewsbury;
And further amend said section 2F, by striking line item
6720-2258, and inserting in place thereof the following
item:
6720-2258For a public realm improvement program; provided,
that funds may be used for grants to municipalities for
improvements to sidewalks, curbs, curb ramps, streets and
parking spaces to create additional capacity for pedestrians
and cyclists and to reimagine and repurpose street space in
response to the 2019 novel coronavirus to support public
health, safe mobility and renewed commerce; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for
intersection improvements at Pond Street and West Street in
Leominster; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for road repavement on Route 99 between
the Melrose and Everett lines in the city of Malden;
provided further, that not less than $100,000 shall be
expended for improvements and land acquisition for the
Greenway Bicycle and Pedestrian Path in Southampton;
provided further, that not less than $5,000,000 shall be
expended for the construction of the Davis Path Footbridge
in Brookline; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for the improvement and expansion of
sidewalk access in Tewksbury; provided further, that not
less than $310,000 shall be expended for all costs
associated with the redesign and construction of a safer,
larger, and ADA accessible parking lot at the Belchertown
Town Beach; provided further, that not less than $200,000
shall be expended for the installation of a new traffic
signal and pedestrian crossing improvements at the
intersection of Lakeview Avenue and Walkers Brook Drive in
Reading; provided further, that not less than $250,000 shall
be expended for the construction of new sidewalks in
Middleton; provided further, that not less than $75,000 be
expended for downtown wayfinding and sidewalk improvements
in Webster; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for ADA compliant sidewalks and crossings
in Nahant; provided further, that not less than $38,000
shall be expended for pedestrian signals for walking routes
to Avon Middle/High School and the Butler Elementary School;
provided further, that not less than $25,000 be expended for
the Allston-Brighton Bicycle Grant Program for bike parking
safety coverings to promote active transportation and for
traffic calming measures; and provided further, that not
less than $150,000 shall be expended for the maintenance and
improvement of bike and pedestrian paths in
Burlington……………………………………………………………$10,000,000
And further amend the bill in section 2F, in line item
6720-2260, by inserting after the word “Springfield”, in
line 179, the following words:- and for passenger rail
projects in western Massachusetts, including, but not
limited to, the East-West passenger rail project from
Pittsfield to Boston, the Connecticut River Line, the
Berkshire Flyer and the Northern Tier Project;
And further amend said section 2F by inserting after line
item 6720-2260, the following line item:-
6720-2261For various transportation projects; provided, that
not less than $50,000,000 shall be expended for a program to
provide grants and zero-interest loans to upgrade commercial
fishing industry equipment to improve energy efficiency;
provided further, that not less than $50,000,000 shall be
expended for the electrification of the Framingham and
Worcester commuter rail line; provided further, that not
less than $50,000,000 shall be expended for the development
and construction of accessible high level boarding platforms
along the Worcester/Framingham and Fitchburg commuter rail
lines; provided further, that not less than $5,000,000 shall
be expended for the Massachusetts Offers Rebates for
Electronic Vehicles truck grant program to support
zero-emission vehicle charging and fueling infrastructure
projects and the purchase of vehicles; provided further,
that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for safety
improvements to Chestnut Street in Arlington; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
the design and construction of a temporary bridge
replacement on Brandon Road in Dudley; provided further,
that not less than $2,100,000 shall be expended for
infrastructure improvements around the new police station in
Leominster; provided further, that not less than $335,000
shall be expended for the purchase of the final piece of the
Twin Cities Rail Trail in Leominster; provided further, that
not less than $500,000 shall be expended for the road
repavement on Eastern Avenue between Holden Street and Route
99 in the city of Malden; provided further, that not less
than $350,000 shall be expended for the purchase of
maintenance equipment for Colrain; provided further, that
not less than $350,000 shall be expended for the Berkshire
Regional Planning Commission to oversee parking facility
upgrades to promote outdoor recreation in Berkshire County;
provided further, that not less than $1,500,000 shall be
expended for the Museum of Science, Boston for the
feasibility, design and preliminary engineering of a
multimodal riverwalk across the Charles River in order to
create a missing pedestrian and cycling link, connect
businesses, and support the tourism ecosystem; provided
further, that not less than $5,000,000 shall be expended for
the design and construction of the Beacon Street Bridle Path
in Brookline; provided further, that not less than $25,000
shall be expended for a traffic survey in Acushnet; provided
further, that not less than $7,500,000 shall be expended for
the design, permitting and replacement of the Kernwood
Bridge that crosses the Danvers River between Beverly and
Salem; provided further, that not less than $7,500,000 shall
be expended for the design, permitting and replacement of
the Hall-Whitaker Bridge in Beverly; provided further, that
not less than $60,000 be expended for infrastructure
improvements at Orange Airport; provided further, that not
less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the planning,
construction, and maintenance of the DOT Greenway, located
above the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority red
line tunnel cap between Talbot avenue and Park street in the
Dorchester section of the city of Boston; provided further,
that not less than $700,000 shall be expended for the
replacement of the culvert on Egremont Road in Mount
Washington; provided further, that not less than $2,000,000
shall be expended for an elevated median on Gallivan
Boulevard between Neponset Circle and Adams Street in
Dorchester; provided further, that not less than $750,000
shall be expended for the installation and maintenance of
lighting, noise reduction and safety improvements in the
parking lot area under the Southeast Expressway, adjacent
JFK Station in Dorchester; provided further, that not less
than $250,000 shall be expended for maintenance necessary
improvements to the tide gates on Morrissey Boulevard at
Patten's Cove; provided further, that not less than $330,000
shall be expended for design of the Foundry Street
Transportation Improvement Program (TIP) (MassDOT Project
#612269) in Easton; provided further, that not less than
$1,000,000 shall be expended for the replacement of Colrain
Street Bridge in Greenfield; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for full depth reclaim and
resurfacing of Route 31 in Spencer; provided further, that
not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for full depth
reclaim and resurfacing of Route 67 in the town of New
Braintree; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for full depth reclaim and resurfacing of
Route 67 in the town of North Brookfield; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for for a
study of engineering, constructing and maintaining a sound
barrier to control and abate noise along the red line tracks
between Savin Hill station and McConnell Park in the
Dorchester section of the city of Boston; provided further,
that not less than $750,000 shall be expended for the city
of Watertown for the design and construction of the
Watertown Community Path; provided further, that not less
than $150,000 shall be expended for the town of Plympton for
traffic lights and intersection improvements at Center
Street and Route 58 in Plympton; provided further, that not
less than $1,500,000 shall be expended for the design and
construction of sound barriers and other traffic noise
mitigation along Interstate 495 and the Tanglewood Park
Drive neighborhood in the city of Haverhill; provided
further, that not less than $1,500,000 shall be expended for
the design and construction of sound barriers and other
traffic noise mitigation along Interstate 495 and the
Western Avenue neighborhood in the city of Haverhill;
provided further, that not less than $3,000,000 shall be
expended for the city of Lawrence for the construction and
rehabilitation of the Joseph W. Casey Bridge, the Mario
Lucchesi Memorial Bridge, the Daisy Street Bridge, and the
Majowics Bridge; provided further, that not less than
$2,500,000 be expended for sound barriers along state
highway Route 1, northbound and southbound, from Copeland
Circle to Route 16 in the city of Revere; provided further,
that not less than $700,000 be expended for the city of Lynn
for the reconstruction of Central Avenue; provided further,
that not less than $1,500,000 be expended for the town of
Plymouth for sidewalk improvements on Route 80; provided
further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be expended for
the undergrounding of utilities in connection with the
reconstruction of Essex Street in the city of Lynn; provided
further, that not less than $2,200,000 shall be expended for
the repair and reconstruction of Washington Street in the
city of Lynn; provided further, that not less than
$12,000,000 shall be expended for the design and
reconstruction of the Route 117 Bridge in the city of
Waltham; provided further, that $500,000 shall be expended
for projects related to the design and construction of
sidewalks in front of the Ipswich Public Middle School and
High School; provided further, that $100,000 shall be
expended for a transportation master plan for the city of
New Bedford to transition all municipal and school fleets
and the residential sector to cleaner alternative fuels
through an integrated platform; provided further, that
$250,000 shall be expended for "continuing the city of New
Bedford Greening the Gateways program by planting trees on
public grounds in the north end of the city; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for
the department of conservation and recreation for costs
associated with bike path maintenance in the Manuel F.
Correllus State Forest; provided further, that not less than
$3,000,000 shall be expended for the town of Falmouth for
widening and repaving the Shining Sea Bikeway; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
the continuation of current service levels of the 76
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority bus route,
provided that the current frequency and hours of operation
are maintained or increased; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the town of Nantucket
for the construction and maintenance of bike paths; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
the town of Nantucket for dune restoration to mitigate
erosion at the base of Millie's Bridge; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the
Fitchburg State University Theater parking garage, for
municipal and University purposes; provided further, that
$5,000,000 shall be expended for the stabilization and
repairs of the Hoosac Tunnel, and to promulgate passenger
service of the Northern Tier Line between Fitchburg and
North Adams; provided further, that not less than $2,000,000
shall be expended for traffic signal infrastructure and
drainage improvements at the intersections of Lunenburg
Street, Main Street, and Summer Street in Fitchburg;
provided further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be
expended for repair, resurface, and construct drainage
improvements along Route 2A including River Street and
Westminster Street in Fitchburg; provided further, that not
less than $175,000 shall be expended for the city of
Cambridge to provide bus stop amenities to improve rider
experience; provided further, that not less than $3,000,000
shall be expended for repair the Main Street bridge in the
town of Templeton; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for repair and replace the Old
Ashby Road bridge and culvert in the town of Ashburnham;
provided further, that not less than $1,939,235 shall be
expended for the city of Boston for critical environmental
and pedestrian safety improvements to Meadow Road in the
Readville neighborhood of the city of Boston to preserve and
protect the Fowl Meadow, an Area of Critical Environmental
Concern (ACEC); provided further, that not less than
$4,000,000 shall be spent on improvements to the roadways
and parking on both the inbound and outbound sides of the
Sharon train station; provided further, that not less than
$330,000 shall be expended for the Flat Hill Road culvert in
Lunenburg; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
be expended for update transformers as part of Holyoke's
Business District Electrification in the High Street Utility
Corridor; provided further, that not less than $600,000
shall be expended for cover engineering costs associated
with the redesign and construction of Main Street and North
Main Street in Belchertown to enhance traffic movement
efficiency and improve pedestrian safety within the town
center; provided further, that not less than $150,000 shall
be expended for increasing Mission Hill LINK shuttle bus
services that provide safe transit and access to the MBTA,
medical campus, and shopping for elders and people with
disabilities without MBTA access near their homes; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended
forwards safety improvements to the intersection of Page
Boulevard and Berkshire Avenue in the city of Springfield;
provided further, that not less than $3,000,000 shall be
expended for the design and construction of an additional
on-ramp from Cedar Street in the city of Woburn to Route 93
southbound between exit 36 and exit 37; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 be expended for the town of
Duxbury for improvements to the Powder Point Bridge;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 be expended
for the town of Halifax for sidewalk improvements; provided
further, that not less than $800,000 shall be expended
forwards safety improvements to the intersection of Page
Boulevard and Bircham Street in the city of Springfield;
provided further, that not less than $2,500,000 be expended
for cover all costs associated with the redesign and
construction of Main Street and North Main Street in
Belchertown to enhance traffic movement efficiency and
improve pedestrian safety within the town center; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
safety improvements to the intersection of Page Boulevard
and Brookdale Drive in the city of Springfield; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
the town of Berlin for improvements to the rail trail;
provided further; that not less than $750,000 shall be
expended for the town of Clinton for improvements to the
condition of pedestrian accommodations on Main Street;
provided further, that not less than $350,000 shall be
expended for the Berkshire Regional Planning Commission for
the overseeing of parking facility upgrades to promote
outdoor recreation in Berkshire County; provided further,
that not less than $2,500,000 shall be expended for the town
of West Springfield for the Ashley Street culvert repair
project; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for the design and construction of
additional Ferry Service vehicle parking at the town landing
in Winthrop; provided further, that not less than $1,500,000
shall be expended for the replacement of the pedestrian
bridge over the Pioneer Valley Railroad in West Springfield;
provided further, that not less than $450,000 shall be
expended for the design, engineering and construction of an
environmentally appropriated parking lot along Shirley
Street in Winthrop to support community use of Yirrell
Beach; provided further, that not less than $415,000 shall
be expended for the planning, engineering and other design
costs for any signalization and improvements at the
intersection of Route 20, Highland Street, and Boston Post
Road in Weston; provided further, that not less than $60,000
shall be expended for the purchase of an electric vehicle to
assist with the general operations of the department of
public works in Winthrop; provided further, that not less
than $1,250,000 shall be expended for roadway improvements
and climate mitigation near Beaver Brook Parkway in
Worcester; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
near Webster Square in Worcester; provided further, that not
less than $500,000 shall be expended for roadway and
intersection improvements near Clover and Heard Streets in
Worcester; provided further, that not less than $250,000
shall be expended for roadway and intersection improvements
near Canterbury and Hammond Streets in Worcester; provided
further, that not less than $450,000 shall be expended for
the expansion of electric vehicle charging infrastructure
along Park Avenue in Worcester; provided further, that not
less than $500,000 shall be expended for safety improvements
to the intersection of Bennington Street and Winthrop Avenue
in the Beachmont section of Revere; provided further, that
not less than $750,000 shall be expended for infrastructure
improvements to protect and benefit pedestrians and cyclists
on Stafford Street in Worcester; provided further, that not
less than $150,000 shall be expended equally among the towns
of Canton, Avon, and Stoughton for the establishment of
electric vehicle charging stations; provided further, that
not less than $200,000 shall be expended for an automatic,
speed-triggered public safety traffic management system for
East Rodney French Boulevard and West Rodney French
Boulevard located in New Bedford; provided further, that not
less than $7,000,000 shall be expended for the city of
Quincy for construction and safety improvements to Sea
Street between the intersection of Palmer Street and Sea
Street and the intersection of Quincy Shore Drive and Sea
Street; provided further, that not less than $25,000 shall
be expended for the installation of electric vehicle
charging stations in Manchester-By-The-Sea; provided
further, that not less than $250,000 shall be expended for
the town of Wakefield for traffic-calming and safety efforts
and public spacemaking to revitalize the downtown; provided
further, that not less than $200,000 shall be expended for
the town of Wakefield for sidewalk connectivity support;
provided further, that not less than $25,000 shall be
expended for the installation of electric vehicle charging
stations in Rowley; provided further, that not less than
$3,000,000 shall be expended for noise abatement along
Interstate 95 and Interstate 93 in Woburn; provided further,
that not less than $210,000 shall be expended for the city
of Melrose for the adjustment of intersection signal
infrastructure on Main Street from West Wyoming Avenue to
Lynn Fells Parkway to enhance safety and accessibility;
provided further, that not less than $700,000 shall be
expended for the town of Plymouth for the engineering,
design and permitting of exit 13, Route 3, slip ramp
reconstruction planning to alleviate congestion and address
increased traffic from development; provided further, that
not less than $100,000 shall be expended for the Plymouth
Regional Economic Foundation for a feasibility study for
ferry service in Plymouth; provided further, that not less
than $75,000 shall be expended for the South Shore Community
Action Council for the purposes of assisting with growing
transportation need of elderly, disabled and low-income
individuals in Southeastern Massachusetts through the Taking
People Places transportation program; provided further, that
not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the town of
Plymouth for the reconstruction of the historic, waterfront
seawall to increase public safety, protect businesses and
address rising sea level; provided further, that not less
than $122,400 shall be expended for the town of Plymouth for
the installation of 18 Mobile Data Terminals (MDT) units in
front-line response apparatus and command cars to increase
efficient transfer of sensitive and complex information,
reduce excessive radio traffic and increase firefighter
safety; provided further, that not less than $54,000 shall
be expended for the town of Plymouth for the purchase and
installation of two Level Two public electric vehicle (EV)
charging stations; provided further, that not less than
$750,000 shall be expended for the town of Plymouth for the
Allerton Street and Sever Street reconstruction project to
repair and upgrade streets and improve pedestrian
connectivity in this densely developed area; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
the city of Melrose for an electric trash packer and
necessary charging infrastructure; provided further, that
not less than $100,000 shall be expended for the town of
Sudbury for the ‘Go Sudbury!’ program offering subsidized
rideshares and taxi rides; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the town of Wayland
for the extension of the Mass Central Rail Trail from where
it currently ends in Wayland to the Sudbury line; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
the continuation of Bus Route 354 with all-day service;
provided further, that not less $3,000,000 shall be expended
for the Grafton Street-Route 122 Bridge Replacement Project
in Worcester; provided further, that not less than
$1,000,000 shall be expended for infrastructure improvements
to the Nip-Nap Trail in Worcester; provided further, that
not less than $2,000,000 shall be expended for the redesign
of Summer Street, including the installation of bike lanes,
ADA compliant sidewalks, ramps and crossings, in Lynnfield;
provided further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be
expended for an environmental study and stormwater plan for
Pillings Pond in Lynnfield, including funding for the
purchase and installation of upgraded catch basins in
roadways around the pond to trap pollutants and
sedimentation; provided further, that not less than
$2,500,000 shall be expended for the construction of a rail
trail from Fosters Lane to Salem Street in Wakefield;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall be
expended for safety improvements to the intersection of
Chestnut Street and Haverhill Street in North Reading;
provided further, that not less than $200,000 shall be
expended for safety improvements to the intersection of
Central Street and Park Street in North Reading; provided
further, that not less than $225,000 shall be expended for
safety improvements to the intersection of Central Street
and North Street in North Reading; provided further, that
not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the Metrowest
Regional Transit Authority for expanded Sunday service,
including but not limited to service to MCI-Framingham;
provided further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be
expended for the Massachusetts Port Authority for the
Framingham Logan Express service for mitigation during
construction of the Sumner Tunnel; provided further, that
not less than $60,000 shall be expended for the purchase of
an electric vehicle to assist with the general operations of
the department of public works in Reading; provided further,
that not less than $125,000 shall be expended for the
implementation of the initial phase of the Birch Meadow
Master Plan, including the restoration of wetland areas and
the installation of several electric charging stations, in
Reading; provided further, that not less than $300,000 shall
be expended for the replacement of the Peabody Street Bridge
deck in Middleton; provided further, that not less than
$100,000 shall be expended for the town of Sudbury for a new
transit passenger van for the parks and recreation
department to pilot an extended day program for children
after school; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for the design, permitting,
construction and improvement of the Centre Street and
Central Avenue bridge connecting Needham and Dover; provided
further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be expended for
repairs to the Potter Road Bridge spanning Framingham to
Wayland over the Sudbury River; provided further, that not
less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the replacement
of the water transmission main connecting the water
treatment facility to the water storage tanks in Gardner;
provided further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be
expended for a new maintenance garage for the city of Lynn's
department of public works; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for roadway safety
improvements for all transportation modes at the
intersection of Boston Street and Hamilton Street in Lynn;
provided further, that not less than $150,000 shall be
expended for the initial study for Phase II reconstruction
of Western Avenue from Central Street to the Belden Bly
Bridge in Lynn; provided further, that not less than $30,000
shall be expended for parking enforcement technology
upgrades in Lynn; provided further, that not less than
$125,000 shall be expended for 9 electric vehicle charging
stations for public parking lots in Lynn; provided further,
that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for traffic
signals and roadway improvements at the intersection of
Hathaway Road and Rockdale Avenue located in New Bedford;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall be
expended equally for improvements to the Stoughton Train
Station, Canton Center Train Station, and Canton Junction
Train station; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for water quality testing,
storm water mitigation, and public accessibility
improvements for the Norwoods Trail connector at the
Buttonwood Park dam in the Buttonwood Brook Watershed in New
Bedford; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for roadway improvements to Neponset
Street and Randolph Street in Canton; provided further, that
not less than $250,000 shall be expended for the Center
Street bridge project in Dighton; provided further, that not
less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for culvert
replacement on Walker Street in Norton; provided further,
that not less than $5,000,000 shall be expended for the city
of Lowell to purchase low or no-emission vehicles; provided
further, that not less than $250,000 shall be expended for
sidewalk repairs along Route 28 in Avon; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be spent for the Schnopp
project in Hinsdale; provided further, that not less than
$10,000,000 shall be expended for the reconstruction of the
intersection at Chestnut Street and Pleasant Street in
Franklin; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for replacement of the Warren Road Pump
Station in Auburn; provided further, that not less than
$1,000,000 be expended for the Main Street reconstruction
from Front Street to Fairlawn Avenue in Oxford; provided
further, that not less than $500,000 shall be expended for
Route 109 access improvements at Choate Park, including a
culvert, sidewalk, guardrails and fencing to complete the
entrance to the new town green at Choate Park in Medway;
provided further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be
expended for the construction, replacement, or maintenance
of dams, bridges, culverts, sewers, and other storm water
infrastructure in Oxford; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for sewer plant upgrades
to improve wastewater infrastructure in Charlton; provided
further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be extended for
the city of Pittsfield for the superstructure replacement of
the Barker Road bridge; provided further, that not less than
$5,000,000 shall be expended for the Island End River, in
Everett and Chelsea, for infrastructure improvements and
protection from coastal storms and seal level rise; provided
further, that not less than $30,000 shall be expended for
the town of Randolph for the installation and maintenance of
public bicycle repair and work stands; provided further,
that not less than $1,200,000 shall be expended for the
construction of sidewalks on Tyler Street in Methuen from
North Lowell Street to Westwind Drive; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for costs
associated with repairs and construction of an improved
intersection at Chapin and Fuller Streets in Ludlow to
accommodate new traffic from the newly built Harris Brook
Elementary School; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for the harbor walk in the
Charlestown section of the City of Boston for infrastructure
improvements relative to bike and pedestrian paths; provided
further, that not less than $8,500,000 shall be expended for
the Amelia Earhart Dam, spanning the City of Somerville, the
City of Everett and the Charlestown section of Boston, for
design and infrastructure protection from coastal flooding
to 7 upstream communities; provided further, that not less
than $330,000 shall be expended for culvert replacement and
paving on Fuller Road and not less than $230,000 shall be
expended for the replacement of the culvert on Hyde Hill
Road in Goshen; provided further, that not less than
$2,500,000 shall be expended for the reconstruction and
raising of Argilla Road, redesign and replacement of
culverts, and creation of a climate resilient coastal road
in Ipswich; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for sidewalk repair and maintenance in
Belmont; provided further, that not less than $300,000 shall
be expended for the design, planning and construction of an
elevated median road feature on Highland Avenue in
Winchendon; provided further, that not less than $4,000,000
shall be expended for reconstruction of the Boden Lane
Bridge in Natick; provided further, that not less than
$200,000 shall be expended for intersection improvements of
Maple and Washington Street in Sherborn; provided further,
that not less than $3,150,000 shall be expended for the
Allen Street Reconstruction Project in Braintree; provided
further, that not less than $600,000 shall be expended for
the replacement and construction of all sidewalks and safety
ornamental fencing of all Massachusetts Department of
Transportation property along Riverview Road, from the
Brooks Street Bridge to the Parsons Street Bridge; along
Newton Street past the intersection of Charlesview Street;
from the North Beacon Steet Bridge, along North Beacon
Street to the Vineland Street, along Vineland Street to
Market Street; and the creation of a passive park at the
corner of Vineland and North Beacon Street; all in the
Brighton section of the city of Boston; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for roadway
and sidewalk improvements on John W. Leroy, Jr. Way in
Braintree; provided further, that not less than $250,000
shall be expended for the department of conservation and
recreation for the installation of e-bike parking racks and
universal e-bike charging stations in Blue Hills Reservation
parking lots; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for the extension of
underground utilities in South Braintree Square, Braintree
Square and Braintree/Weymouth Landing located in Braintree;
provided further, that not less than $350,000 shall be
expended for sound barrier and beautification along Route 16
along Seagrave Road and Columbus Ave in the City of
Cambridge; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for road improvements of Route 109 (Main
Street) in Millis; provided further, that not less than
$250,000 shall be expended for sidewalk improvements in
Sherborn; provided further, that not less than $150,000
shall be expended for the installation of e-bike parking
racks and universal e-bike charging stations in Randolph;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall be
expended for the planning, design, renovation and
reconstruction of the Washington Street bridge in
Winchester; provided further, that not less than $2,000,000
shall be expended for pedestrian and ADA improvements
throughout Framingham; provided further, that not less than
$150,000 shall be expended for the installation of e-bike
parking racks and universal e-bike charging stations in
Milton; provided further, that not less than $250,000 shall
be expended for the design, construction, maintenance and
other costs for a solar canopy for vehicle charging at the
Chandler Road Recreation Facility in Andover; provided
further, that not less than $90,000 shall be expended for
the design, construction, maintenance and other costs for
solar pathway lights along the Andover Playstead to improve
access and pedestrian safety to Town Offices, Senior Center,
and Youth Center; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for the Bruce Freeman Rail
Trail and Chris Walsh Rail Trail in the city of Framingham;
provided further, that not less than $35,000 shall be
expended for the design, construction, maintenance and other
costs for vehicle charging stations in North Andover;
provided further, that not less than $50,000 shall be
expended for the design, construction, maintenance and other
costs for vehicle charging stations in Boxford; provided
further, that not less than $15,000 shall be expended for a
traffic analysis and intersection study at Main Street and
Maple Avenue to improve safety and sightlines in Boxford;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall be
expended for traffic calming strategies in the city of
Framingham; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for the planning, design and construction
of traffic and pedestrian safety improvements to the
intersection of Ridge Street and Lockeland Road in
Winchester; provided further, that not less than $100,000
shall be expended for the Water Transportation Advisory
Council to conduct a study, no later than September 30,
2023, on the feasibility and cost of creating a
Massachusetts Water Regional Transit Authority (MWRTA), with
recommendations regarding the governance, operational
budget, capital needs and financing structure of said MWRTA
and opportunities to expand the current Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority ferry system, to ensure equitable
and broad access to and from Boston and other coastal cities
and townships; provided further, that not less than
$1,500,000 shall be expended for electric vehicle
infrastructure and the installation of electric vehicle
charging stations in public spaces for public use and at
town facilities for town vehicle use; provided further, that
not less than $250,000 shall be expended for repairs and
lighting infrastructure to the Connecticut River Bikeway in
the city of Springfield; provided further, that not less
than $250,000 shall be expended for pedestrian walkway
enhancements in Court Square and historic First Church in
the city of Springfield; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for a beautification study
of the Route 12 corridor in Worcester beginning at the
intersection of East and West mountain Street heading south
ending at the beginning of West Boylston Drive; provided
further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be expended for
the design, planning and construction of pedestrian safety
improvements and upgrades in the downtown area of
Winchester; provided further, that not less than $1,500,000
shall be expended for electric vehicle infrastructure and
the installation of electric vehicle charging stations in
public spaces for public use and at town facilities for town
vehicle use in Randolph; provided further, that not less
than $44,000 shall be expended for the addition of 2 bus
shelters to enhance safety and accessibility of regional and
local transit in North Andover; provided further, that not
less than $2,000,000 shall be expended for electric vehicle
infrastructure and the installation of electric vehicle
charging stations for public use in all Blue Hills
Reservation parking lots with more than 30 spaces and in the
blue hills operations parking lot for state vehicle use;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall be
expended for safety improvements and the planning, design
and construction of Massachusetts Bay Transportation
Authority bus stop and mass transit locations in Stoneham;
provided further, that not less than $100,000 shall be
expended for reconstruction of the seawall along Rebecca and
Lighthouse Roads in Scituate to increase public safety,
protect homes and the town's business district and address
rising sea level; provided further, that not less than
$250,000 shall be expended for the next phase of design for
the McGrath Boulevard Project in Somerville; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for
the planning, design and construction of pedestrian safety
upgrades on Maple Street in Stoneham; provided further, that
not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for sidewalk
improvements in the downtown area to ensure pedestrian
access and safety in Lowell; provided further, that not less
than $750,000 shall be expended for or improvements along
Route 62 in Sterling; provided further, that not less than
$3,000,000 shall be expended for increasing administrative
and operational capacity and outside contracts that further
transportation electrification efforts; provided further,
that not later than March 31, 2023, the Massachusetts
Department of Transportation shall submit a report to the
house and senate ways and means committees detailing (a) the
number of full-time equivalent employees, (b) a list of
outside consultants engaged in electrification projects and
the dollar amount expended forwards said contracts, (c)
staffing levels of full-time equivalent staff for the
previous 10 years in the office of the secretary of
transportation, (d) the number of public electric vehicle
charging stations in the commonwealth, (e) progress towards
complete commuter rail electrification, (f) the number of
public transit electric busses in circulation in the
commonwealth, and (g) recommendations for the additional
resources needed to fulfill the commonwealth’s goal of
complete public transportation electrification by 2050;
provided further, that not less than $150,000 shall be
expended for Bedford for improvements and maintenance of the
Reformatory Branch Trail; provided further, that not less
than $1,600,000 shall be expended for the Stow Minute Man
Air Field for the design and permitting of a new “net zero
energy” airport administration building and a new Admin
Annex/SRE building; provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for Stoneham for the design,
planning and construction of pedestrian safety upgrades and
modernization of automobile traffic access routes to the
South School in Stoneham; provided further, that not less
than $1,000,000 shall be expended for construction of a
500-vehicle parking structure at the Mansfield Train Station
in Mansfield; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for major repairs to the roadway
underneath the Bond Street Bridge in Worcester on Route 12;
provided further, that not less than $3,000,000 shall be
expended for design, permitting and construction to
re-establish a storm water connector pipe at Tremont Street
to South Creek, under Air Force Road, and to redesign and
repave the intersection of Air Force Road and Rivergreen
Drive in Everett; provided further, that not less than
$400,000 shall be expended for the resurfacing of the face
of the railroad bridge that expands across Route 190 in
Worcester; provided further, that not less than $50,000
shall be expended for Alternatives For Community And
Environment, Inc. (ACE) for environmental justice and
transit equity advocacy programming led by the community,
civic associations collaboration, and volunteers; provided
further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be expended for
improvements and the creation of new infrastructure to
support the auto bridge that connects Ludlow to the Indian
Orchard section of Springfield; provided further, that not
less than $500,000 shall be expended for Stoneham for the
planning, design and installation of electric vehicle
charging infrastructure; provided further, that not less
than $750,000 shall be expended for a sound barrier heading
east between Burncoat Street and Lincoln Street in
Worcester; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for the design and construction of sound
barriers and other traffic noise mitigation along Interstate
495 between Massachusetts Avenue and Sutton Street in North
Andover; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for bridge and culvert repairs to a stone
arch bridge on Hecla Street to mitigate degradation issues,
increase the bridge weight capacity and improve stormwater
runoff; provided further, that not less than $650,000 shall
be expended for roadway improvements to Lincoln Street and
Chestnut Street to promote multimodal access and enhance
overall safety; provided further, that not less than
$850,000 shall be expended for upgrades to the Canal street
bridge to prevent flooding and enhance access for
pedestrians, motorists and public works and utility
vehicles; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for the department of energy resources for
a fund to establish new rebates up to $500 for general
consumers and up to $750 for low-income and moderate-income
consumers and not more than 40 percent of retail price for
the purchase of new and used electric bicycles; provided
further, that the department of energy resources shall
evaluate offering electric bicycle rebates at the point of
sale through Massachusetts owned and operated bicycle
retailers; provided further, that not less than $1,000,000
shall be expended for the replacement of HVAC systems of
municipal buildings in Auburn; provided further, that not
less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for repairs to
heating, cooling, air circulation and ventilation at the
Lilla Frederick School; provided further, that not less than
$247,000 shall be expended for park, highway and plowing
needs for Whitman; provided further, that not less than
$195,000 shall be expended for traffic light upgrades and
pedestrian improvements for the Plymouth street and Centre
avenue intersection in Abington; provided further, that not
less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the
reconstruction of South avenue from Commercial street to
Plymouth street in Whitman; provided further, that not less
than $624,000 shall be expended for park, highway and
plowing needs of Whitman street in East Bridgewater;
provided further, that not less than $950,000 shall be
expended for park, highway and plowing needs of West Street
in East Bridgewater; provided further, that not less than
$1,570,000 shall be expended for the construction of
ADA-compliant sidewalks and bicycle accommodations on Bridge
Street in East Bridgewater; provided further, that not less
than $95,000 shall be expended for the construction of
diagonal parking and a new fence at Green Street Park in
Abington; provided further, that not less than $450,000
shall be expended for sidewalks along Summer street from
Progress street to Walnut street in Abington; provided
further, that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for
investments to promote climate resiliency against heat or
extreme precipitation, improve air quality, eliminate mold
and environmental hazards and reduce emissions at the
Cardinal Medeiros Manor; provided further, that not less
than $450,000 shall be expended for the redesign and
reconstruction of the rotary at Alewife Brook Parkway at
Mystic Valley Parkway; provided further, that not less than
$30,000 shall be expended for the installation and
maintenance of public bicycle repair and work stands in
Milton; provided further, that not less than $5,000,000
shall be expended for improvements, resurfacing and
sidewalks for Route 3A and Bridge street in Weymouth;
provided further, that not less than $8,600,000 shall be
expended for the preferred concept design of the Quinobequin
road portion of the Charles River greenway vision project to
improve safety and accessibility for all reservation
visitors, including a one-way layout to accommodate a
pedestrian sidewalk on the residential side, and a one-way
travel lane with a shared use trail on the river side;
provided further, that not less than $2,000,000 shall be
expended for the completion of the Belmont Community Path in
Belmont; provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall
be expended for the Main street redesign project in
Northampton; provided further, that not less than $100,000
shall be expended for E4TheFuture to advance climate
protection and economic fairness through assisting in the
development of a resilient and robust energy efficiency and
renewable energy sector; provided further, that not less
than $4,000,000 shall be expended for the repair and
rehabilitation of the Court street parking garage in
Marlborough; provided further, that not less than $7,000,000
shall be expended for Phase 2 of the Interstate 495
Southbound to Interstate 290 Westbound Ramp Improvement
Project; provided further, that not less than $300,000 shall
be expended for rail trail expansion in Hatfield; provided
further, that not less than $50,000 shall be expended for
crosswalk visibility improvements and bus shelter and speed
bump functionality improvements along Pleasant street,
between Main street and Park avenue, in Worcester; provided
further, that not less than $100,000 shall be expended for
bus shelters for commuting employees in the Industrial Park
in Fall River; provided further, that not less than
$4,000,000 shall be expended for a new maintenance garage
for the Fall River Department of Public Works; provided
further, that not less than $2,500,000 shall be expended for
the repair and repainting of the Army Specialist Scott A.
Andrews Memorial bridge in Fall River; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for repairs
to the St. James Avenue bridge walkway over Interstate 291
in Springfield; provided further, that not less than
$1,000,000 shall be expended for investments to promote
climate resiliency against heat or extreme precipitation,
improve air quality, eliminate mold and environmental
hazards, and reduce emissions at the Northampton Housing
Authority; and provided further, that not less than
$2,000,000 shall be expended for traffic, safety,
accessibility and feasibility studies for the extension of
the Green E-line from Heath Street to Canary Square in
Jamaica Plain; provided further, that not less than $500,000
shall be expended for the construction, replacement or
maintenance of culvert, sewer and water infrastructure in
the city known as the town of Agawam; provided further, that
not less than $1,000,000 be expended for the town of
Medfield for the complete reengineering, redesign and
replacement of North Street including the construction of
the sidewalk to enhance pedestrian safety; provided further,
that not less than $1,000,000 shall be expended for the town
of Norfolk to replace the City Mills dam and bridge;
provided further, that not less than $250,000 shall be
expended for the town of Wrentham for the study,
engineering, and repairs to the intersection of Route 140
and Franklin St, including curbing, catch basins, and
culverts to mitigate the hazardous stormwater and road
debris discharge that flows into the adjacent Lake Archer;
provided further, that not less than $500,000 shall be
expended for a feasibility and design study and a public
engagement process regarding the potential for electric
multiple unit (EMU) vehicles or other vehicles on the Grand
Junction Corridor in the city of Cambridge
………………………………………………………………………………………$459,230,635
And further amend the bill by inserting, after section 2J,
the following 2 sections:-
SECTION 2K. Section 4 of chapter 57 of the General Laws, as
amended by chapter 83 of the acts of 2021, is hereby further
amended by striking out, under the caption “Plymouth”, the
words “Fourth Plymouth. - Consisting of VTD numbers
25023001160, 25023001161, 25023001162, 25023001164,
25023001165, and 25023001166, of the town of Marshfield, and
the town of Scituate, both in the county of Plymouth.” and
inserting in place thereof the following words:- “Fourth
Plymouth. - Consisting of VTD numbers 25023001160,
25023001161, 25023001162, 25023001164, 25023001165, and
25023001166, of the town of Marshfield, VTD number
25023001440 of the town of Norwell, and the town of
Scituate, all in the county of Plymouth.
SECTION 2L. Said section 4 of said chapter 57, as so
amended, is hereby further amended by striking out, under
the caption “Worcester”, the words “Nineteenth Worcester. -
Consisting of Census Blocks 250173839021003,
250173839021004, 250173839021005, 250173839021006,
250173839021007, 250173839021008, 250173839021009,
250173839021010, 250173839021011, 250173839021012,
250173839021013, 250173839021014, 250173839021015,
250173839021017, 250173839021018, and 250173839021025, all
in VTD number 25017000795, of the city of Framingham, in the
county of Middlesex; VTD numbers 25027001424, 25027001425,
and 25027001426 of the town of Northborough, the town of
Southborough, Census Blocks 250277424022000,
250277424022003, 250277424023000, 250277424023001,
250277424023002, 250277424023003, 250277424023005,
250277424023006, 250277424023007, 250277612001025,
250277612001026, 250277612001027, 250277612001028,
250277612001029, 250277612003001, 250277612003002,
250277612003003, 250277612003004, 250277612003005,
250277612003006, 250277612003007, 250277612003008,
250277612003009, 250277612003010, 250277612003011,
250277612003012, 250277612003013, 250277612003014,
250277612003015, 250277612003016, 250277612003017,
250277612003018, 250277612003019, 250277612003020,
250277612003021, and 250277612003025, all in VTD number
25027001983, VTD numbers 25027001984 and 25027001985, Census
Blocks 250277423003001, 250277423003002, 250277423003003,
250277423003004, 250277423003005, 250277423003006,
250277423003007, 250277423003008, 250277423003009,
250277423003010, 250277423003011, 250277423003012,
250277423003013, 250277423004010, 250277424012000,
250277424012001, 250277424012002, 250277424012003,
250277424012004, 250277424012005, 250277424012006,
250277424012007, 250277424013005, 250277424013006,
250277424013008, 250277424013016, 250277424013017,
250277424013018, 250277424013019, 250277424021008,
250277424021010, and 250277424021011, all in VTD number
25027001986, and VTD number 25027001987, of the town of
Westborough, all in the county of Worcester.” and inserting
in place thereof the following words “Nineteenth Worcester.
- Consisting of Census Blocks 250173839021003,
250173839021004, 250173839021005, 250173839021006,
250173839021007, 250173839021008, 250173839021009,
250173839021010, 250173839021011, 250173839021014,
250173839021015, 250173839021018, and 250173839021025, all
in VTD number 25017000795, of the city of Framingham, in the
county of Middlesex; VTD numbers 25027001424, 25027001425,
and 25027001426 of the town of Northborough, the town of
Southborough, Census Blocks 250277424022000,
250277424022003, 250277424023000, 250277424023001,
250277424023002, 250277424023003, 250277424023005,
250277424023006, 250277424023007, 250277612001025,
250277612001026, 250277612001027, 250277612001028,
250277612001029, 250277612003001, 250277612003002,
250277612003003, 250277612003004, 250277612003005,
250277612003006, 250277612003007, 250277612003008,
250277612003009, 250277612003010, 250277612003011,
250277612003012, 250277612003013, 250277612003014,
250277612003015, 250277612003016, 250277612003017,
250277612003018, 250277612003019, 250277612003020,
250277612003021, and 250277612003025, all in VTD number
25027001983, VTD numbers 25027001984 and 25027001985, Census
Blocks 250277423003001, 250277423003002, 250277423003003,
250277423003004, 250277423003005, 250277423003006,
250277423003007, 250277423003008, 250277423003009,
250277423003010, 250277423003011, 250277423003012,
250277423003013, 250277423004010, 250277424012000,
250277424012001, 250277424012002, 250277424012003,
250277424012004, 250277424012005, 250277424012006,
250277424012007, 250277424013005, 250277424013006,
250277424013008, 250277424013016, 250277424013017,
250277424013018, 250277424013019, 250277424021008,
250277424021010, and 250277424021011, all in VTD number
25027001986, and VTD number 25027001987, of the town of
Westborough, all in the county of Worcester.
And further amend the bill by inserting, after section 13,
the following 5 sections:-
SECTION 13A. Section 8 of chapter 187 of the acts of 2016 is
hereby amended by striking out subsections (c) and (d) and
inserting in place thereof the following subsections:-
(c) The division shall:
(i) proportionately distribute ½ of the amount received from
the fund to a city or town based on the number of rides from
the previous calendar year that originated within that city
or town to address the impact of transportation network
services on municipal roads, bridges and other
transportation infrastructure or any other public purpose
substantially related to the operation of transportation
network services in the city or town including, but not
limited to, the complete streets program established in
section 1 of chapter 90I of the General Laws and other
programs that support alternative modes of transportation;
provided that, if the amount of the distribution to a city
or town is not greater than $25,000, the chief executive
officer, as defined in Clause Fifth B of section 7 of
chapter 4 of the General Laws, may expend such funds for
these purposes without further appropriation;
(ii) distribute ¼ of the amount collected to the
Massachusetts Development Finance Agency established in
section 2 of chapter 23G of the General Laws to provide
financial assistance to small businesses operating in the
taxicab, livery or hackney industries to encourage the
adoption of new technologies and advanced service, safety
and operational capabilities and support workforce
development; and
(iii) distribute ¼ of the amount collected to the
Commonwealth Transportation Fund established in section 2ZZZ
of chapter 29 of the General Laws.
(d)(i) Not later than December 31 of each year in which a
city or town receives a disbursement greater than $25,000
from the Transportation Infrastructure Enhancement Trust
Fund, established by subsection (a), that city or town shall
submit a report to the director of the division that details
the projects and the amount used or planned to be used for
transportation-related projects as described in subsection
(c).
(ii) Not later than December 31 of a year in which a city or
town receives a cumulative total greater than $25,000 in
disbursements from the Transportation Infrastructure
Enhancement Trust Fund since its last report to director of
the division, that city or town shall submit a report to the
director of the division that details the projects and the
amount used or planned to be used for transportation-related
projects as described in subsection (c) for each
disbursement from Transportation Infrastructure Enhancement
Trust Fund since the city or town’s last report to the
director of the division.
(iii) A city or town whose cumulative total disbursements
from the Transportation Infrastructure Enhancement Trust
Fund have not exceeded $25,000 in the 5 years since its last
report to the director of the division shall submit a report
to the director of the division not later than December 31
of the fifth year since its last report to the director of
the division. The report shall detail the projects and the
amounts used or planned to be used for
transportation-related projects as described in subsection
(c) for each annual disbursement from Transportation
Infrastructure Enhancement Trust Fund since the city or
town’s last report to the director of the division.
(iv) The division shall withhold future disbursements from
the Transportation Infrastructure Enhancement Trust Fund
from any city or town that does not comply with the
reporting requirements of this subsection. The withheld
funds shall be disbursed after the city or town complies
with the requirements of this subsection.
(v) On an annual basis, the director shall compile the
reports and post the projects and amounts of money used on
the website of the division.
SECTION 13B. Said chapter 187 is hereby further amended by
striking out section 9 and inserting in place thereof the
following section:-
Section 9. Section 8 is hereby amended by striking out
subsection (c) and inserting place thereof the following
subsection:-
(c) The division shall: (i) proportionately distribute ½ of
the amount collected to a city or town based on the number
of rides from the previous calendar year that originated
within that city or town to address the impact of
transportation network services on municipal roads, bridges
and other transportation infrastructure or any other public
purpose substantially related to the operation of
transportation network services in the city or town,
including, but not limited to, the complete streets program
established in section 1 of chapter 90I of the General Laws
and other programs that support alternative modes of
transportation; provided that, if the amount of the
distribution to a city or town is not greater than $25,000,
the chief executive officer, as defined in Clause Fifth B of
section 7 of chapter 4 of the General Laws, may expend such
funds for these purposes without further appropriation; and
(ii) distribute ½ of the amount collected to the
Commonwealth Transportation Fund established in section 2ZZZ
of chapter 29 of the General Laws.
SECTION 13C. Item 6121-2137 of section 2C of chapter 383 of
the acts of 2020 is hereby amended by inserting after the
word “item”, the second time it appears, the following
words:- ; and provided further, not less than $100,000,000
shall be made available for the permitting and early action
construction components of the New Bedford-Fairhaven bridge
in the city of New Bedford.
SECTION 13D. Said item 6121-2137 of said section 2C of said
chapter 383 is hereby further amended by striking out the
figure “$1,250,000,000” and inserting in place thereof the
following figure:- $1,325,000,000.
SECTION 13E. Section 34 of said chapter 383 is hereby
amended by striking out the figure “$1,250,000,000” and
inserting in place thereof the following figure:-
$1,325,000,000.
And further amend the bill in section 15 by striking out, in
line 329, the words “the chancellor of the University of
Massachusetts, or a designee” and inserting in place thereof
the following words:- the Mayor of Northampton, or a
designee; 2 designees of the rural policy advisory
commission, 1 of whom shall be from Berkshire county and 1
of whom shall be from Franklin county.
And further amend the bill in section 15 by inserting after
the word “groups”, in line 343, the following words:- ,
housing and environmental advocacy groups.
And further amend the bill by inserting, after section 15,
the following 3 sections:-
SECTION 15A. (a) For the purposes of this section the term
“public transportation” shall include the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority and regional transportation
authorities.
(b) There is hereby established a special commission on
mobility pricing to investigate, study and make
recommendations on the development and deployment of
comprehensive and regionally-equitable public transportation
pricing, roadway pricing and congestion pricing. The
commission shall consist of: the secretary of
transportation, or a designee; and 11 members to be
appointed by the governor, 1 of whom shall be an expert in
transportation planning and policy who shall not be an
employee of the commonwealth or any political subdivision,
who shall serve as chair, 1 of whom shall be an expert in
tolling systems or toll authorities, 1 of whom shall be an
expert in transportation financing, 1 of whom shall be an
expert in traffic congestion and congestion pricing, 1 of
whom shall be the chief executive officer of the Greater
Boston Chamber of Commerce, 2 of whom shall be members of
the Massachusetts Municipal Association who represent
geographically diverse areas, 1 of whom shall be a
representative of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation
Authority advisory board, 1 of whom shall be a member of the
business community and 2 of whom shall be employed by
organizations that represent low-income communities that
have been historically underserved by transit and acutely
adversely affected by the public health impacts of traffic
congestion; provided, however, that the members representing
low-income communities shall not be from the same
organization.
(c) For roadway and congestion pricing, the commission
shall: (i) identify and analyze physical, technological,
legal and other issues or requirements related to roadway
pricing in the commonwealth; (ii) propose detailed
specifications and regionally-equitable locations for toll
gantries and other equipment necessary to assess and collect
tolls; (iii) advise the Massachusetts Department of
Transportation on roadway pricing scenarios under the
federal Value Pricing Pilot Program; (iv) provide estimates
of annual operation and maintenance costs; (v) provide
estimates of annual revenue with consideration of declining
motor vehicle fuel excise revenue due to vehicle
electrification; (vi) provide traffic forecasts, including
forecasts of traffic diversion impacts; (vii) provide a
regional and social equity analysis with specific
recommendations related to mitigating adverse impacts;
(viii) provide potential impacts on vehicular emissions
reduction; and (ix) identify all local, state and federal
approvals necessary to deploy new tolls and other roadway
pricing mechanisms on relevant roadways.
(d) For public transportation pricing, the commission shall:
(i) study commute and demand patterns for public transit
entities; (ii) study economic development and housing
patterns and projections and the impact each has on public
transit demand; (iii) review the commonwealth’s laws
regarding emissions reductions within the transportation
sector; (iv) determine fare structures for all modes of
transit of the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority
and regional transit authorities that account for commute
patterns and demand, economic development and housing
patterns and emissions reduction requirements; (v) examine
the feasibility of means tested fares; (vi) provide
estimates of annual operation and maintenance costs; (vii)
provide estimates of annual revenue; (viii) provide
ridership forecasts; (ix) provide a regional and social
equity analysis with specific recommendations related to
mitigating adverse impacts; (x) provide potential impacts on
vehicular emissions reduction; and (xi) identify all local,
state and federal approvals necessary to deploy new fare
structures at regional transit authorities and the
Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority.
(e) The commission may investigate, study and make
recommendations on additional mobility methods as necessary.
(f) Not later than July 1, 2023 the commission shall file a
report of its findings and recommendations, including
legislative recommendations and up to 5 scenarios for
mobility pricing plans with the clerks of the house of
representatives and the senate, the house and senate
committees on ways and means and the joint committee on
transportation. The report shall include, but not be limited
to, an analysis of mitigation measures to address social
equity issues, including, but not limited to, social equity
issues for communities underserved by the current
transportation system.
SECTION 15B. Notwithstanding any general or special law to
the contrary, the Massachusetts Department of Transportation
shall review the feasibility of extending the use of the
Southeast Expressway breakdown lane during the months of May
through September, inclusive, to alleviate traffic to and
from Cape Cod and shall submit a report of its findings,
including recommendations, to the clerks of the house of
representatives and senate and the joint committee on
transportation not later than December 31, 2022.
SECTION 15C. Not later than 1 week after the effective date
of this act, and biweekly thereafter, the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority shall file a report with the chairs
of the joint committee on transportation and shall make the
report publicly accessible on the Massachusetts Bay
Transportation Authority website. The report shall include:
(i) all unfilled job positions, including the position title
and the length of time the position has been open; (ii) all
positions filled in the prior 2 weeks; and (iii) the length
of time needed for the completion of any required training
after an individual has been hired and prior to the date on
which the individual may start to perform the role in the
capacity for which the individual was hired.
And moves to further amend the bill in section 21 by
inserting after the figure “2026”, in line 494, the second
time it appears, the following words:- ; and provided, that
the unexpended balance of item 6820-1301 authorized in
chapter 79 of the acts of 2014, which would otherwise revert
on or before June 30, 2024, but which is necessary to fund
obligations during fiscal years 2022 to 2028, inclusive, is
hereby reauthorized through June 30, 2028.
And further amend the bill in section 27 by striking out the
figure $805,000,000 and inserting in place thereof the
following figure:- $1,264,230,635.
— RETURN TO
COMMENTARY — |
NOTE: In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this
material is distributed without profit or payment to those who have expressed a prior
interest in receiving this information for non-profit research and educational purposes
only. For more information go to:
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml
Citizens for Limited Taxation ▪
PO Box 1147 ▪ Marblehead, MA 01945
▪ (781) 639-9709
BACK TO CLT
HOMEPAGE
|
