16

Page 16 THE MALDEN ADVOCATE–Friday, May 3, 2024 BHRC | FROM PAGE 15 ing graduates and students in their last semester of nursing education programs to practice nursing. “I’m proud that this legislation puts us on a responsible path forward without sacrificing our values of treating families with dignity and respect,” said Senate President Karen Spilka (D-Ashland). “This legislative action was warranted because of inaction at the federal level on a challenge of their own creation. Massachusetts has once again shown that we can work together to address complicated issues, as we have done today.” “Ensuring that people exit the shelter system in a timely manner is crucial to the emergency assistance program’s long-term viability,” said House Speaker Ron Mariano (D-Quincy). “This is the current reality due to the status of the migrant crisis, the lack of federal support, the number of people on the waitlist and the revenue challenges facing Massachusetts. It’s also critical that we ensure that folks in the shelter system receive ample support aimed at helping them to successfully enter the workforce, which is exactly what this legislation does.” "Once again the Massachusetts Senate was given the opportunity to do right by our residents and the majority party failed to do so,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton).“The supplemental budget did not have a residency requirement nor prioritization criteria for the right to shelter program and therefore earned a ‘No’ vote from me. In a time when the state budget is being trimmed back, adding nearly half a billion dollars to the right to shelter program which has housed thousands of people who are not Massachusetts residents and has only hemorrhaged money is not the answer." “I firmly believe that the state of Massachusetts cannot continue to afford to fund this program ourselves without jeopardizing many of the countless critical programs we hold dear,” said Sen. John Velis (D-Westfield). “Our emergency shelter system was simply never meant to handle the number of individuals it is housing today and unlike the federal government, who has completely abdicated their responsibility to address the immigration crisis, the commonwealth must have a balanced budget and cannot simply run up debt without any consequences.” (A “Yes” vote is for the supplemental budget. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino Yes Yes Sen. Jason Lewis Yes RESIDENCY REQUIREMENTS (H 4460) House 30-125, rejected an amendment that would change the state’s Right to Shelter Law which requires the state to provide shelter and other necessities to homeless parents with young children, pregnant women and recently the many migrant families arriving in the Bay State. Homeless individuals are not covered by the Right to Shelter law. The amendment would require that people provide proof that they have lived in the state for at least three months to qualify for the program. It also exempts from the requirement a victim of domestic violence or a person whose living situation has been affected by a fire or other natural disaster that occurred in Massachusetts. Amendment supporters said the current interpretation of residency in Massachusetts by the Healey administration is that the person can be in the state for a matter of minutes to qualify to get services. “The emergency housing assistance program is operating under a 7,500-family cap imposed by Gov. Healey, but the demand for services continues to grow and has created a lengthy waitlist,” said House Minority Leader Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “Imposing a minimum residency requirement of three months is reasonable and will help to ensure that people who are already living in the commonwealth will have access to housing assistance when they need it.” Some amendment opponents said the amendment might be unconstitutional. Others said people from around the world who are the victims of rape, violence and oppression are coming to Massachusetts and the state should not impose residency requirements on these suffering migrants. "I would also just like to underscore, as I did a moment ago, that no families -- whether they are longtime Massachusetts residents or families that are new to the state -- are being put out on the street," said Rep. Alice Peisch (D-Wellesley). "We do have these overflow shelters. I don't want anyone to be operating under the assumption that we have Massachusetts residents who are being left out on the street, so once again, I ask you please … reject the residency requirement." (A “Yes” vote is for the 3-month requirement. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino No No PRIORITIZE HOMELESS VETERANS (H 4600) House 27-129, rejected an amendment that would prioritize honorably discharged homeless veterans for eligibility for placement in the shelter assistance program. “Massachusetts is widely recognized as a national leader for the programs and services we provide to our veterans and our shelter system should be reflective of that,” said amendment sponsor GOP Minority Leader Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “No individual who has served their country with valor and dedication should ever be forced to sleep on the street. Ensuring the well-being of homeless veterans, who have sacrificed so much for our country and our commonwealth, is not a policy decision; it’s a moral imperative.” Opponents of the amendment said it is a political stunt designed to make it appear that Democrats are against helping veterans and noted that nothing could be further from the truth. They noted this shelter assistance funding was designed to protect women, children and families. They noted that the Bay State proudly already has some of the best veterans’ benefits in the nation and pointed to increased veterans benefits in the House budget. Rep. Gerard Cassidy (D-Brockton), House chair of the Committee on Veterans and Federal Affairs, previewed a veterans bill being prepared by his committee for consideration in May and said it will provide even more benefits for veterans. "This is not a veterans' bill. This is basically a political ploy,” said Cassidy. (A "Yes" vote is for the amendment giving priority to homeless veterans. A "No" vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino No No HOUSE APPROVES $58 BILLION FISCAL 2025 STATE BUDGET (H 460 House 153-4, approved a $58 billion fiscal 2025 state budget after three days of debate. The House version now goes to the Senate which will approve a different version. A House-Senate conference committee will eventually craft a plan that will be presented to the House and Senate for consideration and then sent to the governor. “This budget builds off the successes of the last few years by prioritizing our residents,” said Rep. Aaron Michlewitz (D-Boston), chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means. “Whether it is greater investments into programs like housing stability, public transportation or early education, these initiatives are a reflection of our shared values. By reinvesting in the people of the commonwealth, we will continue to make our economy more competitive and equitable for years to come." “We take pride in our collective efforts to develop a budget that mirrors the needs of our constituents,” said Rep. Pat Haddad (D-Somerset), Assistant Vice Chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means. “The fiscal year 2025 budget underscores our dedication to significant investments in healthcare, education, housing, veteran services, energy and environmental services, among other critical areas. Passing this budget will provide vital protection for the cities and towns of the Bay State, particularly amidst fiscal challenges. Our commitment to supporting municipalities has never been more resolute, with local aid emerging as a top priority to sustain essential local services.” “This budget contains billions in taxpayer dollars for illegal migrants, cash bail and $35 million for free phone calls for inmates,” said Rep. Marc Lombardo (R-Billerica). “All the while in this $58 billion budget, education and local aid are less than 25 percent of the budget. The taxpayers are not the priority in this budget and I can’t support that.” “Clearly Speaker Ron Mariano has one thing on his mind, which is to spend now and figure out the economic mess later,” said Paul Craney, spokesperson for Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “His budget successfully mugs the taxpayers of their hard-earned money and keeps them on the hook to fund new priorities. The speaker’s top three priorities are to spend, spend and spend. His budget has nothing to show in the way of spending restraint or fiscal responsibility. Through budget amendments, the House had several opportunities to reform how they spend our taxpayer money, but they were all shot down. The speaker was unusually cruel to taxpayers of Massachusetts, as spending continues to grow with nothing to show for it.” (A “Yes” vote is for the budget. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino Yes Yes ADVANCED PLACEMENT (AP) COLLEGE CREDITS (H 4600) House 25-132, rejected an amendment that would require all public institutions of higher education in Massachusetts to develop and adopt written policies and procedures allowing full acceptance of all appropriate college credits earned by students in advanced placement courses who have successfully completed these courses and have also achieved proficient advanced placement test scores to satisfy these credits. “If a high school student is taking advanced college level courses before graduation and has also achieved satisfactory AP test scores, I think it’s only fair that their hard work be recognized by giving them full credit for these courses once they enroll as a freshman in college,” said House Minority Leader Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “With families of college-age students facing large tuition bills, this policy change would help to ease some of their financial burden by giving students the opportunity to begin college with several credits already earned towards their degree.” Amendment opponents said the Higher Education Committee has already approved a separate, more detailed measure that addresses advanced placement. They said the bill will eventually come before the full House and urged members to vote against this less comprehensive amendment and wait for the more detailed bill. Rep. Dave Rogers (D-Cambridge), the House chair of the Higher Education Committee, did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him to explain his opposition to the amendment. (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino No No $35 MILLION FOR LOCAL AID INSTEAD OF FREE PRISONER PHONE CALLS (H 4600) House 29-125, rejected an amendment that would strike a budget section that provides $35 million to subsidize free phone calls for prisoners; and instead use the $35 million to fund additional unrestricted local aid for cities and towns. “At a time when many cities and towns are struggling to balance their budgets, the House Ways and Means Committee inexplicably opted to fund unrestricted local aid at a level that is $25 million below the governor’s proposal,” said House GOP minority Leader Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “Communities rely on this funding to support a variety of municipal services, including teachers, police, firefighters, libraries and senior centers. The $35 million allocated for unlimited free prisoner phone calls represents a 75 percent increase in the program’s costs, which is unacceptable at a time when revenues are declining and the governor has implemented millions of dollars in … cuts. The state budget is all about setting priorities and boosting local aid represents a more prudent use of our limited state resources.” Amendment opponents say telephone and video calls are a lifeline for people locked in prisons and their families. They said these calls help families keep in touch and can help incarcerated people succeed when they are released from prison into the community. Rep. Mike Day (D-Stoneham), the House chair of the Judiciary Committee,did not respond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call asking him to explain his opposition to the amendment. (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment providing $35 million in local aid to cities and towns. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino No No PROTECT CONSUMER WHEN PURCHASING CARS (S 2716) Senate 38-0, approved and sent to the House a bill that supporters say will modernize protections for consumers in automobile transactions. The bill adds legal safeguards for buyers who purchase used and leased cars in Massachusetts by creating new consumer protections in the car buying process. A key provision expands the Lemon Aid Law by providing consumers seven days from the date of delivery to inspect their vehicle and obtain a full refund if the vehicle fails inspection. Current law provides this return privilege seven days from the date of sale. Other provisions would ensure those who lease a vehicle have the same rights to repossession notice and right to cure as those who finance a vehicle; and increase the used vehicle warranty from 125,000 miles to 150,000 miles – a move supporters say that will protect consumers who purchase more affordable vehicles with higher mileage. Supporters say the bill would expand the rights of car buyers who expect a purchased vehicle to be in a state of good repair and free of problems. “I am … proud that the Senate has passed legislation I have filed to update Massachusetts used vehicle statutes and close existing loopholes in our laws that prevent the attorney general from adequately protecting consumers during a used car purchase,” said sponsor Sen. Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough). (A “Yes” vote is for the bill.) Sen. Jason Lewis Yes ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL HOME OIL LEAKS (S 2737) – The Senate approved and sent to the House a bill that would mandate that insurance companies in the Bay State provide residential owners with insurance for damage to home and property caused by a leak in a residential liquid fuel tank or home fuel supply lines. Current law requires that companies make coverage available for owners but supporters say that while coverage is available, there are many documented cases of companies not making owners aware that the coverage is available. They said this often results in homeowners being unaware they do not have insurance coverage until after they experience a liquid fuel tank leak. Supporters said that some 100 homeowners experience an oil leak in Massachusetts every year. They noted that leaks can incur costly damage to the residence itself, but under Massachusetts law owners are responsible for environmental cleanup, which can rise to $100,000 or more, to dispose of contaminated soil and mitigate the spread in surrounding areas. “I am … grateful that the Senate has passed a much needed consumer protection measure to protect homeowners in the event of an accidental home heating oil release so that homeowners aren't saddled with exorbitantly high clean-up costs through no fault of their own,” said Sen. Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough), chair of the Financial Service Committee. MUST PAY BROKER FEE (H 4474) – The House gave initial approval to legislation requiring that in real estate transactions, the fees associated with hiring brokers are paid by the party who hires them. “It is common practice in the Massachusetts rental market for landlords to hire brokers to list properties and execute lease agreements,” said sponsor Rep. Paul Schmid. “The landlords then pass off the broker’s fee, often half to a full month rent, onto the tenant making the housing market increasingly unaffordable. This bill would ensure that whoever hires the broker, landlord or tenant, pays the fees. EXTEND TAX BREAKS TO MORE FARMERS (H 2693) – The House gave initial approval to a bill that would expand current law and make more farmers eligible for a favorable valuation of property process that results in a tax break. Under current law, to be eligible for the favorable valuation and the resulting tax break, a farmer must own and be farming a minimum of five contiguous acres of land. The bill would reduce the required number to two and not require the acres to be contiguous. Supporters said that farming practices have been modernized and farmers no longer need vast contiguous acreage to grow crops and manage their livestock. They noted that in Eastern Massachusetts, contiguous land is getting harder to acquire. “The bill basically would provide a farmer with multiple parcels of agricultural land the same taxation benefits that a farmer would receive if they owned all their five acres in the same municipality,” said sponsor Rep. James Arciero (D-Westford). “Whenever an owner holds two or more non-contiguous areas of land in one or more subdivisions of the commonwealth equaling not less than five acres, the owner shall have theright to apply for the provisions of this section provided all parcels are within a 10-mile radius of one another, or within the confines of a single municipality. The acreage would have to meet all the requirements for the benefits of this section as if the land was contiguous.” CONDO CONSTRUCTION AND PROPERTY TAX (H 2982) – The House gave initial approval to a bill that would change the current law which removes from a city or town’s property tax rolls BHRC | SEE PAGE 20

17 Publizr Home