17

THE MALDEN ADVOCATE–Friday, October 27, 2023 Page 17 BHRC | FROM PAGE 16 Tood Smola (R-Warren). “The Massachusetts Chiefs of Police Association unanimously opposed this legislation, yet the proponents of this bill never said a single word to address their objection. Unfortunately, we missed an opportunity to target the real issues related to gun violence in this bill.” (A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino OFF-DUTY POLICE OFFICERS (H 4135) Yes Yes FIND OUT THE COST OF THE GUN BILL (H 4135) House 130-27, upheld the ruling of the chair that the debate can begin on the gun bill despite the fact that it does not include a fiscal note detailing the cost of the proposal. House GOP Minority Leader Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading) moved to delay action on the bill because he said that House rules require any legislation reported from the House Ways and Means Committee which has a cost attached to it exceeding $100,000 must be accompanied by a fiscal note detailing the amount of public money which will be required to be spent to carry out the provisions of the proposal. Acting House Speaker Rep. Kate Hogan (D-Stow) ruled that a fiscal note is not necessary. “This is not within our province to the internal workings of a particular subject matter committee and feel the order is not well taken,” said Hogan. This led to Jones’ doubting the ruling of the chair. Beacon Hill Roll Call asked the top two Democratic leaders in the House to comment on the ruling and why they voted in favor of it. House Speaker Ron Mariano (D-Quincy) and Majority Leader Frank Moran (D-Lawrence) did not respond to repeated requests for a comment. “In my opinion, the lack of a fiscal note on [the bill] is a clear violation of House Rule 33,” said Jones. “There is no way that implementing the many provisions contained in this bill will not exceed a cost of $100,000. Based on my conversations with stakeholders, the provision requiring the State Police to take over the inspections of firearms dealers from local jurisdictions alone is likely to cost $1 million to $2 million per year. Before voting on such an expansive bill, House members and the public have a right to know how much its implementation is going to cost the state’s taxHouse 158-0, approved an amendment designed to clarify that the bill does not ban off-duty police officers from carrying firearms in certain restricted spaces, as long as the weapon is provided by their department. The legislation originally allowed only active, on-duty police to carry guns in those spaces. “Most, if not all of us, have heard from our law enforcement community with concerns about when and where they would be allowed to carry firearms when not on official duty,” said amendment sponsor Rep. Mark Cusack (D-Braintree). “I am offering this amendment … to clarify that off-duty active law enforcement officers would be allowed to carry their department-issued firearms in the following places: a place owned, leased or under the control of state, county or municipal government and used for the purpose of government administration; a location in use at the time of possession as a polling place and for the storage and tabulation of ballots; and an elementary school, secondary school, college and university, including transport used for the students, in the areas contained within.” (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino 4135) House 26-132, rejected an amendment that would allow the state to move, based on dangerousness, for an order of pretrial detention or release on conditions when a person has been charged with covert weapons violations or illegal possession of a firearm. Supporters said the amendment would give prosecutors the tools necessary to hold dangerous people accountable and protect victims of gun violence. Rep. Alyson Sullivan (R-Abington), the sponsor of the amendment, did not reYes Yes DANGEROUSNESS (H payers.” (A “Yes” vote supports the ruling of the chair that debate can proceed despite the lack of a fiscal note. A “No” vote is against allowing debate to proceed and supports the requirement that a fiscal note be included before debate can begin.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino Yes Yes spond to repeated requests by Beacon Hill Roll Call to comment on her amendment. “This amendment is actually part of a number of bills that are currently before the Judiciary Committee,” said Rep. Christine Barber (D-Somerville) who urged members to vote against the amendment. “A number of those bills would expand the pretrial detention of people. And this committee takes the issue of expanding pretrial detention very seriously. The committee is currently vetting those proposals, and rather than taking a piecemeal approach of this one piece, that committee is looking at all the related bills in a thoughtful manner. And so we're continuing to take a full look at this issue and I look forward to those discussions.” (A “Yes” vote is for the amendment. A “No” vote is against it.) Rep. Paul Donato Rep. Steven Ultrino No No EMPLOYERS MUST DISCLOSE A SALARY RANGE WHEN POSTING A JOB (S 2468) Senate 38-1, approved a bill, named the Frances Perkins Workplace Equity Act, in honor of the first woman to serve as U.S. Labor Secretary. The measure would require employers with 25 or more employees to disclose a salary range when posting a job position. The measure also would require employers with 100 or more employees to file annual employment data reports, including information on employee demographics and salaries, with the state. In addition, the bill directs the Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development to track compensation data and file an annual report on data showing the state’s progress toward equal pay for equal work. The House has already approved a different version of the proposal. The Senate version now goes to the House for consideration. Supporters said that in the Greater Boston area in 2021, women on average were paid 70 cents for every dollar earned by a man. They noted this gap widens among communities of color. “Many workers, especially women and people of color, underestimate their own value in the job market," said Sen. Pat Jehlen (D-Somerville). "The 2016 Equal Pay Act made real progress on breaking down barriers by banning employers asking applicants for salary history. This helped women and people of color who were changing jobs because their past low pay didn't follow them their whole lives. However, it didn't help applicants learn how much a job could pay or how to assess their work's value to be able to get past the new barrier of their salary expectations. This bill will give workers a better chance to be paid fairly by giving them straight forward information and help them have reasonable expectations.” “In the commonwealth of Massachusetts, we take pride in our world-class academic institutions, competitive talent pool and vast opportunities for economic success,” said Sen. Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough). “Yet when we take a closer look at the earnings of commonwealth residents, it is clear we continue to fall short of closing long-standing racial and gender wage gaps that dramatically suppress the earnings of women and people of color. By requiring disclosure of salary ranges for an open job posting, publishing aggregate demographic data to track wage inequities by race and gender across industries, and protecting an employee's right to ask for salary range information in the workplace, we have the opportunity to recruit and retain skilled workers while closing the wage gap and ultimately boosting our commonwealth’s competitive edge.” “While I agree with the overarching concept of salary range transparency postings for larger businesses, I voted no on this bill because it would place an undue burden on small business,” said Sen. Ryan Fattman (R-Sutton), the lone opponent of the measure. “Subjecting small businesses, who employ even as few as 25 individuals, to the salary range posting portion of the bill with violation fines for failing to properly disclose said information is unnecessary. Most small businesses are not equipped with the technical tools to develop the most accurate salary ranges for their job postings. With its existing laws, Massachusetts already makes it difficult to run a business free of excessive government mandates and penalties.” (A “Yes” vote is for the bill. A “No” vote is against it.) Sen. Jason Lewis Yes ALSO UP ON BEACON HILL REGULATE TICKETS TO CONCERTS AND OTHER EVENTS (S 2442) – The Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure Committee held a hearing on legislation that would require that the total price of tickets for live entertainment events, including fees, be displayed to consumers in a clear and conspicuous manner at the beginning of the purchasing process. The measure would also prohibit price increases during the purchasing process. "Far too often, surprise fees pop up at the end of the ticket purchasing process that consumers throughout Massachusetts had no idea about,” said sponsor Sen. John Velis (D-Westfield). “Whether it’s tickets to a Taylor Swift concert or a Patriots game, people shouldn’t have to struggle through the process of finding tickets and then learn that they can’t even afford them anymore. At the most fundamental level, this legislation enables folks to know their budget when they go in to buy tickets and know the amount that they’re ultimately going to be asked to spend." HEARING AIDS (H 3554) – The Financial Services Committee held a hearing on a proposal that would require all health care plans to provide coverage for hearing aids. “I have heard from constituents about the high cost of hearing aids, and as a caregiver myself, I witnessed the vital need for seniors to be able to hear in order to communicate and advocate for themselves,” said sponsor Rep. Kristin Kassner (D-Hamilton). “It’s stunning to me that these important medical devices are not covered by insurance. This bill seeks to rectify that.” ESTABLISH STUDENTS ENTREPRENEURIAL AND ECONOMIC INVESTMENT FUND (H 415) – The Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies held a hearing on a measure that would create a Student Entrepreneurial and Economic Investment Fund to provide an opportunity for interested students to gain experience in entrepreneurialism and early-stage business development while fostering an economic environment that will attract students to the commonwealth and forge a relationship between the public higher education system and the Massachusetts business community. “Under Massachusetts’ current exam-driven public education system, attention to entrepreneurship and personal improvement beyond the classroom is often forgotten,” said sponsor House Minority Leader Rep. Brad Jones (R-North Reading). “This legislation will provide valuable opportunities for students, BHRC| SEE PAGE 19

18 Publizr Home