ReportWire

Tag: Institutions

  • Safety net hospital fund shortfall widening

    Safety net hospital fund shortfall widening

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Lawmakers are seeking more support for the state’s safety net hospitals amid rising concerns about the fiscal health of a fund that helps cover medical costs for large numbers of uninsured and low-income patients.

    Hospitals and health insurers pay into the so-called safety net fund – a pool of money that helps fund care for hundreds of thousands of low-income residents who are uninsured or underinsured – with the state chipping in additional funding. But if the fund runs low, hospitals are on the hook for the shortfall.

    The fund is projected to have a shortfall of more than $220 million in the upcoming fiscal year, hospitals say, rising to the highest level in nearly two decades.

    Without additional funding, financially challenged hospitals will be forced to cover the deficit, leaving less money to provide medical care for low-income and uninsured patients, they say.

    An amendment to the Senate’s version of the $57.9 billion state budget filed by Sen. Barry Finegold, D-Andover, would require commercial health insurance companies to cover 50% of any revenue shortfalls in the safety net fund.

    “We need to do something to help our local hospitals,” Finegold said. “This is part of a long-term problem with funding for hospitals that serve the state’s most vulnerable residents. We need to fix it.”

    Many earmarks

    Finegold’s proposal is one of more than 1,000 amendments to the Senate’s budget, many of them local earmarks seeking to divert more state money to local governments, schools, cash-strapped community groups and nonprofits. Only a handful will likely make it into the Senate’s final spending package.

    The plan faces pushback from the Massachusetts Association of Health Plans, which represents commercial insurers who would be impacted by the proposed changes to the hospital safety net program.

    Lora Pellegrini, the group’s president and CEO, said requiring insurers to cover the fund’s shortfalls would jeopardize negotiations between the state Department of Health and Human Services and the U.S. Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services that seek to reduce assessments paid by medical insurance carriers.

    “This really came out of nowhere, and would be counterproductive to those efforts,” she said. “We have a committee process for a reason and that’s where these kinds of special interest issues should be vetted, not in the budget.”

    But the move is backed by the Massachusetts Health and Hospital Association, which says requiring insurers to cover the shortfall would help alleviate an “unmanageable financial burden” on the health care system “by broadening funding support for the program.”

    “The Health Safety Net is a vital component of Massachusetts’ healthcare infrastructure and its ability to cover the costs of care for low-income and uninsured patients,” Daniel McHale, MHP’s vice president for Healthcare Finance & Policy, said in a statement.

    “At this increasingly fragile time for the entire health care system, it is imperative that we take the steps needed to stabilize the safety net for the people and providers who rely on it each day.”

    Local hospitals affected

    The state’s safety net hospitals and community health centers – which include Lawrence Hospital, Salem Hospital, Holy Family Hospital in Methuen and Anna Jaques Hospital in Newburyport – serve a disproportionate percentage of low-income patients.

    Many are heavily dependent on Medicaid reimbursements, which are typically less than commercial insurance payouts.

    Nearly 30% of Lawrence General’s gross revenue is for care provided to Medicaid, or MassHealth, patients. The state average is 18%.

    Many community hospitals are collecting from low-paying government insurance programs, and getting below-average reimbursements from commercial insurers, advocates say.

    Lawmakers also swept money from the hospital safety net fund to help cover the costs of new Medicare savings programs that pay some or all of eligible senior citizen’s premiums and other health care costs, including prescriptions.

    Hospitals are also seeing increased demand from uninsured patients as hundreds of thousands of Medicaid recipients see their state-sponsored health care coverage dropped following the end of federal pandemic-related programs, which is driving up costs. Claims processing problems are another factor adding to hospital costs, they say.

    Those and other factors have widened the fund’s shortfall from $68 million in fiscal 2022 to more than $210 million in the previous fiscal year, according to the hospital association. Combined, the shortfall could reach $600 million for the three fiscal years, the association said.

    Biggest expense

    The House, which approved its $58.2 billion version of the state budget two weeks ago, proposed $17.3 million in state funding for the hospital safety net fund. The Senate, which begins debate on its version of the budget next week, has proposed a similar amount.

    In the current budget, the state allocated $91.4 million for the safety net fund.

    But the House budget didn’t include an amendment requiring insurers to help hospitals pay the shortfall. That means even if the Senate approves Finegold’s amendment, it would still need to be negotiated as part of the final budget before landing on Gov. Maura Healey’s desk for consideration.

    Health care coverage, in the meantime, is one of the state’s biggest expenses. Medicaid costs have doubled in the past decade and now account for nearly 40% of state spending.

    MassHealth serves more than 2 million people – roughly one-third of the state’s population – despite federal Medicaid redeterminations that have reduced its rolls over the past year.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Senate unveils $59.7B  budget

    Senate unveils $59.7B budget

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Money for free community college, regional transportation and increased spending on housing and child care are among the highlights of the Senate’s version of next year’s budget, which was rolled out Tuesday.

    The $59.7 billion Senate budget is slightly more than a spending plan approved by the House of Representatives about two weeks ago, and boosts local aid to communities in the next fiscal year by $38.1 million to nearly $1.3 billion.

    Meanwhile, it increases Chapter 70 funding for schools by $316 million to more than $6.9 billion. That would fully fund the third year of the Student Opportunity Act, which was approved by the Legislature in 2019. The law calls for diverting $1.5 billion to schools over seven years.

    The plan also proposes spending $1.3 billion in proceeds from the newly enacted “millionaires tax” by divvying up the money for a range of education and transportation programs and new initiatives.

    The voter-approved law, which went into effect last year, set a 4% surtax on incomes above $1 million.

    Senate Ways and Means Chairman Michael Rodrigues said the plan makes targeted investments in higher education, transportation, and reflects the upper chamber’s efforts to make the state “more affordable, equitable and competitive.”

    “It maximizes and continues to build on the progress we’ve made in key sectors of the state economy,” the Westport Democrat told reporters at a briefing Tuesday.

    The Senate’s budget doesn’t call for raising taxes or new fees, and pumps more money into the state’s reserves or rainy day fund, which would bring the total to more than $9 billion by the end of the fiscal year.

    A key provision of the Senate budget calls for spending $117.5 million to offer free community college for all Massachusetts residents, and another $28 million for stipends for low-income community college students to cover the cost of books, transportation and child care, among other expenses.

    The plan would earmark $214 million for the state’s 15 regional transit authorities – including $40 million to provide bus service free of charge to passengers. Several RTAs, including the Merrimack Valley Transit Authority, have been offering free and discounted bus service under pilot programs.

    Increased funding for expanding child care, health care, housing and mental health services also are part of the Senate’s proposal.

    The House approved a nearly $58 billion budget that includes new spending on public transportation, public safety, environmental protection, health care and housing. Healey unveiled a $56.1 billion budget in January that calls for capping spending increases at 2.9% across the board, citing the state’s declining revenue collections.

    Lawmakers are debating the spending plan amid concerns about the state’s finances, with taxes and other revenue coming in below benchmarks in recent months, and with federal pandemic aid drying up.

    Healey wielded her executive powers in February to slash $375 million from the current fiscal year budget to close a gap between spending and revenue.

    Senate President Karen Spilka said the spending plan calls for making “key investments,” but shows fiscal restraint as “prudent stewards of taxpayer dollars.”

    “Revenues rise and fall, but this is not the time to take our foot off the pedal when it comes to making investments in our residents that will improve quality of life, build a world-class workforce and keep people in Massachusetts so they can live, work and raise a family,” the Ashland Democrat told reporters on Tuesday.

    Senators are expected to file hundreds of proposed amendments to the budget ahead of debate on the spending bill next week, which could drive up the bill’s final price tag. The fiscal year begins July 1.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Biden’s nursing home rules face pushback

    Biden’s nursing home rules face pushback

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Nursing homes would be required to meet stringent staffing requirements under new Biden administration rules that the long-term care industry says are “unattainable” and could force some facilities to close their doors.

    The new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services rules, which were finalized last month, will require nursing facilities that receive federal funding through the programs to employ enough staff to provide at least 3.48 hours of daily care for each resident.

    That includes 2.45 hours of nurse aide time and 0.55 hours of registered nurse assistance. Facilities also must have a registered nurse on site 24 hours-a-day, seven days a week.

    The White House says the new rule will require nursing facilities with 100 residents to have at least two registered nurses and at least 10 nurse aides as well as additional care staff per shift. Facilities caring for residents with higher needs will be required to increase staffing above the minimum levels, according to the new rules.

    Additionally, the Biden administration is requiring home care agencies allocate at least 80% of their Medicaid payments to staff compensation. States would have flexibility to adjust the rules for small and rural home care providers, according to the directive.

    Nursing home operators that fail to meet the new federal standards could lose Medicare and Medicaid funding, effectively putting them out of business.

    “Medicare and Medicaid pay billions of dollars per year to ensure that 1.2 million Americans that receive care in nursing homes are cared for, yet too many nursing homes chronically understaff their facilities, leading to substandard or unsafe care,” the White House said in a statement.

    “When facilities are understaffed, residents may go without basic necessities like baths, trips to the bathroom, and meals – and it is less safe when residents have a medical emergency,” the statement said.

    But the Massachusetts Senior Care Association, which represents nursing homes, said the new rules are “simply unattainable” for nearly every facility and, if implemented, “would lead to widespread disruption in accessing skilled nursing facility care.

    The association said the workforce crisis — with more than 7,000 vacant positions in nursing facilities — is “directly contributing to the current instability throughout the Massachusetts health care system.”

    “CMS’ failure to provide funding to hire, train and upskill the thousands of individuals necessary to meet the requirements of the final rule is projected to cost over $175 million annually in the commonwealth alone,” Tara Gregorio, the group’s president, said in a statement.

    Gregorio said the association is “fully committed to working with our government partners to secure the funding necessary to hire additional direct care workers, increase wages for our deserving staff, and to promote career pathways.”

    A MassHealth spokesperson said the agency, which oversees nursing homes, is “deeply committed to ensuring that members receiving services at nursing facilities across the state are getting excellent care.

    “We are currently reviewing the rule and its impact and look forward to working with our federal, state, and local partners,” the statement said.

    The state Department of Health’s long-term care facility regulations require a minimum of 3.580 hours of care per resident a day, 0.508 hours of which must be by a registered nurse. That’s higher than the standard for the new CMS regulation.

    DPH regulations also require 24 hour nursing service with an adequate number of trained nursing personnel on duty around the clock, according to the state agency.

    The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services estimates that roughly one-quarter of facilities would meet the minimum nursing requirement, including the onsite 24/7 rule.

    But the American Health Care Association, a trade group representing for-profit nursing homes, says about nine in 10 facilities would fail to meet at least one of the new staffing requirements. One-third of facilities would fail to meet all three standards, the group said.

    “While it may be well intentioned, the federal staffing mandate is an unreasonable standard that only threatens to shut down more nursing homes, displace hundreds of thousands of residents, and restrict seniors’ access to care,” AHCA President and CEO Mark Parkinson said in a statement. “It is unconscionable that the Administration is finalizing this rule given our nation’s changing demographics and growing caregiver shortage.”

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Medical aid in dying plan inches forward

    Medical aid in dying plan inches forward

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A proposal that would authorize physicians to administer lethal doses of drugs to terminally ill patients is advancing on Beacon Hill after winning support from two key legislative committees.

    Both the Legislature’s Public Health and Health Care Financing committees have approved the bills with a recommendation that they ought to pass, sending the measures to the Senate Ways and Means Committee for consideration.

    Advocates praised the vote to advance the bills, noting that it was the first time that the Health Care Financing committee approved the proposal.

    Melissa Stacy, Northeast campaign director for the group Compassion & Choices Action Network, called it a “historic movement to help alleviate unbearable suffering for terminally ill patients.”

    More than 80 lawmakers have signed the proposals filed by Rep. Jim O’Day, D-West Boylston, and Sen. Joanne Comerford, D-Northampton. The bills would allow terminally ill patients to be prescribed a lethal dose of medication to end their lives.

    The proposals would require patients to make two verbal requests for a doctor’s intervention at least 15 days apart, as well as a written request signed by two witnesses. A physician would need to certify that the patient seeking access to lethal medicine is suffering from an incurable, irreversible condition.

    But the measures still face a tough slog on Beacon Hill, where perennial medical-aid-in-dying proposals have failed to win final approval despite increasing support and emotional testimony from terminally ill patients who pack hearings to tell their stories.

    If the Senate approves the legislation, it would still need to go before the House of Representatives before landing on Gov. Maura Healey’s desk for review.

    In 2012, Massachusetts voters rejected a ballot question that would have allowed the terminally ill to end their lives with medication prescribed by physicians. The referendum was narrowly defeated, with 51% voting against it.

    But a March poll by Beacon Research found more than 73% of Massachusetts residents believe doctors should be allowed to end a patient’s life by painless means.

    Critics of medical aid in dying laws, including medical and religious groups and advocates for those with disabilities, say misdiagnoses are common. They urged lawmakers not to approve the practice.

    Terminally ill patients suffer from depression, they noted, and may irrationally decide to end their lives.

    Others argue that legalizing physician-assisted suicide would encourage suicide among those suffering from depression and other mental health issues.

    Lawmakers who support proposals to authorize the procedure say it would include safeguards to prevent abuse and rules to keep doctors from prescribing lethal drugs to those with mental health issues or impaired judgment.

    Proponents of the practice got a boost in 2017 when the Massachusetts Medical Society dropped its longstanding opposition to physician-assisted suicide.

    A U.S. Supreme Court ruling in 1997 left the issue largely up to states. Thirty-seven states have since banned the practice, either at the ballot box or by legislative act.

    But at least eight states, including Vermont and Maine, have approved medical aid in dying laws, according to the advocacy group Death with Dignity.

    In December, the state Supreme Judicial Court upheld a Massachusetts law allowing state prosecutors to charge doctors for prescribing life-ending medication to terminally ill patients.

    Justices rejected claims in a lawsuit that the prosecution of physicians who provide lethal medication to mentally competent, terminally ill adults is unconstitutional.

    The high court didn’t rule on the constitutionality of medical aid in dying laws, saying the issue is best left to the “democratic process where the resolution can be informed by robust public debate and thoughtful research by experts in the field.”

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Andover voters approve capital improvements, reject ballot questions

    Andover voters approve capital improvements, reject ballot questions

    [ad_1]

    ANDOVER — After a turbulent first day of Town Meeting, a noticeably more subdued crowd approved millions of dollars in capital improvements while voting down ballot questions Tuesday night.

    Voters struck down two articles that sought to add similar nonbinding ballot questions for the next local election.

    The questions would have asked residents their opinion on the town meeting form of government.

    Members of a committee that recently studied whether the town should continue with Town Meeting spoke against the articles, saying a ballot vote could undermine the group’s work.

    “Town Meeting is where knowledge and perspectives are exchanged,” said Jon Stumpf, chair of the town governance study committee.

    Others residents were worried about what the town should do with the results of a survey.

    “It robs all of us of the benefits of deliberation and debate,” said committee Vice Chair Dara Obbard. “It could lead to something we won’t have a say in.”

    The articles were defeated 266-190 and 268-161.

    “Of the people, by the people, for the people,” said Keith Saxon, who advocated for studying if the town should continue to hold Town Meeting.

    “We have 26,000 registered voters in Andover,” Saxon said, pointing to the meeting’s low attendance.

    The proposal may have elicited a feeling of deja vu for some voters.

    At a Special Town Meeting in November, voters approved an article similar to what was rejected at this meeting.

    Due to a minor procedural rule, the article was not technically legal, according to town legal counsel Doug Heim, who said ballot questions need to be voted on at a regular Town Meeting, not a Special Town Meeting.

    That vote also saw a lot more participation. It was approved 1,181 to 692.

    Rather than use their authority to add the question for the election in March, the Select Board decided to throw the article back to voters at this Town Meeting.

    The petitioner for the original article proposed the similar article.

    This resulted in two articles that sought to achieve a similar aim to the one adopted in November but later found to be invalid.

    Some in town think that Andover has outgrown Town Meeting, a form of government where residents come together once or more in a year to vote on legislation, rules and appropriations.

    Many have argued the low attendance is evidence of this. Those in favor have said Town Meeting is unique in its ability to give every resident who wants it a direct voice in local government.

    Voters approved Article 23, which limits the town staff positions that the Select Board must approve. Before the change, the board had to approve every position, including part-time positions such as lifeguard.

    Voters also approved millions of dollars for capital projects, including sidewalk repairs and tree removal.

    Residents voted to spend more than $4 million from the town’s general fund for projects related to IT infrastructure and minor storm drainage improvements.

    More than $7 million for water and sewer expenses was appropriated with the majority, $6 million, destined for water main replacement and distribution improvement projects.

    The full list of articles voted on can be found at andoverma.gov/CivicAlerts.aspx?AID=945.

    The number of voters participating in the later votes that night were fewer than during the previous day or even earlier that night when MBTA zoning was debated.

    [ad_2]

    By Teddy Tauscher | ttauscher@eagletribune.com

    Source link

  • Tarr details ‘new threat’ to Salisbury Beach

    Tarr details ‘new threat’ to Salisbury Beach

    [ad_1]

    SALISBURY — Standing before a smattering of local officials at Blue Ocean Music Hall, state Sen. Bruce Tarr detailed what he called a “new threat” to Salisbury Beach.

    Joined by town environmental consultant Tom Hughes and Town Manager Neil Harrington on Monday, the Gloucester Republican said the northern part of the beach is in serious danger of massive overwash.

    Overwash is the flow of water and sediment over a coastal dune or beach crest during storms.

    “The damage will be exponentially worse than what we’ve seen so far. And importantly, it will make the cost of remediation substantially higher, if it’s even within reach. This area of the beach is extremely vulnerable and it compels our action,” Tarr said.

    The Senate minority leader’s speech was billed as the latest attempt to stave off severe, ongoing erosion at Salisbury Beach.

    After a few minutes, Hughes took the microphone and elaborated on the latest threat.

    “That overwash elevation is a little bit above 15 feet above sea level,” Hughes said.

    Until last fall, according to Hughes, all of the dunes exceeded that elevation. But now there is a 1,200-foot stretch of the northern beach that is in the 13- to 14-foot range.

    “This is what would happen if nothing is done is we would get a significant overwatch event, a sustained storm that essentially just flattens the barrier and exposes 1A and all of the homes behind it to risk,” Hughes said, referring to Route 1A (North End Boulevard).

    The fix Hughes has been working on with Tarr would come in two phases. Phase one would look to restore the dunes to an elevation of 17 feet above sea level. The estimated cost would be $1.75 million.

    “It’s a very small project. It would need to be maintained until we can do a phase two,” Hughes said.

    The phase two project would bring the elevation up to 19 feet and extend the volume out further towards the water.

    “That requires more significant permitting,” Hughes said.

    The total cost for both phases would be approximately $6 million.

    “For us to be able to act, we have to be concerned about the shorebirds that will soon be on the beach, or at least there’s the potential for them to be on the beach, which presents a significant constraint in our ability to do work,” Tarr said.

    Tarr said to secure Salsibury Beach it will take the cooperation of various parties, including the Merrimack River Beach Alliance, Department of Conservation and Recreation, Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs, state legislators, town officials, federal legislators, local stakeholders, United States Army Corps of Engineers, Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management, Department of Environmental Protection, Department of Transportation and other state regulatory agencies.

    “We cannot address this situation properly without everyone being at the table, and we think that we have set the stage with all the work that’s been done and all that you’ve heard today for us to have a productive path and one that will avoid significant damage,” Tarr said.

    Asked where the funding would come from, he said it would come from a number of sources, including the Salisbury Beach Preservation Trust Fund.

    The Salisbury Beach Preservation Trust Fund was the idea in 2008 of former state Sen. Steven Baddour, who worked with then-state Rep. Michael Costello, D-Newburyport, to make it a law. Baddour and Costello undertook that task after devastating storms ravaged Salisbury Beach three years in a row, including the Patriots Day storm of 2008, which scoured sand from the beach that is owned and maintained by the state Department of Conservation and Recreation.

    “That’s in the near term, and in the long term we hope to cobble together the resources to have a sustainable beach. And again, our federal partners have identified some very promising sources,” Tarr said.

    Tarr emphasized that one of the big reasons the beach is such an urgent issue is that it protects Route 1A.

    “One-A is the subject of a planned project for reconstruction that literally is going to cost millions of dollars, so there’s a transportation component here, and we’re exploring the synergy potentially between investment in the road and investment in the beach that protects it,” Tarr said.

    Route 1A is also an emergency route for the Seabrook Nuclear Power Station.

    Regarding a timeline for securing funding, Tarr did not provide specifics but stated that for this initial short-term solution they would need to have it done by mid-June.

    “That means getting dollars fast, that means executing emergency contracts, that means mobilizing equipment,” Tarr said.

    He said he has continued to have in-depth conversations with Gov. Maura Healey.

    “She has walked this beach. She was instrumental in getting three access points restored after they were damaged by a storm not all that long ago. She knows what we face, and we’re all trying to work together to find a path forward,” Tarr said.

    Harrington shared that he hoped Healey is paying attention.

    “We are here to plead with the governor to listen to the citizens of Salisbury, to follow the science about what’s going on here at the beach, and to work with our legislative delegation to get this critical, immediate funding for the beach,” Harrington said.

    Erosion at Salisbury Beach has been going on for some time, dating back to December 2022 when the initial damage from nor’easter Elliott occurred.

    Local leaders first learned during a Salisbury Beach Resiliency Subcommittee meeting May 4 that the Department of Conservation and Recreation had shut down Points 8, 9 and 10 for a year due to beach erosion caused by the nor’easter. Points 9 and 10 were reopened the Friday before Memorial Day, with point 8 restored just before the Fourth of July.

    [ad_2]

    By Matt Petry | mpetry@northofboston.com

    Source link

  • Andover voters approve MBTA zoning

    Andover voters approve MBTA zoning

    [ad_1]

    ANDOVER — Voters approved a zoning district on Tuesday that allows for the potential construction of up to 2,121 multifamily housing units.

    Only a day after more than 900 voters turned out Monday for the first day of Town Meeting, the state-mandated district was approved 434-196.

    To combat the housing crisis, the state passed a law in 2021 mandating that communities with MBTA transit stations or station located nearby create a zoning district that promotes the construction of multifamily housing, with the added requirement that 50% of the housing capacity must fall within a half mile of a transit station.

    Creating zoning for the units does not necessarily mean they would be built. Developers would still need to meet regulations; the town would just have less discretion to deny projects, according to planning officials. The district, crafted over the last three years, spreads the density over three sections of town – downtown, Ballardvale and the area off River Road near Old River Road.

    The proposed district was debated Tuesday night on the Town Meeting floor at Andover High School, but few voters lined up to oppose the measure.

    “Andover is aging and we need good housing that makes it possible for young people to live in town,” she said.

    Other residents were concerned about how the new zoning might change the town.

    “I moved to Andover because it is not densely populated,” said Mike Tompkins. “Andover would not be the first town to vote against this overreach.”

    The new district could be formally created relatively soon. The plan will now be sent to the state Attorney General’s Office, which has 90 days to approve the new zoning.

    The section of the district off River Road has sparked some concern since there is little infrastructure there. The area is dominated by parking lots, corporate buildings, restaurants and a hotel.

    “The river district aims to transform the area into a vibrant village-like feel,” said Jennifer Lemmerman, who chairs the volunteer group that drew up the district proposal.

    The location is not within a half mile of a MBTA transit station for the commuter rail line, though it does have a bus stop.

    The downtown zone would allow for up to 1,234 units with 119 in Ballardvale and 768 off River Road. The zone would allow for a unit density of up to 23.2 units per acre, with 17 units per acre for Ballardvale and 39 units per acre for the River Road area.

    Select Board Chair Melissa Danisch said the district is a “measured and thoughtful response” to the state’s requirement.

    “Reflects that fellow residents were listening,” she said.

    Danisch also spoke of the millions of dollars in the grants the town could lose if it does not comply with the law.

    State Sen. Barry Finegold, who received the opportunity to vote on MBTA zoning for the second time, also voiced his support.

    “I did vote for this because it is the right thing to do,” he said. “It has become impossible to afford to come to this community.”

    The proposed district has been well-received by officials. It would boost growth in town and pave the way for more private investment in infrastructure, they said.

    Some residents have voiced concerns that having more people in town would put a greater strain on school services. School and planning officials have said that would not necessarily be the case with enrollment more heavily tied to turnover of current housing stock rather than the construction of new units.

    The district would allow for up to 2,121 housing units – 90 more than previously allowed. Officials have said the state recommends a small buffer.

    A map of the districts can be found at andoverma.gov/1069/Multifamily-Overlay-District.

    A commuter rail line snakes through town and has stations in Ballardvale and the downtown.

    The state law was met with a mixed response from community officials around the state. Not complying with the law could carry serious consequences.

    In addition to the potential loss of grants, municipalities could also face legal action. Milton is being sued by the state after its residents chose to vote against a proposed district.

    At Town Meeting, one resident advocated for only approving the district once the legality of the state requirement was settled through the lawsuit.

    Andover had until the end of this year to approve the district or face consequences from the state.

    [ad_2]

    By Teddy Tauscher | ttauscher@eagletribune.com

    Source link

  • US poised to ease marijuana restrictions | News – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    US poised to ease marijuana restrictions | News – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The US Drug Enforcement Administration will move to reclassify marijuana as a less dangerous drug, The Associated Press has learned, a historic shift to generations of American drug policy that could have wide ripple effects across the country.

    The proposal, which still must be reviewed by the White House Office of Management and Budget, would recognize the medical uses of cannabis and acknowledge it has less potential for abuse than some of the nation’s most dangerous drugs. However, it would not legalize marijuana outright for recreational use.

    [ad_2]

    MMP News Author

    Source link

  • Beverly library announces teen poetry contest winners

    Beverly library announces teen poetry contest winners

    [ad_1]

    BEVERLY — The Beverly Public Library has announced the winners of the 28th annual Teen Poetry Contest.

    Winners in the Middle School Division were Sydney Brown, first place for “What Shall I Say”; Katie Daniels, second place for “A CD considers its music”; and James Daoust, third place for “some random poem I made part 2.”

    In the High School Division, the winners were Johnny Sheridan, first place for “Elegy for the Impermanent”; Michael Towne-Smith, second place for “Pupa”; and Sheridan, third place for “Sweet Dreams.”

    The library received over 450 poems for the contest. The poems were judged by a panel of local poets — Kevin Carey, coordinator of creative writing at Salem State University; Liz Ciampa, founder of the Winter Street Writers group; and Aly Pierce, author of “The Visible Plants and Cryptids.”

    The following students all won honorable mentions:

    Emma Conway for “Forgettable”; Charlie Cook for “Through my Telescope”; Liana for “A Woman”; Rory Horan for “The phantom cat”; Lequontavious Jarmanious Jaquan Lamar Quandale Lapaix III for “The boy from Rosario”; Bianca Loiacano for “Series of haikus”; Cornelia Sollins for “I Hate It Just As Much As You”; Cornelia Sollins for “Ode to Pointe”; Miya Tsuji for “An Ode to Soccer Fields”; Destiny Albanese for “My Mother, My Father”; Skyler Bickmore for “The M&M Not Taken”; Arianna B. for “Ballad of Nicole Duennebier’s ‘Still Life With Meat Pile’”; Amy Cai for “MATH”; Sabela de Haro Borras for “Dichotomy”; Scarlett for “A Photo Of Us”; Claire Fitzgerald for “learning”; Riley E. Michael for “The Bathroom Girls”; JJ Niemann for “The Dreamer”; Colin Vellante for “Wood Doves.”

    The poetry contest is supported by the Friends of the Beverly Public Library; Joan Nelson; and all of the parents, teachers and school librarians who encouraged their students to enter. Further questions about the Annual Teen Poetry Contest or any of the library’s Teen events can be directed to Katie Nelson, the head of Teen Services, at knelson@noblenet.org.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • State grant money to pay for green projects

    State grant money to pay for green projects

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Nearly 100 cities and towns are sharing more than $11.8 million in state funding aimed at helping them reduce their energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to climate change.

    The state Department of Energy Resources is distributing the money to local governments through its Green Communities program, which provides funds for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects aimed at helping the state meet its ambitious goal of reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

    Several communities north of Boston will be getting a piece of the latest round of grant funding disbursements, according to a new report to the Legislature.

    Gloucester is getting $144,311 in grant money; Ipswich is getting $167,500; and Wenham is slated to receive $50,000, according to the state agency.

    The grants will pay for myriad projects, including the acquisitions of hybrid police cruisers, battery-electric vehicles and electric vehicle charging stations.

    Other projects include ventilation system upgrades, weatherization, and de-carbonization of schools, municipal buildings and facilities.

    Combined, the projects are estimated to produce energy savings of more than 31,000 MMBTUs, or roughly the same amount of energy consumed by more than 240 households, according to the state agency.

    When completed, the projects are expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1,897 metric tons every year — equivalent to taking 383 cars off the road.

    The Merrimack Valley Planning Commission is getting a nearly $64,000 grant for work on reducing energy consumption and costs, pollution and the development of renewable energy and alternative energy.

    Meanwhile, Manchester-by-the-Sea, Ipswich, Andover, Haverhill and Methuen will each be getting $15,000 Municipal Energy Technical Assistance grants from the state to cover the cost of green projects ranging from decarbonization of buildings to energy storage.

    About 290 cities and towns, accounting for about 89% of the state’s population, have been awarded a “green community” designation by the state agency.

    Since 2010, the state agency has awarded more than $177 million in Green Communities grants, according to the Baker administration.

    To qualify for funding, cities and towns must commit to reducing their energy consumption by 86,875 MM BTUs over the next five years.

    That’s equivalent to the energy use of 673 homes, or taking 1,222 gas-powered cars off the road, according to the agency.

    Massachusetts is required under a state law to meet ambitious benchmarks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to “net zero” over 1990s levels by 2050.

    A climate change bill signed by then-Gov. Charlie Baker in 2022 requires the state to meet incremental goals every five years to reach a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 before meeting the 2050 goal.

    The plan calls for expanding the use of wind power, solar and hydropower, as well as continuing to reduce overall energy usage and reliance on fossil fuel sources to keep the lights turned on and heat and cool the state’s homes and buildings.

    The state is also working to improve energy efficiency through the Mass Save program, which is funded by a surcharge tacked onto energy bills and proceeds from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade system aimed at reducing emissions from power plants.

    The fees drum up about $2 billion a year, which helps pay for home efficiency audits and other programs to reduce energy consumption.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • State grant money to fund green projects

    State grant money to fund green projects

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Nearly 100 cities and towns are sharing more than $11.8 million in state funding aimed at helping them reduce their energy usage and greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to climate change.

    The state Department of Energy Resources is distributing the money to local governments through its Green Communities program, which provides funding for energy efficiency and renewable energy projects aimed at helping the state meet its ambitious goal of reaching net-zero carbon emissions by 2050.

    Several communities north of Boston will be getting a piece of the latest round of grant funding disbursements, according to a new report to the Legislature.

    Gloucester is receiving $144,311 in grant money; Ipswich is getting $167,500; and Wenham is slated to receive $50,000, according to the state agency.

    The grants will pay for myriad projects, including the acquisitions of hybrid police cruisers, battery-electric vehicles and electric vehicle charging stations.

    Other projects include ventilation system upgrades, weatherization, and decarbonization of schools, municipal buildings and facilities.

    Combined, the projects are estimated to produce energy savings of more than 31,000 MMBTUs, or roughly the same amount of energy consumed by more than 240 households, according to the state agency.

    When completed, the projects are expected to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 1,897 metric tons every year – equivalent to taking 383 cars off the road.

    The Merrimack Valley Planning Commission is receiving a nearly $64,000 grant to reduce energy consumption and costs, pollution and the development of renewable energy and alternative energy.

    Meanwhile, Andover, Haverhill, Methuen, Manchester-by-the-Sea and Ipswich will each get $15,000 Municipal Energy Technical Assistance grants from the state to cover the cost of green projects ranging from decarbonization of buildings to energy storage.

    About 290 communities, accounting for about 89% of the state’s population, have been awarded a “green community” designation by the state agency.

    Since 2010, the state agency has awarded more than $177 million in Green Communities grants, according to the Baker administration.

    To qualify for funding, communities must commit to reducing their energy consumption by 86,875 MM BTUs over the next five years. That’s equivalent to the energy use of 673 homes, or taking 1,222 gas-powered cars off the road, according to the agency.

    Massachusetts is required under a state law to meet ambitious benchmarks to reduce greenhouse gas emissions to “net zero” over 1990s levels by 2050.

    A climate change bill signed by then-Gov. Charlie Baker in 2022 requires the state to meet incremental goals every five years to reach a 50% reduction in emissions by 2030 before meeting the 2050 goal.

    The plan calls for expanding the use of wind power, solar and hydropower, as well as continuing to reduce overall energy usage and reliance on fossil fuel sources to keep the lights turned on and heat and cool the state’s homes and buildings.

    The state is also working to improve energy efficiency through the Mass Save program, which is funded by a surcharge tacked onto energy bills and proceeds from the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative, a cap-and-trade system aimed at reducing emissions from power plants.

    The fees drum up about $2 billion a year, which helps pay for home efficiency audits and other programs to reduce energy consumption.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Rockport ZBA: Affordable housing missing from MBTA measures

    Rockport ZBA: Affordable housing missing from MBTA measures

    [ad_1]

    ROCKPORT — Alan Battistelli and his fellow Zoning Board of Appeals members said the Planning Board’s effort to create an MBTA housing district in town may have missed the mark.

    There is no specific consideration for affordable housing in the zoning articles to be presented for consideration by Monday’s Special Town Meeting, said Battistelli, chairperson of the Zoning Board of Appeals.

    And which board, Planning or Zoning, should have jurisdiction is up for debate, he said.

    “The chair of the Planning Board (Jason Shaw) is aware the Board of Appeals is not supportive of the Planning Board being the board that is handling the MBTA district,” Battistelli said. “We’re also unhappy that there is no affordable housing element in the bylaw.”

    “We realize there’s a clock ticking,” he said. “We just want the two boards to walk in together at Town Meeting with the warrant articles we favor. We decided that we unanimously do not want to see the Planning Board try to practice zoning. We believe strongly the ZBA should be practicing zoning.”

    Shaw said the both the Zoning and Planning Boards want a component in the town bylaw before Town Meeting that addresses an affordable housing. Any amendments to be made to the measure will probably be offered by the Rockport Affordable Housing Trust.

    “We certainly have a desire to have a certain percentage of family units as affordable housing,” he said. “We understand that. We are on the same page. It’s more a matter of timing and scope.”

    No controversy exists between Shaw’s board and the Zoning Board.

    “Site plan review is under the Planning Board’s jurisdiction,” he said. “We felt it would be more efficient and more cohesive with one board overseeing the article.”

    However, meeting Wednesday night, the Zoning Board voted 4-0 to support a move to create an ad-hoc committee to direct Rockport’s MBTA housing plan.

    The ad-hoc group could be made up of two members each from the Zoning and Planning Boards, and the Rockport building inspector, Battistelli said.

    The state has imposed a Dec. 31 deadline for MBTA communities like Rockport to present their plans for an MBTA housing district.

    The articles

    Special Town Meeting on Monday will consider Articles A and B, both related the state’s new multi-family zoning requirement for MBTA Communities.

    Article A is a multi-item measure that includes questions about amending the zoning bylaws and the “Transit-Oriented Village Overlay District” (TOVOD).

    Article B is aimed at creating a multi-family overlay district near the MBTA train station off Railroad Avenue by amending zoning bylaws.

    The new MBTA Communities Zoning Act requires that an MBTA community, like Rockport, have at least one zoning district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right and meets other criteria set forth in the statute:

    There must be a minimum gross density of 15 units per acre.

    The district must be located not more than a half mile from a commuter rail station, subway station, ferry terminal or bus station, if applicable.

    No age restrictions can be made and the housing must be suitable for families with children.

    The planning measures regarding the creation of a new MBTA housing district, while well intended, fall short of what is needed for Rockport, Battistelli said.

    “We don’t want to get a multi-family district created without the responsibility of some affordable housing,” he said. “The affordable housing component is not written into the warrant article. It doesn’t mandate that there would be 10% affordable.”

    A motion may be made on the Town Meeting floor to attempt to modify or amend the proposed multi-family district to add multi-family housing, Battistelli said.

    “Right now, there’s zero affordable in the bylaw,” he said. “I believe that without it, we shouldn’t do this.”

    Timing for affordable housing aspect of measure

    Shaw suggested a consultant may be hired in the near future to advise all town boards about the nature of the proposed MBTA housing district. He said the consultant being considered has not yet been hired but that talks were taking place to sign a possible contract.

    It would be prudent to wait until fall Special Town Meeting to address the affordable housing aspect of the MBTA housing measure.

    “We’ll have a consultant who will be working with all boards,” he said. “It’s not a controversy at all. We’re all on the same page. It’s more a matter of do you want something now where things are incomplete, or should we wait until the fall? We’d have a more complete picture and a more complete bylaw.”

    For his part, Battistelli said the Zoning Board will likely make a separate motion to move jurisdiction of the MBTA zoning district from the Planning Board to the Zoning Board, which he believes is appropriate.

    “Otherwise, you have two boards making decisions in the same neighborhood,” he said. “One of the first things we do is teach our members how to write up these legal decisions and they stand up in court.”

    Of the five-member board, two members are attorneys.

    “We’ve saved the town millions by having these volunteers on the Board of Appeals,” Battistelli said.

    Special Town Meeting is scheduled for Monday at Rockport Middle and High School, 24 Jerden’s Lane. The meeting will begin at 5:30 p.m. You can find the full warrant at https://bit.ly/3JCJmCI.

    Stephen Hagan may be contacted at 978-675-2708, or shagan@gloucestertimes.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Stephen Hagan | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • Teachers, others back suspended North Andover school superintendent

    Teachers, others back suspended North Andover school superintendent

    [ad_1]

    NORTH ANDOVER — About 80 teachers and school advocates turned out at the School Committee meeting Thursday night with signs supporting School Superintendent Gregg Gilligan after he was placed on paid administrative leave Tuesday.

    The teachers read statements and cheered each other on in the North Andover High School auditorium. The signs ranged from “We support Dr. Gilligan, Dr. Mealey, and the administrative team” to “S.O.S. Save Our Superintendent.”

    “He has been a very good superintendent for us,” said Juliette Darmon, president of the North Andover Teachers Association. “He works collaboratively with the association.”

    Gilligan was placed on paid administrative leave following an announcement at a Select Board meeting Monday that the school district is facing a projected deficit of $3,122,565, or about 6% of the district’s budget for fiscal 2024.

    In explaining the deficit to the board Monday night, Gilligan said the district faced “some major hits” this year. They included increases in special education and homeless student transportation costs, a lack of elementary and secondary school emergency relief funding, and the need for 38 long-term teaching substitutes as of Monday.

    On Tuesday, School Committee Chair Dave Brown suspended the superintendent.

    “In my judgment, this was in the best interest of the district,” Brown said at the committee meeting Thursday. “This is me taking on the responsibility I was elected to do.”

    The committee decided unanimously Thursday night to keep Gilligan on paid administrative leave to allow for an investigation of the deficit. No timeline was discussed.

    Prior to the meeting Thursday, Brown asked Assistant Superintendent Pam Lathrop, an educator since 1989, to serve as acting superintendent. The committee approved.

    “I never expected to be saying yes to this,” said Lathrop, who joined the district in July. “I wanted to be part of Dr. Gilligan’s administrative team … . In my short time that I’ve been here, I’ve seen incredible leaders do incredible work.”

    Lathrop said she and the rest of the administration, including Gilligan, take full responsibility for the “mistake” that occurred. She told a story about how when Gilligan hired her, he told her that at any moment she may need to step up and that he trusted her to do so.

    Two residents said during the public comment session Thursday that they voted “no confidence” in Gilligan, saying he was not transparent in financial matters for years and “not cut out to lead the district.”

    Some teachers and staff members criticized the move, calling the administrative leave “reactionary and unnecessary” since Gilligan was unable to answer any questions prior to being put on administrative leave.

    Gilligan has worked for North Andover Public Schools since 1998, serving as a teaching assistant, high school history teacher, principal of Thomson Elementary School and assistant superintendent. He accepted his current position in 2018 and his contract runs through 2026.

    Three principals spoke on behalf of the district’s administration at the meeting Thursday, highlighting Gilligan’s impact on the community. They said Gilligan’s work has been “ignored or overlooked.”

    “We believe this was a profound lapse of judgment,” said Joseph Clarke, principal of Franklin Elementary School, calling the move “calculated and cruel.”

    “A School Committee couldn’t find a superintendent more invested in our community than Dr. Gilligan,” he said.

    Darmon presented a letter, signed by the four former association presidents as well, to the committee on Thursday night to show the union’s support.

    “We hope he gets reinstated as soon as possible,” Darmon said. “We feel this was completely uncalled for.”

    Multiple teachers also spoke up during the public comment session prior to the superintendent discussion They called the $3 million deficit “not unique nor an anomaly.”

    “It is evident from the information that Dr. Gilligan and Dr. Mealey presented to the (Select Board) that even the most careful planning could not have compensated for the unprecedented overtures this year,” according to a statement from the association read by many teachers.

    “Rather than blaming our school leaders let’s take a look at where the responsibility might fall,” the statement said.

    Kathleen Tanis, the association’s vice president, said the deficit was “bound to happen.”

    “This is not a unique situation to North Andover. The fact is this is occurring in neighboring towns across the state of Massachusetts and the nation,” Tanis said. “Right now, we should be focused on keeping our administration in place to help steer us through these difficult times.”

    Follow Monica on Twitter at @MonicaSager3

    Follow Monica on Twitter at @MonicaSager3

    [ad_2]

    By Monica Sager | msager@eagletribune.com

    Source link

  • Manchester-by-the Sea Town Meeting backs senior center plan. lauinch service

    Manchester-by-the Sea Town Meeting backs senior center plan. lauinch service

    [ad_1]

    MANCHESTER-BY-THE-SEA — Considering 21 articles on the warrant was no easy task but annual Town Meeting wrapped it up in about three hours.

    Town Moderator Alan Wilson banged the gavel to convene the meeting Wednesday at Manchester Memorial Elementary School precisely at 6:30 p.m. and adjourned it at 9:12 p.m. Midway through, Wilson reported a quorum of 317 voters present.

    The meeting approved financing for a new senior center, the operation of a launch service in Manchester Harbor, and a number of capital projects, including $7,550,000 to make capital improvements to the town’s water and wastewater systems.

    It also approved a fiscal year 2025 budget amounting to $42,336,058, with $16,818,112 for the town operating and enterprise budgets for water and sewer, and debts; $19,060,435 for town’s share of Manchester Essex Regional School District’s operating budget and debt service; $243,385 for the North Shore Agricultural & Technical School; and $2,642,740 for capital items.

    Each of the above articles passed by substantial margins with voters using electronic vote tallying devices.

    Finance Committee Chairperson Sarah Mellish said the budgets received much careful consideration.

    “The Finance Committee feels this budget is prudent and addresses the needs of the town,” she said. “This is a lean budget that meets the town’s needs.”

    Article 6 authorizing the Select Board to raise or borrow $1 million to buy the Masons’ 26,045 square foot parcel at 10 Church St. needed a two-thirds majority and was approved by a sizable margin, prompting a rousing cheer. Many applauding were senior citizens.

    Select Board member Brian Sollosy moved the measure, which was seconded by Select Board member John Round.

    Responding to a question about whether the building is the right place for a town-operated facility, being at the edge of Manchester Harbor, Town Administrator Gregory Federspiel said the elevation of the Masons’ building protects it from storm surge.

    “This building is in pretty good shape,” Federspiel said. An appraisal a few years ago estimated the building’s value to be about $800,000.

    “We do feel the price is appropriate,” he said.

    The town will start running a launch service in Manchester Harbor after Town Meeting voted 309-34 to purchase to two launch boats and fund operating expenses for this fiscal year and next.

    Select Board member Catherine Bilotta said town officials, including Harbormaster Bion Pike, put together a prudent business plan for the launch service.

    “All of these costs are going to be reimbursed by user fees,” she said. “The entire endeavor is to be funded entirely by user fees.”

    Mellish said the effort should eventually be self-sustaining.

    “If you want to use a launch, contact the harbormaster and he’ll gladly take your money,” she said.

    The meeting also approved paying the town’s share of the Manchester Essex Regional School District’s $16,339,528 gross operating and maintenance budget for fiscal 2025, $2,720,907 to cover its long-term debt, and $660,000 for a feasibility study for Essex Elementary School.

    Superintendent Pamela Beaudoin said the Manchester Essex Regional School Committee will eventually narrow its focus to considering possible renovation or new construction for the school, 12 Story St. in Essex.

    “We really lean heavily on community experts,” she said.

    Spending $481,670 of Community Preservation Fund money on restoration of the First Parish Church steeple and resurfacing of the Sweeney Park basketball court, among other things, was approved, but not before a motion was made to eliminate $200,000 to fund the Manchester Affordable Housing Trust. The motion was defeated 178-45.

    Here is a condensed version of the articles on the meeting’s warrant and votes:

    1 – Receive reports of the town’s boards and committees. APPROVED.

    2 – Fix the salaries of the town moderator and members of the Select Board at $0 per year. APPROVED.

    3 – Raise $243,385 as the town’s share of the budget for the Essex North Shore Agricultural and Technical School District. APPROVED.

    4 – Raise sums by taxation to pay town debts and charges — $42,336,058 — for the coming fiscal year, effective July 1. APPROVED.

    5 – Spend the following, all of which were APPROVED:

    — Road resurfacing — $550,000.

    — DPW facility siting, geotechnical analysis — $250,000.

    — Drainage and sidewalk improvements — $250,000.

    — Storm damage repair — $50,000. Not recommended.

    — General building upgrades — $50,000.

    — Backhoe replacement — $150,000.

    — IT and telephone upgrades at Town Hall — $30,000.

    — Planning and zoning studies — $20,000. Not recommended, in operating budget.

    — Library walkway repairs — $6,500.

    — Library building assessment — $43,500.

    — Fire engine replacement fund — $250,000. Not recommended.

    — Ambulance 2 replacement — $470,000.

    — Police tasers — $12,600.

    — Police administration vehicle replacement — $73,000.

    — Cardiac monitors and defibrillators — $54,000.

    — Fire Station repairs and upgrades — $30,000. Not recommended, in operating budget.

    — Dredging/engineering/permitting — $100,000.

    — No wake buoys — $9,500.

    — Plant upgrades/PFAS design — $2 million. $150,000 recommended.

    — Pipe replacement/improvements — $2 million. Not recommended.

    — Meter replacements (for “smart” meters) — $1.5 million. Not recommended.

    — Water truck replacement — $50,000.

    — Plant upgrades/Equipment replacement – $4.1 million. $550,000 recommended.

    6 – Raise or borrow $1 million and authorize the Select Board to use it to acquire, for a senior center and, or community center, all or a portion of the Masons’ 26,045 square foot parcel at 10 Church St. APPROVED.

    7 – Raise or transfer money to operate a town-sponsored launch service in Manchester Harbor including $9,500 for fiscal 2024 operating expenses, $125,000 for the purchase of two launch boats, and $41,000 for fiscal 2025 launch operating expenses. APPROVED.

    8 – Spend $7,550,000 — $4,100,000 on the town’s water system and $3,450,000 on the town’s wastewater system — for capital improvements. APPROVED, 290-33.

    9 – Spend Massachusetts Public Library Construction Program grant funds and re-appropriate $150,000 of the $200,000 previously appropriated for restroom renovations at Manchester-by-the-Sea Public Library. APPROVED, 200-19.

    10 – Create a Special Opioid Settlement Stabilization Fund and dedicate 100% of the opioid litigation settlement funds to the fund. APPROVED.

    11 – Raise or transfer money for the town’s assessment for the gross operating and maintenance budget of the Manchester Essex Regional School District. APPROVED.

    12 – Raise or transfer $660,000 for the town’s apportioned share of the Essex Elementary School feasibility study. APPROVED, 244-44 .

    13 – Raise or transfer $248,348 to fund the town’s share of the cost to refurbish the turf fields in town. APPROVED.

    14 – Hear and act on the report of the Community Preservation Committee on the fiscal 2025 Community Preservation budget and to appropriate $481,670 from the Community Preservation Fund money to meet the administrative and other expenses of the committee for fiscal 2025. APPROVED.

    Included in the $481,670 total amount is:

    – $200,000 for the Manchester Affordable Housing Trust Project funding.

    – $60,000 for restoration of the First Parish Church steeple.

    – $28,500 to resurface the Sweeney Park basketball court.

    – $25,000 for restoration of town cemeteries.

    – $24,400 for portico restoration at Hooper Trask House.

    – $20,000 for Power House Hill parking and access easement.

    15 – Authorize the Select Board to acquire an access and parking easement on property owned by the Manchester Housing Authority at Newport Park for access to Powder House Hill conservation lands.  APPROVED.

    16 – Raise or transfer $100,000 to supplement the fiscal 2024 Legal Expenses Account. APPROVED.

    17 – Raise or transfer $300,000 to be deposited into the town’s “Other Post Employment Benefits Trust Fund.” APPROVED.

    18 – Set fiscal 2025 imitations on expenditures by the town’s recreation programs at $400,000; and the town’s Board of Health Emergency Dispensing Sites and Clinics Programs at $50,000.  APPROVED.

    19 – Amend the Tobacco Products Regulations and Tobacco Use Regulations of the town’s General Bylaws as fines and enforcement are covered by other bylaws and state statutes/regulations.  APPROVED.

    20 – Amend Article X, Section 23 of the General Bylaw on non-accessory signs by adding the language: “The provisions of this section shall not apply to non-accessory signs located on town-owned property, subject to the approval by the Select Board, nor to non-accessory signs on town-owned property used for educational purposes, subject to approval by the Manchester Essex Regional School Committee.”  APPROVED.

    21 – Raise or transfer money to reduce the tax rate. NO ACTION TAKEN.

    Stephen Hagan can be reached at 978-675-2708 or at shagan@northofboston.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Stephen Hagan | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • Lawmakers load up budget with earmarks

    Lawmakers load up budget with earmarks

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Downtowns, youth sports programs, churches, food pantries and nonprofits are among the myriad interests angling for a piece of the state’s nearly $58 billion budget.

    State lawmakers loaded the spending package for next fiscal year with requests for money for local projects and programs, along with changes in public policy ahead of a debate on the bill in the House of Representatives this week.

    The fate of many of those requests will be decided upon in closed-door meetings with House Democratic leaders before the final budget comes up for a vote.

    Many of the local earmarks seek to divert more state money to local governments, schools, cash-strapped community groups and nonprofit organizations. Some restore unilateral budget cuts made by Gov. Maura Healey earlier this year in response to revenue shortfalls.

    That includes an amendment filed by Reps. Sally Kerans, D-Danvers, and Kristin Kassner, D-Hamilton, calling for $75,000 for the town of Topsfield to restore 9C budget cuts made by Healey and provide funding for the Downtown Economic Development plan.

    Kerans is also seeking $25,000 for the Topsfield Historical Society to build a parking lot, which was also cut by Healey.

    Rep. Frank Moran, D-Lawrence, is seeking $25,000 for the Dominican Carnival in the Merrimack Valley, $50,000 for a basketball club for low-income youth, $50,000 for Casa Dominicana to provide ESL classes, and $25,000 for the Andover Baptist Church for “structure repairs and maintenance costs,” among other funding requests.

    Other proposed earmarks, filed by Rep. Jerald Parisella, D-Beverly, seek $100,000 for Beverly’s 400th anniversary and $200,000 for Gillis Park renovations.

    House lawmakers filed nearly 1,500 amendments to the budget. Only a handful will likely make it into the final spending plan. Most will be withdrawn or consolidated by legislative leaders through the vetting process that largely happens behind closed doors.

    Overall, the House budget unveiled last week would increase state spending by about 3.3% next fiscal year, slightly less Gov. Maura Healey’s initial $56.1 billion package filed in January.

    State aid to cities and towns, used for everything from closing local budget gaps to fixing sidewalks, would come in at more than $1.25 billion. Education aid would increase to more than $6.86 billion under the spending plan.

    The House budget would divert $500 million to the state’s emergency shelter system, which is bursting at the seams amid a surge of migrants.

    The plan also calls for spending $1 billion in proceeds from the millionaires’ tax on a range of education and transportation programs, along with new initiatives. The new voter-approved law, which went into effect in January, set a 4% surtax on incomes above $1 million.

    But the final price tag for the budget is almost certain to be driven up by local earmarks during next week’s debate on the spending package.

    Critics of earmarks — including fiscal watchdogs — argue that they encourage patronage and government waste.

    Lawmakers defend the practice as a means to getting money for local projects, since the executive branch largely controls the budget for capital and one-time expenses.

    The requests for additional funding come as state budget writers urge fiscal responsibility following several months of lackluster tax collections and rising costs from a surge of asylum seekers.

    Healey wielded her executive powers in February to slash $375 million from the current fiscal year budget to close a gap between spending and revenue.

    Last year, Healey used her veto pen to slash a total of $272 million in spending in her first budget as governor. The Democrat also spiked an outside section of the $56 billion spending plan that called for another $205 million of one-time funding.

    Healey’s predecessor, Republican Charlie Baker, often feuded with lawmakers over earmarks in the budget, but his vetoes were usually overridden by the Democratic-controlled Legislature.

    Once the House wraps up its work on the budget, the spending package moves to the Senate for consideration.

    The new fiscal year begins July 1.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • State sued over special education for young convicts

    State sued over special education for young convicts

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — State education officials are being sued over claims that they aren’t providing adequate special-needs services for older, incarcerated youth serving time in county jails.

    A lawsuit filed in state Superior Court last week alleges the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education failed to fulfill its statutory obligation to provide special education to youth with disabilities in houses of correction throughout the state, which is depriving them opportunities they are entitled to under state law.

    The legal challenge was filed by the Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee and Committee for Public Counsel Services on behalf of several unidentified inmates, who allege that they deprived of services such as speech and language therapy, and little or no access to tutoring from “a grossly understaffed and inadequately monitored” education provider.

    “DESE’s failure to uphold its legal obligation to provide adequate education to incarcerated youth is unacceptable,” Phil Kassel, of the Mental Health Legal Advisors Committee, said in a statement.

    “Every student, regardless of their circumstances, deserves access to a quality education that meets their individual needs.”

    A spokeswoman for the state Department of Elementary and Secondary Education said the agency will “review the lawsuit” but declined comment further, citing a policy of not discussing pending litigation. The statement said the agency said it is “committed to seeing that all students with disabilities receive the services they deserve.”

    The plaintiffs argue that the failure to adequately provide special-needs services for students increases a likelihood they will not get a high school diploma, which means their prospects after release from jail “are greatly diminished, economically and otherwise.”

    “A high school diploma is necessary to have any reasonable chance to compete in today’s job market,” the lawyers wrote.

    “Without meaningful employment opportunities, youth are substantially more likely to live in poverty and depend on public benefits as adults.”

    “This poverty can exacerbate mental health issues, as well as perpetuate cycles of homelessness and unemployment,” they added.

    A report by the group Citizens for Juvenile Justice highlighted what it described as a lack of education opportunities for 18- to 21-year-olds serving time at houses of correction, alleging that the state, county, and municipal officials are violating young peoples’ right to an education under the state constitution.

    But the group says the DESE lawsuit is “narrow” in scope and won’t have an impact on the overall problem of educational opportunities for incarcerated youth.

    It has called for taking other steps including a proposal that would raise the age of juvenile jurisdiction by the courts to include 18 to 20 year olds.

    “Even if it is successful, the needs of general education students in both HOCs and DOC, as well as special education students in DOC, are not addressed by the litigation,” the group said.

    “It would be more efficient to raise the upper age of juvenile jurisdiction to ensure a state-wide fix, rather than focus on improving county-by-county programming for young adults in HOCs that are reluctant or outright resistant to do this.”

    On Thursday, supporters of the “raise the age” proposal held a rally outside the Statehouse, where formerly incarcerated youth called on lawmakers to approve the legislation.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Lawsuit targets MBTA over train safety system

    Lawsuit targets MBTA over train safety system

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A Japanese high-tech corporation has filed a $158 million federal lawsuit against the MBTA, claiming the public transit agency violated the terms of a contract to install a new safety system on the commuter rail network.

    The lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court alleges that the T made changes to the contract to install a Positive Train Control system along the commuter rail tracks that drove up the cost of the project by hundreds of millions of dollars, but refused to compensate the company for the additional costs.

    “Despite Hitachi Rail’s repeated demands and attempts to resolve the claims detailed below, Defendant MBTA has failed and refused to issue Change Orders, to acknowledge delays, or to compensate Hitachi Rail for the costs and other impacts incurred by Hitachi Rail in connection with the same, in breach of the Contract,” the complaint states.

    The T is under a federal mandate to install the system on all of its 15 commuter rail lines. The technology uses antennas on locomotives, radio towers and track sensors to monitor train speeds and locations to prevent collisions.

    Hitachi’s predecessor, Ansaldo STS, was awarded a $338 million contract in 2015 for the work but alleges that the MBTA required the company to perform additional work “beyond the contractual obligations” and then later “refused to pay for it.”

    The company cited the example of the Gloucester Drawbridge Project, alleging that the MBTA failed to issue a change order or pay for the additional work to install safety systems along that new section of commuter rail track.

    The MBTA said it is reviewing the complaint but argues it has “no impact on the MBTA’s ability to work closely with the contractor and deliver a project that improves safety for both customers and employees of the commuter rail system.”

    “While the MBTA continues its efforts to resolve any outstanding issues with the contractor, the work of accomplishing these important safety enhancements is in its final stages, and both parties are firmly committed to ensuring the project is successfully completed,” the T said in a statement.

    The project is part of a long-delayed federal mandate to equip the nation’s rail lines with the Positive Train Control system, which is designed to prevent train-on-train collisions, speed-related derailments and other safety issues.

    In 2008, Congress approved the mandate in response to a series of deadly train crashes involving speed and other rail safety issues.

    Initially, the federal government set a 2015 deadline for freight railroads covered by the law to implement it, but under industry pressure congressional lawmakers have pushed back the deadline several times.

    In the lawsuit, Hitachi claims that in Massachusetts the safety upgrades have been plagued by problems stemming from the MBTA’s handling of the project.

    “These include delays driven by the aforementioned changes to the contractually agreed work, ongoing lack of MBTA supplied flagger support necessary for Hitachi Rail to perform work in the right of way, MBTA track access denials, MBTA mandated re-sequencing and COVID-19 impacts,” the complaint states.

    The T is also under a congressional mandate to install the Automatic Train Control system on all of its commuter rail lines by this year.

    Similar to PTC, the system uses satellites and wayside radio signals to monitor trains. If any problems are detected — such as excessive speeds — on-board computers can take over to slow a train or bring it to a complete stop.

    Nationwide, the rail industry has spent nearly $14 billion installing train control equipment over the past several years, according to the Federal Railroad Administration.

    The National Transportation Safety Board says the technology could have prevented 145 railroad accidents, saved an estimated 300 lives and averted more than 6,700 injuries over the past 45 years.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Article would move library renovation plans ahead

    Article would move library renovation plans ahead

    [ad_1]

    MANCHESTER-BY-THE-SEA — To residents Gretchen Wood and Lisa Bonneville, the town’s library is a dream.

    But Wood and Bonneville want that dream to be accessible for all who visit Manchester-by-the-Sea Public Library — including those who are disabled. Both are members of the town Americans with Disabilities Advisory Committee.

    Access for all to the library’s offerings is critical, but is a challenge because “the library is very small and it has very tight spaces,” Wood said Thursday. “We have some pretty deep concerns about the library’s accessibility.”

    Wood and Bonneville hope the town shows its support for the library, calling for the approval of a financing measure at annual Town Meeting on Wednesday that would lead to a potential library building project.

    Article 9 asks the town to apply for, accept and expend Massachusetts Public Library Construction Program grant funds and re-appropriate $150,000 of the $200,000 previously appropriated for restroom renovations at the library, 15 Union St.

    Library Director Cynthia Gemmell, who supports passage of Article 9, said she will be at Town Meeting to potentially answer questions about the measure.

    “I would very much like to see the town support the article,” she said. “This is a preliminary step to see if we could have a plan for the potential renovation and expansion of the library. This will allow us to address the space issues, accessibility issues, lack of programming space, lack of meeting space and lack of collection space.”

    Successful passage of Article 9 would enable the town to apply for a matching state grant that will help finance the planning and design of the library project, Wood said.

    “This will not fund it,” she said. “It will merely get us into this round of grant funding. We can’t go forward unless we are accepted. It’s a small ask.”

    Library Trustee Sarah Davis said Article 9 is supported by the Trustees, the Select Board, and the Americans with Disabilities Advisory Committee.

    “It’s a requirement for keeping us in the running for a potential grant from the Massachusetts Board of Library Commissioners,” she said. “It’s a requirement.”

    The town needs to apply for the grant by May 31, Davis said.

    “We’ve been working on the application for years,” she said.

    Access for everybody

    Wood, who served as town clerk in Manchester for 23 years before stepping down 13 years ago, will volunteer as a timekeeper during Town Meeting deliberations on Wednesday.

    The library, she said, needs attention, adding using the restroom in the building is impossible for some.

    “It’s a very tiny restroom,” Wood said. “That’s a problem.”

    Access to the young adult programs is limited since the programs are held on the library’s upper level – reached only by climbing a narrow full flight of metal stairs.

    “Imagine the feelings of a young person with physical challenges facing this obstacle,” reads the letter by Wood and Bonneville. “Searching for a book in the stacks would be impossible for anyone in a wheelchair. Then, there is the problem of the existing very small restroom tucked into a corner of the reading room, where it is hardly adequate for anyone, but certainly completely inaccessible to anyone in a wheelchair or walker, or a parent with a child in a stroller.”

    The library is a resource in Manchester that needs to be optimized, Wood said.

    “We have a beautiful building that is very valuable to the town,” she said. “It’s time to use it.”

    Ground was broken and construction began on the library in 1886. The building, designed by noted architect Charles P. McKim, was dedicated on Oct. 13, 1887, according to the library’s website.

    “It’s an architectural gem,” Davis said, who added the library’s limited accessibility, limited meeting space and the narrow staircase to the upstairs loft are among the problems faced by patrons and library staff.

    “We want to have more meeting space to support programs, hold meetings and make interactions possible,” she said. “It’s really important to act now.”

    Town Meeting is slated to begin at 6:30 p.m. at Memorial Elementary School at 43 Lincoln St. in Manchester.

    Stephen Hagan may be contacted at 978-675-2708, or shagan@gloucestertimes.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Stephen Hagan | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • Healey urges passage of parentage rights bill

    Healey urges passage of parentage rights bill

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Massachusetts was the first state in the country to legalize same-sex marriages but still lags behind others in granting LGBTQ couples parental legal rights.

    Advocates have pushed for years to change that by updating the state’s parental protections to cover children born through in-vitro fertilization, surrogacy and adopted by same-sex parents. Despite impassioned pleas from couples, who have packed committee hearings to tell their stories, the legislation has failed to pass.

    Now advocates are making another push to have the Massachusetts Parentage Act approved with a boost by Gov. Maura Healey, a Democrat who took office last year as the state’s first openly gay chief executive. The governor has thrown her support behind the initiative.

    Healey said the measure would guarantee equality in parental rights regardless of gender, marital status or the circumstance of birth. Massachusetts is the only New England state without protections for LGBTQ families seeking the legal bond of a parent-child relationship, she said.

    “We’ve been proud to be a national leader and trailblazer when it comes to LGBTQ+ equality, but we’ve got some catching up to do,” she said.

    Attorney General Andrea Campbell, a Democrat, has also gotten behind the initiative, saying the state is falling behind others on parental rights laws, which “have not kept pace with the diversity of modern-day families.”

    The legislation, backed by dozens of lawmakers, received bipartisan support from Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr and other Republican lawmakers.

    “No child in our state should be left in parental limbo caused by laws that haven’t been updated to recognize the realities of many families,” the Gloucester senator said.

    Tarr said the proposal would “create a straightforward path to establishing parentage that avoids unnecessary litigation and the bureaucratic hurdles that too often deprive kids and parents of the stability and well-being that comes from proper legal recognition and the rights that attach to that recognition.”

    Under current law, gay, lesbian and transgender mothers and fathers in Massachusetts sometimes have to adopt their own children to ensure parental rights, advocates say, a process that can take several months.

    Polly Crozier, director of Family Advocacy at GLBTQ Legal Advocates & Defenders, said the changes are needed “to fill gaps in our laws that leave some children vulnerable and to ensure all families, no matter how they are formed, have the legal security they deserve.”

    “We hope to see this bill passed into law this session so that Massachusetts can stand proud as a state that recognizes and protects the dignity and worth of all children and families,” she said.

    Earlier this month, Michigan Gov. Gretchen Whitmer signed a package of bills updating the state’s parentage and surrogacy laws and repealed a law threatening criminal penalties against parents who engage in paid surrogacy contracts.

    Crozier said Whitmer’s approval of the changes is a “potent reminder of what strengthening families should look like in 2024 and it should serve as an inspiration to Massachusetts.”

    But supporters of the Massachusetts proposal are running out of time to approve the bill before the formal end of the two-year legislative session.

    The bill is pending before the Legislature’s Judiciary Committee, which was recently given a deadline of April 30 to decide on the proposal.

    Christian M. Wade covers the Massachusetts Statehouse for North of Boston Media Group’s newspapers and websites. Email him at cwade@cnhinews.com.

    [ad_2]

    By Christian M. Wade | Statehouse Reporter

    Source link

  • Shelter money fading but new funding explored

    Shelter money fading but new funding explored

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — State dollars for the emergency family shelter system are dwindling, and restaurateurs who for years enjoyed expanded outdoor dining and the ability to sell drinks to go remain “in limbo” amid a sustained period of legislative disagreement.

    House and Senate Democrats broke for another long weekend Thursday without announcing any deal on a spending bill that would replenish shelter funding for the remainder of the fiscal year.

    While negotiators remain at odds over how much they want to draw from state savings and exactly what kind of time limits to place on shelter stays — plus whether restaurants should resume takeout drink sales — funding could run out in less than two weeks, a Healey administration official confirmed Thursday.

    “Direct funding for emergency assistance shelters has been expected to be exhausted early this spring. It’s possible that could occur as soon as this month,” Matt Murphy, a spokesperson for the Executive Office for Administration and Finance, said in a statement. “We are both grateful to the Legislature for the work they have done so far to advance our supplemental funding request and hopeful that legislation can be finalized quickly for our review to address this time sensitive need.”

    “If we do exhaust the direct funding available for shelters, we have some flexibility to shift other available funds as a short-term measure to avoid any disruption in services until the supplemental budget passes,” he added, referring to “additional money from the last (emergency assistance) supp that wasn’t direct shelter funding that can be used.”

    Murphy said the administration “continues to call on the federal government to address this federal problem, including by providing additional funding to states.”

    Both branches have already approved competing versions of a mid-year spending bill that would steer more money to the shelter system, but they cannot send it to Gov. Maura Healey’s desk until they iron out differences.

    The House and Senate adjourned with plans to return Monday, April 22, which is the earliest they could act to send a compromise to the governor — if top Democrats can strike an agreement by then.

    Sean Fitzgerald, a spokesperson for Senate Ways and Means Committee Chair Michael Rodrigues, declined to make the senator available for an interview Thursday, but said the conference committee is “continuously engaged and remains focused with ongoing and productive conversations.”

    “We remain optimistic that we’ll have an agreement soon,” Fitzgerald said.

    A spokesperson for House Ways and Means Committee Chair Aaron Michlewitz did not reply to a News Service request.

    Legislative leaders have said for months the money currently propping up shelters is set to run out by spring, though they and the Healey administration have been less than forthcoming about when exactly that might be.

    Michlewitz was the first to identify the “early spring” timeline, way back in November when his chamber approved the last multi-million dollar injection into the state’s emergency family shelter system.

    That supplemental budget, signed in December, steered $250 million to the emergency shelter crisis, with $50 million set aside for overflow shelter and $75 million targeted for school funding relief related to the shelter crisis.

    “From what we gather, this would take us through the winter, neatly through the winter, and probably early into the spring,” Michlewitz said at the time. “Then it will all depend at that point moving forward on how many families we have in the system.”

    Since Michlewitz’s remarks last fall, the number of families looking for a spot in shelters has only grown, with 713 families as of Wednesday on a waitlist set up by Healey.

    Healey got the ball rolling on the next funding injection for the overburdened system on Jan. 28, saying the additional supplemental budget would have enough money to keep the shelters running through the end of June.

    Michlewitz said again in February that they were “managing with that timeline” that “the (Emergency Assistance) shelter money will run out in the spring.”

    When asked at that point exactly when in the spring the funding was set to run out, the chairman and House Speaker Ron Mariano laughed.

    “When are the crocuses?” Mariano quipped. Michlewitz jumped in, “What, is March 21 the first day of spring?” as the speaker chuckled.

    The House approved its version of Healey’s supplemental budget bill on March 6, and the Senate took its vote on March 21. Now, almost a month later and nearly a third of the way into spring, it still has not emerged from negotiations.

    Rodrigues said last week that the administration told him family shelter money could run out “sometime mid- to end of April” and that the administration has “other flexible funds that they can use,” which Murphy appeared to confirm Thursday. Mariano said Sunday on WCVB that he “never got a date from the governor as to when it was gonna run out,” only that “sometime in the spring, it would run out.”

    Republican Sen. Peter Durant of Spencer told the News Service on Thursday that the conference committee’s delay could indicate the money is not needed as urgently as some Democrats have said.

    “We’ve also heard that the governor has said that she has a few more levers to pull somewhere, so we can finance it,” Durant said. “So I’m not sure it’s as critical as everybody might think that it is. Certainly as this drags on, it would appear that it’s not as critical as it’s made out to be.”

    He said financing the emergency family shelter system through supplemental budgets over the course of the year, rather than a lump sum through the annual budget — which could be the approach Democrats take again in fiscal 2025 — leads to uncertainty.

    “That’s a real challenge for the leadership here. How exactly are we going to pay for it, how does it look going forward? And I just don’t think that we have a lot of really good answers to that yet,” Durant said. “Even when the speaker says, ‘We’ll fund this budget for half the year and then we’ll see what happens in December, maybe we’ll have the same president, maybe we’ll have a new one’ — there’s just so many unanswered questions. Everybody’s just playing it by ear.”

    Sen. Nick Collins of South Boston, a Democrat, said there’s not “too much concern just yet” about shelter funds running out, as “the indications from the administration tell us that we’re not at the end of the line here.”

    “The number-one issue in the state of Massachusetts on taxpayers’ minds is the cost of this. So there’s a lot to think about,” Collins said. “And I think that’s what’s taking the time.”

    The lack of consensus on the legislation does not only impact the emergency assistance shelter system. Legislative leaders opted to use the supplemental budget bills as the vehicle for revisiting some pandemic-era policies that have been in place on a temporary basis for years, like a streamlined process for restaurants securing permission to serve patrons in certain outdoor spaces.

    Both branches voted in favor of making permanent the outdoor dining overhaul and a graduate student nursing program, but they were split on whether to allow restaurants to continue selling alcoholic beverages to go. The House is in support and the Senate is in opposition.

    Because the branches still have not found compromise on the underlying bill, all of those provisions — including the ones both the House and Senate back — expired March 31, pushing many restaurants back toward a pre-COVID status quo.

    “Marathon Monday is always the first sign of the weather turning the corner in Boston and around Massachusetts. That day has come and gone, and I think I speak for most people that we are ready to welcome some great weather,” Steve Clark, president of the Massachusetts Restaurant Association, said in a statement. “With great weather, comes the want and desire to eat outside. Unfortunately, a number of restaurants across the state are in limbo without extended outdoor dining authorization, hopefully we are able to get this issue resolved quickly.”

    Clark added that many of his members have asked about the prospects of bringing back takeout drinks.

    “Menu evolution is always happening, but it takes time and effort to remove items off of menus; at the same time, license holders take their responsible service of alcohol seriously and do not want to run afoul of the laws that come with it,” he said.

    However, the policy might be up against a major hurdle, as one of the lead negotiators has come out against the idea.

    “I personally do not support cocktails to go. I believe we have cocktails to go, it’s called package stores,” Rodrigues said earlier this month. “We have bricks and mortar businesses, retail establishments, that that’s what they provide.”

    The chairman said he has not heard about to-go alcoholic drinks from one restaurant. “I’ve heard a lot from inside the building, I hear a lot from the media, but from restaurants, they want outdoor dining,” he said.

    Mariano, asked on WCVB’s “On The Record” to respond to Rodrigues’ comments, gave a vague endorsement of the idea.

    “It was something we came up with during the pandemic to help restaurants. It seemed to be successful, some people liked it. It didn’t really cause any problems that we were aware of. So we just thought if restaurants want to do it, we’ll let them do,” he said.

    [ad_2]

    By Sam Drysdale and Chris Lisinski | State House News Service

    Source link