ReportWire

Tag: Legislation

  • Lawmakers seek to lift fishing gear removal ban

    Lawmakers seek to lift fishing gear removal ban

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A new bipartisan proposal calls for lifting a statewide ban on removing abandoned fishing lines to help protect critically endangered North Atlantic right whales.

    The legislation, filed by Senate Minority Leader Bruce Tarr, R-Gloucester, would authorize the state Division of Marine Fisheries – with the approval of the Marine Fisheries Advisory Commission and the Department of Fish and Game – to set regulations allowing for the removal of fishing gear from state waters.

    Under current law, commercial fishing gear is considered private property and cannot be removed when it becomes dislodged and sinks to the ocean floor or washes up on shore. Backers of the plan say abandoned fishing gear poses a threat to the marine environment and ecosystems.

    “It ‘ghost fishes,’ increasing mortality without any harvest benefit, it presents a major risk for entanglement for right whales and other species, it clutters and pollutes the ocean floor, and it presents ongoing problems for coastal communities that have to deal with this form of pollution when it washes ashore and must be collected and disposed of before it does further damage,” Tarr said in a statement.

    The rare bipartisan measure is co-sponsored by more than a dozen lawmakers spanning the North Shore, South Shore, Cape Cod and the islands, including state Sen. Joan Lovely, D-Salem, and Rep. Ann-Margaret Ferrante, D-Gloucester, and House Minority Leader Brad Jones, R-North Reading.

    It’s also backed by the Massachusetts Lobstermen’s Association, which lauded the fact that the bill would allow abandoned gear to be collected during community beach cleanups.

    “The commercial lobster industry also helps with many of these cleanup efforts to maintain clean beaches for everyone to enjoy,” said Beth Casoni, the association’s executive director. “We look forward to seeing this bill through to the end.”

    The bill also includes protections for fishermen, including a provision that clarifies it is unlawful to “take, use, destroy, injure or molest” traps, lines and other gear “without the consent of the owner.”

    Lawmakers say the proposal seeks to strike a balance between the protection of right whales while recognizing the impact of government-ordered fishing ground closures and other restrictions on the state’s commercial lobster fishery.

    Driven to the brink of extinction in the 20th century by whalers, North Atlantic right whales are more recently at risk from ship collisions and entanglement in fishing gear.

    Scientists say the population of North Atlantic right whales has dwindled to about 360. The species has also been hindered by poor reproduction and several years of high mortality, research has shown.

    Environmental activists want to ban commercial fishing nets and gear in state waters to prevent entanglements of whales and turtles. They’ve also called for federal regulators to expand no-fishing zones and mandate the use of so-called “ropeless” fishing gear to reduce the risk of entanglements.

    Federal regulators are considering new regulations requiring modifications in fishing gear to help reduce whale fatalities, but those rules have been put on hold for two years following recent court challenges.

    Massachusetts lobstermen argue that they’re doing more than enough to protect the whales by following conservation measures, including a months-long fishing closure during the winter and early spring and the use of new technology.

    They also argue that line entanglements are rare and say additional regulations would mean more financial pressures for an industry that is already struggling amid stringent regulations and closures of fishing areas.

    Last week, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration announced the death of a right whale off Martha’s Vineyard from a fishing line entanglement.

    The federal agency said the fishing gear, which had become deeply embedded in the whale’s tail, was traced back to Maine’s commercial lobster industry.

    Meanwhile, authorities discovered another dead right whale carcass floating off the coast of Georgia this week.

    The deaths have rekindled demands from environmental groups to impose new restrictions on fishing gear and commercial vessels to protect the critically endangered species.

    “The death of two juvenile North Atlantic whales within three weeks of each other is heartbreaking and preventable,” Kathleen Collins, senior marine campaign manager for the International Fund for Animal Welfare, said in a statement Thursday. “The right whale graveyard off our eastern seaboard continues to grow and inaction from the administration is digging the graves.”

    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

  • Warning signs mounted before Texas shooter entered church with her son, former mother-in-law says

    Warning signs mounted before Texas shooter entered church with her son, former mother-in-law says

    [ad_1]

    HOUSTON — The former mother-in-law of the woman who opened fire at a Houston megachurch tried for years to alert authorities and others, including church staff, about her ex-daughter-in-law’s mental health struggles, she said Wednesday. But Walli Carranza said nothing came of her actions.

    Carranza said she believes systemic failures as well as lax gun laws ultimately led to Sunday’s shooting at celebrity pastor Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Church in which Genesse Moreno entered the church with her 7-year-old son and opened fire in a hallway. Two people were wounded in the shooting, including Moreno’s son, who was shot in the head. Moreno was gunned down by security officers she exchanged gunfire with.

    “You can’t put responsibility on the mind, when the mind was so very ill. A healthy mother would never bring her child to a situation like this. That’s not mental health. So sometimes we don’t have to find a guilty party or place blame. We can just say there are systems that failed,” Carranza told The Associated Press in an interview.

    Carranza said her grandson Samuel remained in critical condition, but that he was doing better.

    Various questions about the shooting remained unanswered on Wednesday, including Moreno’s motive and details about how she obtained the AR-style rifle she used.

    Carranza said her son Enrique Carranza and Moreno met at the University of Houston and married in September 2015. They divorced in 2022.

    Carranza said her son, who is currently incarcerated in Florida, didn’t want to divorce Moreno and only “wanted his wife to get healthy.”

    Carranza said Child Protective Services was notified after Moreno was accused by nurses of putting adult medication in her son’s feeding tube after his birth in 2016. Other concerns, including allegations that Moreno left guns unattended in her home, were also forwarded to CPS but no action was taken, Carranza said.

    “My great concern for Sam was that he was going to shoot himself, and that’s what we warned against,” Carranza said. She added that in January 2020, when Moreno and her grandson visited her in Colorado, Samuel pulled a handgun from his diaper bag and gave it to her.

    Melissa Landford, spokesperson for the state Department of Family and Protective Services, said CPS could not comment on the case for confidentiality reasons.

    Carranza also said that in 2020 and 2021, her attorney sent emails to Lakewood Church asking for assistance with intervening in Moreno’s struggles, believing that Moreno’s mother attended the church.

    Church spokesman Don Iloff said Wednesday that records show Moreno “sporadically” attended services at Lakewood for a couple years but there were no records of her being at the church after 2022.

    Iloff said they were still looking but had not found any records showing Moreno’s mother attended the church. He added that church officials also had not found records of the emails sent by Carranza’s attorney but they were still looking.

    Iloff said in situations where someone may reach out for help, what the church can offer them is spiritual and biblical counseling.

    “If we had reached out and (Moreno) had accepted counseling, then we definitely would have been more than happy to provide that,” Iloff said.

    In a video message on Instagram, Osteen invited people to attend a special service at the church this coming Sunday to celebrate a “time of healing and restoration.”

    “We are not people of fear. We are people of faith. God has us in the palm of his hand, and this is not the time to shrink back. This is the time to turn to God, to rally together,” Osteen said.

    Texas law generally bans someone convicted of a felony from owning a gun for several years after they are released from prison. Misdemeanors connected to domestic violence will also trigger a ban.

    But Moreno’s extensive list of misdemeanors, ranging from forging a $100 bill to shoplifting and assault, did not meet that threshold.

    Texas also lacks a so-called “red flag” law, which generally allows law enforcement or family members to ask a judge to order the seizure or surrender of guns from someone who is deemed dangerous, often because of mental health concerns or threats of violence.

    Carranza said she met for hours with FBI agents on Tuesday, discussing the reports she filed over the years about Moreno.

    ___

    Associated Press writer Jim Vertuno in Austin contributed to this report.

    ___

    Follow Juan A. Lozano on X, formerly known as Twitter: twitter.com/juanlozano70

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Special Town Meeting set for March 11; public meeting Feb. 14

    Special Town Meeting set for March 11; public meeting Feb. 14

    [ad_1]

    ANDOVER — The Select Board has set March 11 for a resident petitioned Special Town Meeting.

    The meeting was called after a group of residents filed a petition in an effort to stop the paving of a rail trail next to Haggetts Pond.

    Town officials say the goal of the paving project is to create an accessible trail, but opposition has grown from many in the community, including abutters, who worry about the project’s impact on the environment.

    A joint meeting of municipal boards and committees including the Select Board, Finance Committee, School Committee, Conservation Commission, Commission on Disability, Planning Board and Commission on Diversity, Equity and Inclusion has will be held Wednesday, Feb. 14, 7 p.m., at Wood Hill Middle School Auditorium, 11 Cross St., to discuss three articles included in the warrant set for the March 11 Special Town Meeting.

    During a Select Board meeting Feb. 12, one resident criticized officials for setting the meeting on Valentines Day; voicing his disapproval in a poem.

    According to the Feb. 14 meeting’s agenda, all seven groups will consider taking a position on the articles.

    The petitioners and other opponents of the project worry about potential impacts of the trail including on the town’s water supply, trees and the natural beauty of the location. Haggetts Pond also serves as the town’s water supply.

    Town officials, including the Director of Conservation Bob Douglas, have said paving the path will not harm the town’s water supply.

    The three articles seek to block the project through changes to Andover’s bylaw. Andover’s legal counsel Doug Heim said he will release a memo on the legality of the articles later this week.

    The town is planning on paving a roughly 1.6 mile stretch of trail, which lies adjacent to Haggetts Pond. The project would be funded by a state grant and American Rescue Plan funds.

    The project has most recently been under the scrutiny of the Conservation Commission which enforces laws related to the wetlands.

    This will be the second Special Town Meeting in the last six months. The most recent Special Town Meeting was a mix of resident- and town-petitioned articles and chiefly dealt with proposed new high school project.

    In order to follow state law, the Select Board must hold Special Town Meetings within 45 days after petitions have been submitted, said Select Board chair Melissa Danisch.

    [ad_2]

    By Teddy Tauscher | ttauscher@eagletribune.com

    Source link

  • Senate passes a $95.3 billion aid package for Ukraine and Israel, but fate in the House is uncertain

    Senate passes a $95.3 billion aid package for Ukraine and Israel, but fate in the House is uncertain

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Senate early Tuesday passed a $95.3 billion aid package for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, pushing ahead after months of difficult negotiations and amid growing political divisions in the Republican Party over the role of the United States abroad.

    The vote came after a small group of Republicans opposed to the $60 billion for Ukraine held the Senate floor through the night, using the final hours of debate to argue that the U.S. should focus on its own problems before sending more money overseas. But 22 Republicans voted with nearly all Democrats to pass the package 70-29, with supporters arguing that abandoning Ukraine could embolden Russian President Vladimir Putin and threaten national security across the globe.

    “With this bill, the Senate declares that American leadership will not waiver, will not falter, will not fail,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, who worked closely with Republican Leader Mitch McConnell on the legislation.

    The bill’s passage through the Senate was a welcome sign for Ukraine amid critical shortages on the battlefield.

    Yet the package faces a deeply uncertain future in the House, where hardline Republicans aligned with former President Donald Trump — the front-runner for the GOP presidential nomination, and a critic of support for Ukraine — oppose the legislation.

    Speaker Mike Johnson cast new doubt on the package in a statement Monday evening, making clear that it could be weeks or months before Congress sends the legislation to President Joe Biden’s desk — if at all.

    Still, the vote was a win for both Senate leaders. Schumer noted the strong bipartisan support and projected that if the House speaker brings it forward it would have the same strong support in that chamber. McConnell has made Ukraine his top priority in recent months, and was resolute in the face of considerable pushback from his own GOP conference.

    “History settles every account,” the longtime Republican leader said in a statement after the bill’s passage. “And today, on the value of American leadership and strength, history will record that the Senate did not blink.”

    Dollars provided by the legislation would purchase U.S.-made defense equipment, including munitions and air defense systems that authorities say are desperately needed as Russia batters the country. It also includes $8 billion for the government in Kyiv and other assistance.

    “For us in Ukraine, continued US assistance helps to save human lives from Russian terror,” Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy posted on social media. “It means that life will continue in our cities and will triumph over war.”

    In addition, the legislation would provide $14 billion for Israel’s war with Hamas, $8 billion for Taiwan and partners in the Indo-Pacific to counter China, and $9.2 billion in humanitarian assistance for Gaza.

    Progressive lawmakers have objected to sending offensive weaponry to Israel, and two Democrats, Sens. Jeff Merkley of Oregon and Peter Welch of Vermont, as well as Sen. Bernie Sanders, an independent of Vermont, voted against it.

    “I cannot in good conscience support sending billions of additional taxpayer dollars for Prime Minister Netanyahu’s military campaign in Gaza,” Welch said. “It’s a campaign that has killed and wounded a shocking number of civilians. It’s created a massive humanitarian crisis.”

    The bill’s passage followed almost five months of torturous negotiations over an expansive bill that would have paired the foreign aid with an overhaul of border and asylum policies. Republicans demanded the trade-off, saying the surge of migration into the United States had to be addressed alongside the security of allies.

    But a bipartisan deal on border security fell apart just days after its unveiling, a head-spinning development that left negotiators deeply frustrated. Republicans declared the bill insufficient and blocked it on the Senate floor.

    After the border bill collapsed, the two leaders abandoned the border provisions and pushed forward with passing the foreign aid package alone — as Democrats had originally intended.

    While the slimmed-down foreign aid bill eventually won a healthy showing of GOP support, several Republicans who had previously expressed support for Ukraine voted against it. The episode further exposed divisions in the party, made more public as Trump dug in and a handful of lawmakers openly called for McConnell to step down.

    Sen. J.D. Vance, an Ohio Republican, argued that the U.S. should step back from the conflict and help broker an end to it with Russia’s Putin. He questioned the wisdom of continuing to fuel Ukraine’s defense when Putin appears committed to fighting for years.

    “I think it deals with the reality that we’re living in, which is they’re a more powerful country, and it’s their region of the world,” he said.

    Vance, along with Kentucky Sen. Rand Paul and other opponents, spent several hours on the floor railing against the aid and complaining about Senate process. They dug in their heels to delay a final vote, speaking on the floor until daybreak.

    Supporters of the aid pushed back, warning that bowing to Russia would be a historic mistake with devastating consequences. In an unusually raw back-and-forth, GOP senators who support the aid challenged some of the opponents directly on the floor.

    North Carolina Sen. Thom Tillis angrily rebutted some of their arguments, noting that the money would only help Ukraine for less than a year and that much of it would go to replenishing U.S. military stocks.

    “Why am I so focused on this vote?” Tillis said. “Because I don’t want to be on the pages of history that we will regret if we walk away. You will see the alliance that is supporting Ukraine crumble. You will ultimately see China become emboldened. And I am not going to be on that page of history.”

    Sen. Jerry Moran, R-Kan., became emotional as he talked about the drudgery of the Senate and spending time away from his family to get little done. “But every so often there are issues that come before us that seem to be the ones that explain why we are here,” he said, his voice cracking.

    Moran conceded that the cost of the package was heavy for him, but pointed out that if Putin were to attack a NATO member in Europe, the U.S. would be bound by treaty to become directly involved in the conflict — a commitment that Trump has called into question as he seeks another term in the White House.

    At a rally Saturday, Trump said that he had once told a NATO ally he would encourage Russia “to do whatever the hell they want” to members that are “delinquent” in their commitments to the alliance. The former president has led his party away from the foreign policy doctrines of aggressive American involvement overseas and toward an “America First” isolationism.

    Evoking the slogan, Moran said, “I believe in America first, but unfortunately America first means we have to engage in the world.”

    In the House, many Republicans have opposed the aid and are unlikely to cross Trump, but some key GOP lawmakers have signaled they will push to get it passed.

    House Intelligence Committee Chairman Mike Turner, R-Ohio, traveled to Ukraine last week with a bipartisan delegation and met with Zelenskyy. Turner posted on X, formerly Twitter, after the trip that “I reiterated America’s commitment to support Ukraine in its fight against Russia.”

    But Speaker Johnson is in a tough position. A majority of his conference opposes the aid, and he is trying to lead the narrowest of majorities and avoid the fate of his predecessor, former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, who was ousted in October.

    Johnson, R-La., said in a statement Monday that because the foreign aid package lacks border security provisions, it is “silent on the most pressing issue facing our country.” It was the latest — and potentially most consequential — sign of opposition to the Ukraine aid from House GOP leadership, who had rejected the bipartisan border plan as a “non-starter,” contributing to its rapid demise.

    “Now, in the absence of having received any single border policy change from the Senate, the House will have to continue to work its own will on these important matters,” Johnson said. “America deserves better than the Senate’s status quo.”

    Rep. Abigail Spanberger, a Virginia Democrat, traveled to Kyiv last week with Turner and other House members. She said the trip underscored to her how Ukraine is still in a fight for its very existence.

    During a meeting with Zelenskyy, she said the U.S. lawmakers tried to offer assurances that the American people still stand with his country.

    “He was clear that our continued support is critical to their ability to win the war,” Spanberger said. “It’s critical to their own freedom. And importantly, it’s critical to U.S. national security interests.”

    ___

    Associated Press writers Lisa Mascaro and Kevin Freking contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Divided panel calls for shift away from natural gas

    Divided panel calls for shift away from natural gas

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A divided state commission is calling for more aggressive steps to shift Massachusetts away from its reliance on natural gas for energy, but it’s not clear if state lawmakers will take up any of the proposed changes.

    In a report to the state Legislature, the Gas System Enhancement Working Group takes more steps to shift the state’s utilities away from installing gas infrastructure in the state. In some cases, the changes include only edits of one or two words in the state laws on fixing gas leaks.

    But the panel, which included state regulators, environmental groups, labor leaders and representatives of utility companies, was unable to reach consensus on many of the proposed regulatory changes.

    One proposal called for a shift from “replacement” to “repair” of leak-prone natural gas lines, which proponents argued would save ratepayers money and accelerate the state’s transition from fossil fuels to wind, solar and other renewable energy. But the utility panelists voted against it, arguing that it would compromise safety and exceed the working group’s mandate.

    “A shift in policy that prioritizes repair over replacement does not reduce the risk that leak-prone pipes pose to people, property, and the environment,” they wrote in a summary of the report. “Both cast iron and cathodically unprotected steel will continue to pose concerns as they age.”

    The panel was created under a 2014 state law that requires utilities to track and grade all gas leaks on a scale of 1 to 3, with 1 being most serious, and immediately repair the most hazardous.

    The panel’s report noted that Massachusetts gas companies are spending more than $800 million a year installing new gas mains to replace aging leak-prone pipes. The new pipes have a lifespan of 50 years, and will be paid for by energy consumers in the form of higher rates, they noted.

    But the report’s authors said estimates suggest utilities will spend $34 billion on new gas infrastructure, which won’t be fully paid for until 2097. They noted that as more properties are retrofitted with heat pumps to replace gas, fewer and fewer customers will be on the gas distribution system.

    “However, that gas system will still have the same number of miles of pipe, with the same fixed maintenance costs,” Audrey Schulman, a panelist and director of the Home Energy Efficiency Team, a Cambridge nonprofit, wrote in a summary of the report. “These maintenance costs will be shouldered by fewer and fewer gas customers, making the customers’ overall gas bills increase.”

    Schulman said the state is “wasting money and time now by installing long-lived combustion infrastructure, while knowing that combustion is going away.”

    “Instead we are investing significantly and actively in the gas and electric system at the same time, without thinking through how to synergize the work to reduce the cost and increase the speed,” she wrote.

    “It is as though we are taking out a mortgage to replace the foundation on our horse’s stable, even after we’ve ordered an electric car,” Schulman added.

    Massachusetts utilities are under increasing pressure to employ alternatives to natural gas to comply with requirements of a climate change bill approved last year, which requires the state to reduce its emissions to “net-zero” of 1990 levels by 2050.

    Meanwhile, environmental groups have been prodding the state to force utilities to move away from new natural gas infrastructure as the state seeks to diversify its energy portfolio to include solar, wind and other renewable sources of power.

    But industry officials argue the state will continue to need natural gas for a large portion of its energy, even as it turns to more renewable sources.

    Roughly half of New England’s energy comes from natural gas, according to ISO New England, which oversees the regional power grid.

    Critics have also noted the pocketbook costs to consumers from replacing natural gas infrastructure in homes and businesses.

    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

  • Divided panel calls for shift away from natural gas

    Divided panel calls for shift away from natural gas

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — A divided state commission is calling for more aggressive steps to shift Massachusetts away from its reliance on natural gas for energy, but it’s not clear if state lawmakers will take up any of the proposed changes.

    In a report to the state Legislature, the Gas System Enhancement Working Group takes more steps to shift the state’s utilities away from installing gas infrastructure in the state. In some cases, the changes include only those to one or two words in the state laws on fixing gas leaks.

    But the panel, which included state regulators, environmental groups, labor leaders and representatives of utility companies, was unable to reach a consensus on many of the proposed regulatory changes.

    One proposal called for a shift from “replacement” to “repair” of leak-prone natural gas lines, which proponents argued would save ratepayers money and accelerate the state’s transition from fossil fuels to wind, solar and other renewable energy. But the utility panelists voted against in opposition, arguing that it would compromise safety and exceed the working group’s mandate.

    “A shift in policy that prioritizes repair over replacement does not reduce the risk that leak-prone pipes pose to people, property, and the environment,” they wrote in a summary of the report. “Both cast iron and cathodically unprotected steel will continue to pose concerns as they age.”

    The panel was created under a 2014 state law that requires utilities to track and grade all gas leaks on a scale of 1 to 3, with 1 being most serious, and immediately repair the most hazardous.

    The panel’s report noted that Massachusetts gas companies are spending more than $800 million a year installing new gas mains to replace aging leak-prone pipes. The new pipes have a lifespan of 50 years and will be paid for by energy consumers in the form of higher rates, they noted.

    But the report’s authors said estimates suggest utilities will spend $34 billion on new gas infrastructure, which would not be fully paid for until 2097. They noted that as more properties are retrofitted with heat pumps to replace gas, fewer customers will be on the gas distribution system.

    “However, that gas system will still have the same number of miles of pipe, with the same fixed maintenance costs,” Audrey Schulman, a panelist and director of the Home Energy Efficiency Team, a Cambridge nonprofit, wrote in a summary of the report. “These maintenance costs will be shouldered by fewer and fewer gas customers, making the customers overall gas bills increase.”

    Schulman said the state is “wasting money and time now by installing long-lived combustion infrastructure, while knowing that combustion is going away.”

    “Instead we are investing significantly and actively in the gas and electric system at the same time, without thinking through how to synergize the work to reduce the cost and increase the speed,” she wrote.

    “It is as though we are taking out a mortgage to replace the foundation on our horse’s stable, even after we’ve ordered an electric car,” Schulman added.

    Massachusetts utilities are under increasing pressure to employ alternatives to natural gas to comply with requirements of a climate change bill approved last year that requires the state to reduce its emissions to “net-zero” of 1990 levels by 2050.

    Meanwhile, environmental groups have been prodding the state to force utilities to move away from new natural gas infrastructure as the state seeks to diversify its energy portfolio to include solar, wind and other renewable sources of power.

    But industry officials argue the state will continue to need natural gas for a large portion of its energy, even as it turns to more renewable sources.

    Roughly half of New England’s energy comes from natural gas, according to ISO New England, which oversees the regional power grid.

    Critics have also noted the pocketbook costs to consumers from replacing natural gas infrastructure in homes and businesses.

    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

  • Residents calling Special Town Meeting to block Haggetts Pond paved trail

    Residents calling Special Town Meeting to block Haggetts Pond paved trail

    [ad_1]

    ANDOVER — Yet another Special Town Meeting may be on the horizon.

    The required number of signatures have been verified for a resident-petitioned Special Town Meeting to be called, according to the Town Clerk Austin Simko.

    The intent of the articles on the meeting’s warrant would be to block the creation of a paved path on the Haggetts Pond trail.

    The town is planning on paving a roughly 1.6 mile stretch of trail, which lies adjacent to Haggetts Pond. The goal, according to the town, is to create an accessible path that would allow people from all walks of life to experience nature.

    The petition was submitted on Jan. 30.

    The paving project has not been well received by the community. Residents have been in an uproar about the potential environmental and ecological results of paving the trail.

    Don Schroeder, a petitioner calling for the meeting, said he was able to gather more than 390 signatures.

    “It wasn’t as difficult as one might think,” he added.

    Most recently, the project has been before the Conservation Commission whose role it is to make sure projects conform to wetland laws.

    The project would be completed using both American Rescue Plan Funds and a state grant.

    One petitioner of the Special Town Meeting said the town has been rushing the paving project.

    “It seems like the town has not done their homework,” Jenicka Engler said.

    Engler said she is chiefly concerned about potential contamination created from disturbing the old rail bed, a danger she said the state recognizes. But Director of Facilitates Janet Nicosia said the plans don’t call for much digging at the site.

    “All we are going to do is take the organic top off,” she said.

    Nicosia said the hard-packed soil there will be used to build the trail up.

    This is also of concern due to the trail’s close proximity to Haggetts Pond which also serves as the town’s water supply.

    Despite concern from residents, town officials say the use of the asphalt near the water is safe. Officials also emphasize the importance of asphalt in making a project accessible. Nicosia said it is not just making a trail that meets the qualifications on Day One, but every day. Asphalt is helpful in making sure the project is consistently accessible, she said.

    Engler said more information should be gathered regarding the soil.

    “It’s too risky, we don’t have enough information,” she said.

    Engler said there are also better options and highlights an area near Pomps Pond as an ideal location.

    She is also concerned about microplastics, which she said would increase with more traffic on the trail.

    She said that it is the “right project in the wrong location.”

    There is also concern from many about the number of trees that may have to come down as a result of the project. Nicosia said they have not determined the number of trees that will need to be taken down for the project.

    The Select Board will take up the petition on Monday, Feb. 12, according to an agenda for that meeting.

    Resident-petitioned articles often have no legal weight behind them due to the limits of the Town Meeting’s power. It is unclear if the submitted articles will be binding. Town Counsel Douglas Heim could not be reached by press time, but has in the past offered to help petitioners determine if an article is legal before presenting it to Town Meeting.

    Nicosia said the project is also necessary to make sure the town is in compliance with ADA laws.

    The most recent Special Town Meeting was held on Nov. 20.

    [ad_2]

    By Teddy Tauscher | ttauscher@eagletribune.com

    Source link

  • Law honoring motorcyclist killed in crash to be heard at Statehouse

    Law honoring motorcyclist killed in crash to be heard at Statehouse

    [ad_1]

    DERRY — A bill named after a motorcycle passenger who was killed in Derry in April 2023 would, if passed into law, make it easier for State Police oversight on certain investigations.

    House Bill 1566, which is to be known as Katina’s Law, is being introduced at the Statehouse on Friday at 9:30 a.m.

    The law would add a paragraph to the code regarding the Attorney General’s office to allow municipal governing bodies such as county attorneys and sheriff departments to request an independent review of local police investigations, which would prompt a State Police investigation.

    “This bill provides a method for local and county governmental bodies to request an independent investigation by the Division of State Police of a local police department investigation,” the legislators wrote in the methodology section of the bill. “Upon receipt and review, the NH Office of the Solicitor General shall direct the State Police to conduct a separate and independent investigation and to issue a separate and independent report.”

    The bill is being proposed by Ralph Boehm (R- Hillsborough 14) and Terry Roy (R-Rockingham 31) after the investigation into the death of motorcyclist Adam Platania, 21, of Derry, and his passenger and girlfriend, Katina Skotis, 20, of Litchfield.

    Platania died at the scene. Skotis, for whom the law is named, died at the hospital.

    The vehicle driver, a 76-year-old woman from Derry, was turning onto North Main Street as Platania and Skotis were traveling on North Main Street with a group of other motorcyclists at the time of the accident.

    After an investigation, Derry Police and the Rockingham County Attorney both said in a press release published in August 2023 that they would not bring charges against the woman.

    MaryAnne Savani-Skotis, the woman’s mother, has been vocal about her belief that the driver should have been charged with something.

    “Almost 10 months since my world was shattered and I still wake up several times a night horrified that NOT EVEN A TICKET was given to the woman for failing to yield a stop sign,” Savani-Skotis wrote on her Facebook page.

    If the bill were to pass into law, it would become effective 60 days after being signed. Katina’s Law would be her daughter’s legacy, Savani-Skotis said in a comment on one of her Facebook posts.

    “I appreciate state Rep. Ralph Boehm for really hearing my concerns during a time of doubt in governance,” Savani-Skotis wrote. “Authentic leaders like himself and collaborators like Rep. Roy give hope.”

    [ad_2]

    By Katelyn Sahagian | ksahagian@northofboston.com

    Source link

  • Council mulls senior, veteran tax work-off programs

    Council mulls senior, veteran tax work-off programs

    [ad_1]

    To help homeowners age 60 and up and veterans of all ages lower their property tax bills, the City Council is considering an ordinance to create senior and veteran property tax work-off programs.

    If the City Council adopts state legislation, the administration could then establish programs to allow seniors and veterans to volunteer their services to the city in exchange for lower property taxes.

    To do this, the City Council must first accept two provisions of state law. The council is scheduled to take this up at its next meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 13.

    Communities in the region that already offer senior tax work-off programs include, but are not limited to, Salem, Beverly, Danvers, Boxford, Ipswich, Hamilton, Wenham, Marblehead and Middleton, according to various municipal websites. Some towns such as Middleton and Swampscott offer both senior and veteran tax work-off programs.

    On Cape Ann, Rockport and Manchester-by-the-Sea offer the ability of seniors to volunteer to be able to reduce their taxes, while Essex and Gloucester do not.

    Councilor at-Large Jason Grow, Councilor at-Large Val Gilman and Ward 2 Councilor Dylan Benson co-sponsored the order to enable the creation of the senior and veterans tax work-off programs before the council’s three-member Ordinances and Administration Standing Committee on Monday, Feb. 5. The committee unanimously recommended the move.

    Grow told the subcommittee senior homeowners could volunteer in exchange for an abatement at a rate of 125 hours or $2,000.

    “It’s basically minimum wage up to $2,000,” he said.

    The senior tax work-off program would be for those 60 and up. There was a recent change in the legislation to allow for “the proxy possibility” for seniors who are infirm or unable to do the volunteer work to appoint someone to do it for them in exchange for the tax abatement, Grow said.

    The enabling statute for the veteran tax work-off program makes it eligible for any veteran with no age restriction. This would allow for the establishment of a program for veterans that offers up to a $1,500 tax reduction in exchange for volunteer hours.

    The council’s responsibility would be to accept the state legislation and it would be up to the administration to establish the parameters of the program, such as how much its funded, how many volunteers would be recommended, and what the maximum abatement might be, Grow said.

    The reason to bring this forward was because property taxes continue to be a burden, especially on seniors.

    “We have a program of abatement in the assessors’ office currently that seniors can take advantage of,” he said. “This is just one more opportunity for seniors and veterans to take advantage of volunteering in the community for whatever roles the administration determines is acceptable for this, and take that money off of their taxes and help with the annual expenses of living in Gloucester.”

    Gilman, who serves as an ex-officio member of the Council on Aging, said they have been talking about doing a better job about communicating to Gloucester residents about the repertoire of benefits and cost savings available to them.

    “Because the cost of aging in place has become more demanding and it’s a big concern for seniors,” she said.

    Gilman said she looked online to see what other communities were doing to help seniors save, and one of them was the tax work-off program. Nearly 100 municipalities in Massachusetts doing this. She shared the idea with the Council on Aging “and the response was very positive.”

    Benson said he has seen the positive impact of the senior tax work-off programs in other communities.

    Lynn, Salem, Amesbury, Beverly, Newburyport and a number of area towns already have senior work-off programs, and Newburyport and Amesbury offer both veteran and senior tax work-off programs.

    The reason he thinks this will help senior is because “it’s not forcing anyone to do anything, it’s an incentive and it’s an ability for seniors and veterans to have another way to reduce their property taxes,” Benson said.

    Ward 4 Councilor Frank Margiotta, a member of Ordinances and Administration, gave the proposal “kudos.” Ward 3 Councilor and subcommittee member Marjorie Grace asked Benson what types of work seniors were doing.

    Benson reiterated the council was only adopting state legislation and it would be up to the administration to enact the program.

    However, in other communities, Benson said the work involves clerical volunteer hours to do things like scanning documents, greeting people in City Hall, beach cleanups or helping out at a senior and veterans centers.

    Ward 5 Councilor Sean Nolan, the council vice president and chair of the subcommittee, noted that in Rockport, people would adopt fire hydrants to maintain or shovel out.

    “There is a lot places for people to give their expertise,” Nolan said.

    Grow added state legislation states such programs should not take away jobs or staffing.

    With the three-member committee recommending the order’s adoption, the City Council is scheduled to take up the matter under committee reports at its meeting on Tuesday, 6:30 p.m., in the Kyrouz Auditorium in City Hall.

    Ethan Forman may be contacted at 978-675-2714, or at eforman@gloucestertimes.com.



    [ad_2]

    By Ethan Forman | Staff Writer

    Source link

  • In possible test of federal labor law, Georgia could make it harder for some workers to join unions

    In possible test of federal labor law, Georgia could make it harder for some workers to join unions

    [ad_1]

    ATLANTA — As Georgia shovels out billions in economic incentives to electric vehicle manufacturers and other companies, the state’s ruling Republicans are moving to make it harder for workers at those firms to join labor unions, in what could be a violation of current federal law.

    The state Senate voted 31-23 on Thursday for a bill backed by Gov. Brian Kemp that would bar companies that accept state incentives from recognizing unions without a formal secret-ballot election. That would block unions from winning recognition from a company voluntarily after signing up a majority of workers, in what is usually known as a card check. Senate Bill 362 moves to the House for more debate.

    Union leaders and Democrats argue the bill violates 1935’s National Labor Relations Act, which governs union organizing, by blocking part of federal law allowing companies to voluntarily recognize unions that show support from a majority of employees.

    “At the end of the day, voluntary recognition is a protected right, period,” said Hannah Perkins, political director for the Georgia AFL-CIO union federation, which claims 500,000 members in the state. Only 4.4% of Georgia workers are union members, the eighth-lowest rate among states.

    The National Labor Relations Board, the federal agency overseeing union affairs, did not immediately respond Thursday to an email seeking comment.

    Georgia’s bill is modeled after a law passed in Tennessee last year, but there could be similar legislation offered in many other states. The conservative American Legislative Exchange Council is promoting the idea. Governors in other Southern states traditionally hostile to organized labor have been speaking out against unions in recent weeks, after the United Auto Workers vowed a fresh push to organize nonunion auto factories after multiple failed attempts.

    Alabama Republican Gov. Kay Ivey said her state’s economic success is “under attack.” Henry McMaster, South Carolina’s Republican governor, told lawmakers in the nation’s least unionized state last month that organized labor is such a threat that he would fight unions “ all the way to the gates of hell.”

    Georgia Gov. Brian Kemp proclaimed his support for the bill in a January speech to the Georgia Chamber of Commerce, echoing the chamber’s own agenda. He said the move would protect workers’ “right to opportunity” from President Joe Biden’s pro-union agenda and outside forces “who want nothing more than to see the free market brought to a screeching halt.”

    Kemp and fellow Republicans argue that they are protecting workers from being bullied into joining unions by giving them the protection of a secret ballot.

    “Why is it such a bad policy to say, if you’re in the state of Georgia, you have a right to be protected, you have a right to choose whether or not to unionize, and you’re not going to get bullied, and you’re not going to get blackmailed?” asked state Sen. Bo Hatchett, a Cornelia Republican who Kemp appointed as one his floor leaders in the Senate.

    Democrats, though, say the bill is really about making it harder for unions to organize and for companies to accept them. Most employers who oppose unions require employees voting on organizing to attend mandatory anti-union meetings before a vote, which can cause employees to vote against unions.

    “All too often employers are engaging in these scorched-earth campaigns against workers,” said state Sen. Nikki Merritt, a Lawrenceville Democrat who said a union contract protected her in a former job. Like most Senate Democrats Thursday, Merritt wore a red bandanna as a symbol of union solidarity.

    State. Sen Mike Hodges, a Brunswick Republican who is sponsoring the bill, denied that it would violate federal law.

    “It does not prohibit a company’s employees from unionizing or require an employer to oppose unionization in any action,” said Hodges, another Kemp floor leader.

    Hodges said he has a number of relatives who had been union members and understands “the addition to a lifestyle that union wages make.”

    “If I thought this bill in any way, shape or form was injurious to unions or to union members, I would not carry it,” Hodges said.

    But Democrats said they think the bill is an attempt to attack federal labor law.

    “They think that they found a loophole, so they want this to be a test case,” said Sen. Jason Esteves, an Atlanta Democrat. “They want this to go to court because they’re hoping the Supreme Court will allow them to chip away.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Aid package for Israel fails in the House, dealing another setback to GOP leaders

    Aid package for Israel fails in the House, dealing another setback to GOP leaders

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — A bill to provide Israel with more military aid went down to defeat Tuesday in the House, spoiling Speaker Mike Johnson’s attempt to separate Israel from other national security priorities, including helping Ukraine defend itself from Russia’s military invasion and deterring crossings at the U.S.-Mexico border.

    The vote gave individual lawmakers another chance to show voters their support for Israel and could be used on the campaign trail to criticize those who voted against it. But it did little to generate momentum toward passage of a final emergency spending package.

    It was also the second setback of the day for House Republican leaders. Just minutes before the vote their drive to impeach Homeland Security Secretary Alejandro Mayorkas fell short due to opposition from three House Republicans.

    The House had already gone on the record in support of an Israel aid package. Johnson brought that package up in November on one of his first days as the new House speaker. The vote was in response to Hamas and other militants killing about 1,200 people, mostly civilians, and taking captive some 240 men, women and children in an Oct. 7 attack.

    Last year’s measure also included budget cuts to the Internal Revenue Service. This time, there were no attempts to offset the new spending, which ended up alienating some of the Republican members concerned about federal deficits. Meanwhile, Democrats largely remained opposed, concerned passage of the bill would leave no way to get Ukraine more aid. The bill did manage to gain more Democratic support than during November’s vote but not nearly enough to pass.

    Johnson resorted to moving the bill through an expedited process that requires a two-thirds majority for passage. That’s because Republicans were unlikely to even muster the simple majority needed to set the terms for the bill’s debate. Such a procedural vote is generally a routine matter, but has become problematic for the current Republican majority, which can generally afford to lose only three Republicans on party-line votes. The vote for more Israel aid was 250-180, well short of the two-thirds threshold necessary for passage.

    Fourteen Republicans ended up voting against the bill, concerned about the lack of spending cuts to offset the $17.6 billion price tag. That compares to 204 Republicans who voted for it. On the Democratic side, 46 voted for it and 166 against.

    Prior to the vote, the White House issued a statement announcing President Joe Biden’s intent to veto the bill if it were to reach his desk. And Democratic leaders in both chambers said the only way forward requires a bipartisan approach.

    “The time has come for House Republicans to end the political stunts and come together in support of a comprehensive approach to our national security priorities,” Democratic leader Hakeem Jeffries and other members of leadership told colleagues before the vote.

    The bill called for about $17.6 billion in military aid for Israel and for the replenishment of U.S. defense systems. About $4 billion would have gone to replenish Israel’s missile defense systems and $1.2 billion to counter short-range rockets and mortar threats. There’s also funding for the procurement of advanced weapons system and to enhance the production of artillery and other munitions.

    To ensure the support does not compromise U.S. readiness, it includes $4.4 billion to replenish U.S. stocks of weapons provided to Israel. There’s also $3.3 billion for current U.S. military operations in the region.

    Johnson said before the vote that since the House passed its first Israeli military aid package, the “situation has gotten much more dangerous.”

    “We need to stand with Israel right now and we cannot wait any longer,” Johnson said.

    After the vote, he said Democrats were using Israel to force through other priorities that don’t enjoy the same degree of consensus.

    “Leveraging Israel aid as it fights for survival is wrong,” Johnson said.

    Democrats said presidential politics played into the route House Republicans took in going ahead solely with aid for Israel.

    “Trump doesn’t want to support Ukraine, and he also doesn’t want a border deal because it hurts him politically. What they get out of it is Donald Trump‘s approval,” said Rep. Adam Smith, the ranking Democratic member of the House Armed Services Committee.

    Rep. Lois Frankel of Florida was one of the Democrats who spoke in favor of the bill, saying she feared that “a divided Congress will embolden Israel’s adversaries and put our own military in harm’s way.”

    “Israel’s security is our security,” Frankel said.

    Across the Capitol, a similar political debate took shape. Republicans overwhelmingly criticized a carefully negotiated plan unveiled over the weekend that included policies intended to curb illegal crossings with $60 billion in wartime aid for Ukraine, plus billions for Israel and humanitarian aid for civilians in Gaza.

    Republicans said the border security provisions were inadequate while Democrats said Republicans were simply afraid to buck Trump even though they had insisted earlier that border security be included in an aid package for Ukraine. The divide leaves in question whether any emergency spending package will be passed.

    “We all know what’s going on here: Donald Trump would rather keep the chaos at the border going so he can exploit it on the campaign trail, instead of letting the Senate do the right thing and fix it,” said Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y. “He would rather let Ukraine suffer on the battle field instead of being tough on Putin.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House passes bill to enhance child tax credit, revive key tax breaks for businesses

    House passes bill to enhance child tax credit, revive key tax breaks for businesses

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The House accomplished something unusual Wednesday in passing with broad, bipartisan support a roughly $79 billion tax cut package that would enhance the child tax credit for millions of lower-income families and boost three tax breaks for businesses, a combination that gives lawmakers on both sides of the political aisle coveted policy wins.

    Prospects for the measure becoming law are uncertain with the Senate still having to take it up, but for a House that has struggled to get bills of consequence over the finish line, the tax legislation could represent a rare breakthrough. The bill passed by a vote of 357-70.

    Speaker Mike Johnson, R-La., threw his support behind the bill on Wednesday morning. He spent part of the previous day meeting with GOP lawmakers who were concerned about particular features of the bill, namely the expanded child tax credit. Some were also unhappy that it failed to address the $10,000 cap on the total amount of property taxes or state or local taxes that consumers can deduct on their federal returns. Raising the cap is a top priority of lawmakers from the Republican members of the New York congressional delegation, whose victories in 2022 helped the GOP take the majority.

    Johnson committed to moving a bill that addresses the cap, but there is no bill text yet and legislation would have to move through the House Rules Committee, which leaves the timing very much in flux. Athina Lawson, a spokeswoman for Johnson, said the speaker and the chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Jason Smith, R-Mo., agreed to work with lawmakers to “find a path forward.”

    Johnson called the tax cut bill on the House floor important, bipartisan legislation that would revive “conservative pro-growth tax reform.” He also said it would bring an early end to a “wasteful COVID-era program” that has been plagued with fraud. Moving up the deadline for claiming the employee retention tax credit is expected to largely offset the cost of the tax cuts in the legislation.

    Johnson also emphasized the importance of the bill moving through the House Ways and Means Committee before coming to the full House for a vote, saying it was a good example of how Congress is supposed to work.

    House Republicans were anxious to restore full, immediate deductions that businesses can take for the purchase of new equipment and machinery, and for domestic research and development expenses. They argue such investments grow the economy and incentivize American companies to keep their manufacturing facilities and operations in the United States. The bill also provides businesses more flexibility in determining how much borrowing can be deducted.

    “Each of these policies will help American businesses grow, create jobs and sharpen their competitive advantage against China,” Smith said as debate began on the House floor.

    Democrats focused on boosting the child tax credit. The tax credit is $2,000 per child, but not all of that is refundable. The bill would incrementally raise the amount of the credit available as a refund, increasing it to $1,800 for 2023 tax returns, $1,900 for the following year and $2,000 for 2025 tax returns. The bill also adjusts the topline credit amount to temporarily grow at the rate of inflation.

    Households benefitting as a result of the changes in the child tax credit would see an average tax cut of $680 in the first year, according to estimates from the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center.

    Democrats pushed to restore the more generous tax credit they passed in 2021 in President Joe Biden’s first year in office with payments occurring on a monthly basis. The credit was $3,600 annually for children under age 6 and $3,000 for children ages 6 to 17. But most lawmakers were willing to take what gains they could get through the compromise bill.

    “You know I’ve been told that a half a loaf is better than none,” said Rep. Danny Davis, D-Ill. “This isn’t even half a loaf, but I’m going to vote for it because our families and businesses need help.”

    “What’s in front of us tonight is pretty simple,” said Rep. Richard Neal, D-Mass. “Sixteen million children will benefit from the improvement to the child tax credit. That’s a fact.”

    But for some Democrats, it wasn’t enough.

    “This bill provides billions of dollars in tax relief for the wealthy, pennies for the poor,” said Rep. Rosa DeLauro, D-Conn. “Big corporations are richer than ever. There is no even split.”

    And for some Republicans, it was too much. The chief critics of the expanded child tax credit likened it to “welfare.”

    “What is a refundable tax credit? It’s welfare by a different name. We’re going to give cash payments, checks, to people who don’t even pay taxes,” said Rep. Thomas Massie, R-Ky.

    Rep. Drew Ferguson, R-Ga., chafed at that characterization, saying “we all believe on this side of the aisle that you should work in order to receive federal benefits. That is something that this bill does.”

    While there were complaints about the tax bill from some of the most conservative and liberal members of the House, a significant majority from each party voted for it. Proponents are hoping the strong show of support will stir action in the Senate.

    The bill keeps a threshold of a household having $2,500 in income to be eligible for refundable child tax credit payments.

    The bill also would enhance a tax credit for the construction or rehabilitation of rental housing targeted to lower-income households, adding an estimated 200,000 housing units around the country. That was a key priority of lawmakers from states with acute housing shortages and soaring prices. And it would ensure victims of certain natural disasters and the East Palestine, Ohio, train derailment don’t get hit with a big tax bill for payments they received as compensation for their losses.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Sip, sip, hooray! New bill would allow drinking on public streets in designated areas

    Sip, sip, hooray! New bill would allow drinking on public streets in designated areas

    [ad_1]

    Imagine a California where you can buy a beer at your favorite bar or restaurant, take it outside and drink it on the street with a friend. That could soon be a reality, if state and local officials clear the way.

    A bill proposed by California Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) would allow the consumption of alcohol on public streets in zones designated for tippling.

    The proposed legislation, Senate Bill 969, would give municipalities and counties the power, starting in 2025, to designate local “entertainment zones” where people could consume “alcoholic beverages on public streets, sidewalks, or public rights of way,” according to the bill.

    Wiener says the legislation could help revitalize California’s downtown districts, where businesses have struggled since the pandemic eviscerated foot traffic.

    “People want to be outdoors; they want to gather with their community,” said Wiener. “We have these very strict alcohol laws in California that sometimes need to be made more flexible.

    “This is really about giving cities the ability to decide what works for their public spaces,” he added. “And for some cities, whether it’s in the downtown area or a town square or a particular block, they should have the ability to create an entertainment zone to allow bars and restaurants to sell both food and alcohol onto the street. Let’s allow people to enjoy themselves with their friends and neighbors.”

    Wiener said the legislation would also be a boon beyond downtown neighborhoods, helping cities and local businesses that have struggled since COVID-19 caused companies to close offices and send employees to work from home.

    Current laws allow street festivals to get one-day permits for vendors to sell alcohol for consumption on public streets. Wiener believes that should be extended to local businesses.

    A University of Toronto study showed that many downtown areas in California are getting 60% to 90% of the traffic they saw in 2019. For downtown Los Angeles, the figure is 83%; San Francisco has 67%; and Sacramento is at 66%.

    San Francisco and San Jose have given the bill their support.

    “When safely implemented, SB 969 would make it easier for local businesses to host block parties, wine walks and events that bring us all together to help drive the vibrant future of our downtown,” said San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan in a statement.

    The entertainment zones designated by municipalities would have specific days and hours of operation, like any business; people wouldn’t be free to imbibe in the street whenever they please. And California Penal Code Section 647(f) would continue to make it a crime to be intoxicated in public. Bars and restaurants would still be subject to state law that does not allow for the sale of alcohol between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m.

    Wiener proposed similar legislation in 2021 and last year; both passed the Senate unanimously. But they ran into trouble in the Assembly’s Appropriations Committee, which blocked the entertainment zone provisions in 2022, then watered down and limited them to San Francisco County in 2023.

    The 2024 bill has not yet been referred to a committee.

    [ad_2]

    Noah Goldberg

    Source link

  • Sorry, speeders: New bill would require speed-limiting devices in California cars

    Sorry, speeders: New bill would require speed-limiting devices in California cars

    [ad_1]

    What if you could not speed that much?

    That’s the premise of a new bill in the California Senate that would require vehicles sold in the state to be equipped with speed governors to limit how fast they can go.

    The proposal from Sen. Scott Wiener (D-San Francisco) is part of a package of bills that he hopes will reduce traffic injuries and deaths in the Golden State.

    “There’s no reason why people should routinely be allowed to drive more than 10 miles per hour above the speed limit,” Wiener said in an interview with The Times. “You can want whatever you want. But that doesn’t mean you’re allowed to do it and that doesn’t mean you should be physically able to do it.”

    The measure, Senate Bill 961, would require every passenger vehicle, truck and bus manufactured or sold in California to have speed governors starting in 2027. The devices would use GPS technology or cameras to verify the speed limit in a particular area and slow a speeding vehicle down if it approaches 10 mph over the limit.

    Wiener said he is open to changes in the bill — for example, whether to require active or passive speed governors.

    Active speed governors would actually reduce the speed of cars that hit the 10 mph limit, while passive ones would make some sort of annoying sound or buzz to warn drivers to slow down.

    The European Union passed legislation that will require passive speed governors in all cars sold in member countries starting in July.

    The legislation is likely to be met with some opposition from certain trucking groups that have similarly opposed federal legislation regarding speed governors.

    Todd Spencer, president of the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Assn., opposes the legislation, which he believes is not the correct way to make roads safer. Spencer advocates for increased police presence to monitor speeders, but said that changes in speed are sometimes necessary to drive safely.

    “There are times drivers may want to speed up enough to switch lanes, to move away from certain unsafe situations. Our preference is for drivers to have the maximum ability to do that. We don’t think technology or even most well-intentioned regulations should obstruct that,” Spencer said.

    But Wiener says surging traffic deaths in California — 4,400 people died in crashes in 2022, a 22% increase from 2019 — make the legislation a safety imperative.

    In Los Angeles, there were more traffic deaths in 2023 than homicides — the first time that has occurred in a decade.

    “This is a technology that exists. It’s in operation right now, and it will save lives,” Wiener said.

    While the senator acknowledged there would be pushback, he noted that every car safety requirement has run into some degree of opposition when proposed, before becoming a given. Wiener cited requirements for seat belts, child car seats and motorcycle helmets as examples.

    Weiner’s package of bills introduced this week — which he has dubbed Speeding and Fatality Emergency Reduction (SAFER) on California Streets — would also require underride guardrails on trucks to prevent cars and motorcycles from being pulled under the bigger vehicles in a crash.

    [ad_2]

    Noah Goldberg

    Source link

  • Virginia Senate votes to ban preferential treatment for public college legacy applicants

    Virginia Senate votes to ban preferential treatment for public college legacy applicants

    [ad_1]

    RICHMOND, Va. — Public universities would be prohibited from giving preferential treatment in admissions to applicants who are related to alumni or donors under a bill that sailed out of the Virginia Senate on Tuesday.

    The measure, which passed 39-0, now goes to the House of Delegates, where an identical bill, sponsored by Democratic Del. Dan Helmer, is pending. That bill has also seen strong support so far; it advanced from a subcommittee on a bipartisan 10-0 vote this month.

    “It’s about fairness. It’s about higher ed being available to everybody,” Democratic Sen. Schuyler VanValkenburg, the Senate bill’s sponsor, said in an interview ahead of the vote.

    VanValkenburg, a public school teacher, said the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision last summer striking down affirmative action in college admissions prompted him to sponsor the bill this year. The court’s action heightened the national discourse around college admissions and applications, and VanValkenburg said he was surprised to learn of the extent to which some colleges leaned on the practice.

    An Associated Press survey of the nation’s most selective colleges in 2022 found that legacy students in the freshman class ranged from 4% to 23%, though many schools declined to provide basic data in response to AP’s request. The AP found that at four schools — Notre Dame, USC, Cornell and Dartmouth — legacy students outnumbered Black students.

    Both the Virginia House and Senate measures have advanced through committee hearings with minimal discussion and no public opposition. Neither VanValkenburg nor Helmer were aware of any college or other interest group opposing the legislation, they said Tuesday.

    “I think this does have broad bipartisan support because I think everybody recognizes it’s the right thing to do,” VanValkenburg said.

    The change would remove a barrier to college access and help expand pathways to the middle class, Helmer said.

    Republican Gov. Glenn Youngkin’s press office did not immediately respond to a request for comment about his position on the legislation.

    The issue got some high-profile GOP support over the summer when Republican Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares voiced support for a legacy admissions ban, following the Supreme Court’s decision.

    “Colleges and universities use legacy applicants to keep donations flowing and maintain their aura of exclusivity. It often benefits the upper echelon and hurts middle- and lower-class America,” Miyares wrote in an op-ed in the Richmond Times-Dispatch.

    In 2021, Colorado became the first state to ban legacy admissions, according to news reports.

    According to a research report from the National Conference of State Legislatures provided by Helmer’s office, Colorado remains the only state to have passed legislation banning legacy admissions at postsecondary institutions, though at least five other states have considered related legislation.

    Democratic U.S. Sen. Tim Kaine, of Virginia, has also introduced similar legislation in Congress, along with Republican Sen. Todd Young, of Indiana.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • JetBlue and Spirit Airlines say they will appeal a judge's ruling that blocked their merger

    JetBlue and Spirit Airlines say they will appeal a judge's ruling that blocked their merger

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — JetBlue and Spirit Airlines said Friday they will appeal a federal judge’s ruling this week that blocked their plan to combine into a single carrier.

    The airlines said they filed a notice of appeal with the 1st U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, following the terms of their agreement.

    The Justice Department, which sued to block JetBlue’s proposed $3.8 billion purchase of Spirit, declined to comment.

    JetBlue and Spirit are the nation’s sixth- and seventh-largest carriers. JetBlue, which outbid Frontier Airlines, said it needed to acquire Spirit to compete more effectively against even bigger airlines.

    But on Tuesday, a federal judge in Boston ruled that the deal violated antitrust law. The U.S. Justice Department had sued to stop the deal, arguing that consumers would be harmed and forced to pay higher fares if Spirit — the nation’s biggest discount airline — were eliminated.

    The airlines announced their appeal in a statement that provided no other details.

    Earlier Friday, Spirit said that a strong holiday-travel season in December boosted its fourth-quarter revenue. The Miramar, Florida-based airline also said that it is trying to refinance $1.1 billion in debt that is due for payment in September 2025.

    Spirit also said that negotiations with Pratt & Whitney over engines that need to be reworked — resulting in the grounding of an average of 26 planes a day throughout 2024 — “have progressed considerably since October.” The airline said it expects compensation that will provide “a significant source of liquidity over the next couple of years.”

    Spirit has been losing money since the start of 2020. Some analysts said it could face bankruptcy without the merger with JetBlue.

    The airlines announced their intention to appeal U.S. District Judge William Young’s ruling after the stock market closed on Friday.

    Shares of Spirit, which fell 62% over three days following the ruling, gained 17% in regular trading Friday, and rose another 13% in after-hours trading. JetBlue’s shares fell 2% in extended trading.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Capital City Sunday: GOP medical marijuana proposal, Wisconsinites’ tax burden still near historic low | News – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    Capital City Sunday: GOP medical marijuana proposal, Wisconsinites’ tax burden still near historic low | News – Medical Marijuana Program Connection

    [ad_1]

    MADISON (WKOW) — Wisconsin Repubicans have unveiled a new proposal to establish a medical marijuana program in the state.

    The bill would limit the drug to only those who are severely ill with chronic diseases like cancer. Smokeable marijuana would not be allowed.

    The proposal also regulates medical cannabis growers, processors, and testing laboratories, and requires the state to establish five state-owned dispensaries to grow and sell medical cannabis products.

    Cannabis lawyer Jason Tarasek worked closely with lawmakers in Minnesota to hone the state’s adult-use cannabis bill that legalized recreational marijuana in the state. He said this week that he sees similarities between Wisconsin’s proposal and Minnesota’s initial medical marijuana program that was established in 2014. Assembly Speaker Robin Vos has indicated this proposal is based on Minnesota’s program.

    Tarasek said that their initial program was similarly restrictive, but has loosened in recent years to include other conditions such as autism, intractable pain, and sleep apnea. 

    “Like everything with marijuana, it is very controversial when it’s first introduced, the stigma is real around marijuana,” he said. “I think it’s interesting to watch these states come online, and I’m certain that if the medical marijuana program is introduced in Wisconsin, as intended, society will see this…

    [ad_2]

    MMP News Author

    Source link

  • States with big climate goals strip local power to block green projects

    States with big climate goals strip local power to block green projects

    [ad_1]

    LANSING, Mich. — Clean energy developers had planned a 75-turbine wind farm in mid-Michigan’s Montcalm County before local voters shot down the idea in 2022 and recalled seven local officials who had supported it.

    About 150 miles (240 kilometers) southeast, Clara Ostrander in Monroe County found herself at the center of a similar conflict as rising medical costs forced her and her husband to consider selling land her family has owned for 150 years.

    Leasing a parcel to an incoming solar farm could save the property, but neighboring residents complained so vehemently that Ostrander said the township changed its zoning to block the project.

    “There are people in this township I will never, ever speak to again,” she said.

    Local restrictions in Michigan derailed more than two dozen utility-scale renewable energy projects as of last May, according to a study by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. Nationwide, and at least 228 restrictions in 35 states have been imposed to stop green energy projects.

    The conflicts have hindered many states’ aggressive timelines for transitioning to cleaner energy production, with the ultimate goal of eliminating carbon pollution within the next two decades.

    Michigan and more than a dozen other states are seeking to upend the decision-making process by grabbing the power to supersede local restrictions and allow state authorities to approve or disapprove locations for utility-scale projects.

    The shift has sparked a political backlash that may escalate as more states seek to simplify getting green energy projects approved and built.

    “We can’t allow projects of statewide importance that are critical to our state energy security to be vetoed on purely local concerns,” said Dan Scripps, chair of Michigan’s Public Service Commission.

    Scripps and two other commission members now have the power to site large-scale renewable energy projects in the state under legislation passed by Michigan lawmakers and signed by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in November.

    Michigan joined Connecticut, New York, Oregon and Minnesota in requiring utility providers to transition to 100% carbon-free electricity generation by 2040. A sixth state, Rhode Island, is shooting for 100% renewable energy by 2033. The goals are consistent with the Biden administration’s target of carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035 and a net-zero emissions economy by 2050. Other states have long-standing goals lower than 100%.

    But many local officials say giving states the power to site large-scale energy projects clashes with cherished U.S. political principles. Local officials, they say, are the public servants closest to and most directly accountable to voters. They argue that’s especially important when it comes to land use and what gets built near homes.

    In Kansas, Osage County’s moratorium on commercial solar and wind projects came in 2022 after multiple hearings. County Commissioner Jay Bailey said the decision reflected most residents’ concerns. Even after all the hearings and discussions, he said he just didn’t feel he had enough information about the effects of large turbines or solar farms.

    “Here’s the difference,” he said. “If you allow them, you can’t go back and change it, but if you don’t allow them, you can always change it.”

    In other places, such as the Flint Hills of Kansas — home to most of the nation’s remaining tall grass prairie — moratoriums on energy projects stem from environmental concerns.

    But even with the restrictions in place in parts of Kansas, renewable energy has boomed there. Wind farms now provide 47% of the state’s electricity, up from 7% in 2010. The gains came as the clean energy lobby worked steadily to counter opposition from the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature.

    Elise Caplan, vice president for regulatory affairs at the nonprofit American Council on Renewable Energy, said local rules restricting green energy facilities are “not really based on science.” Projects can benefit local environments by retiring generating plants powered by fossil fuels, she said.

    Michigan has pursued its clean-energy goals by rapidly developing facilities where there’s ample farmland. It’s a choice that can divide rural communities, as it did in the Monroe County case in which Ostrander sought to lease property for a solar farm.

    Michigan’s new siting law could revive the project.

    “No one’s forcing this on us,” Ostrander said. “This was something we decided and felt it would be good for us to build to keep our property in the family.”

    Michigan is unusual in that its more than 1,200 townships have the power to enact and enforce zoning ordinances. Twenty of the state’s 83 counties have passed ordinances blocking or delaying wind or solar developments.

    Scripps, the chair of Michigan’s Public Service Commission that can now override those restrictions, has said an additional 209,000 acres (84,579 hectares) will be needed for projects to hit the state’s 60% renewable energy goal by 2035. It’s a massive increase from the 17,000 acres (6,880 hectares) currently being used.

    Developers will still need to go through local communities to approve projects, Scripps said. But if the project is denied, and meets the state’s criteria to proceed, the three-person commission can overrule the local decision and approve solar projects with a capacity of 50 megawatts or greater and wind projects with a capacity of 100 megawatts.

    A 2023 law in Illinois limits local authorities’ power and bans moratoriums on clean-energy projects. In addition to Michigan, the Columbia University study reported that state boards or agencies in California, Connecticut, New York and Rhode Island control decisions about siting projects. Local rules also can be bypassed by the state in Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Florida and South Dakota.

    Local government groups in Michigan have overwhelmingly opposed the new law giving the state power to site projects, saying it creates a “one-size-fits-all” process. Citizens for Local Choice, a group with four state lawmakers, announced in early January that it will try put the issue before Michigan voters in November, which would require collecting nearly 357,000 signatures by May 29.

    Green energy advocates are frustrated by what they often see driving local opposition to projects: A fear of change, widely circulating misinformation about wind turbines and solar panels and a desire by suburbanites who move to rural areas to preserve views.

    Josh Svaty, who assists renewable energy companies seeking county-level approval and lobbies for them at the Kansas Statehouse, decries how opponents can make local officials’ lives “absolutely miserable.” Yet, he said, he still believes in local decision making.

    “County governments — city governments, the same way — they are designed to be accessible to their citizens,” Svaty said. “So you can go to that planning and zoning meeting and if you want to say your view, you can do that.”

    ___

    Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • States with big climate goals strip local power to block green projects

    States with big climate goals strip local power to block green projects

    [ad_1]

    LANSING, Mich. — Clean energy developers had planned a 75-turbine wind farm in mid-Michigan’s Montcalm County before local voters shot down the idea in 2022 and recalled seven local officials who had supported it.

    About 150 miles (240 kilometers) southeast, Clara Ostrander in Monroe County found herself at the center of a similar conflict as rising medical costs forced her and her husband to consider selling land her family has owned for 150 years.

    Leasing a parcel to an incoming solar farm could save the property, but neighboring residents complained so vehemently that Ostrander said the township changed its zoning to block the project.

    “There are people in this township I will never, ever speak to again,” she said.

    Local restrictions in Michigan derailed more than two dozen utility-scale renewable energy projects as of last May, according to a study by the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University. Nationwide, and at least 228 restrictions in 35 states have been imposed to stop green energy projects.

    The conflicts have hindered many states’ aggressive timelines for transitioning to cleaner energy production, with the ultimate goal of eliminating carbon pollution within the next two decades.

    Michigan and more than a dozen other states are seeking to upend the decision-making process by grabbing the power to supersede local restrictions and allow state authorities to approve or disapprove locations for utility-scale projects.

    The shift has sparked a political backlash that may escalate as more states seek to simplify getting green energy projects approved and built.

    “We can’t allow projects of statewide importance that are critical to our state energy security to be vetoed on purely local concerns,” said Dan Scripps, chair of Michigan’s Public Service Commission.

    Scripps and two other commission members now have the power to site large-scale renewable energy projects in the state under legislation passed by Michigan lawmakers and signed by Democratic Gov. Gretchen Whitmer in November.

    Michigan joined Connecticut, New York, Oregon and Minnesota in requiring utility providers to transition to 100% carbon-free electricity generation by 2040. A sixth state, Rhode Island, is shooting for 100% renewable energy by 2033. The goals are consistent with the Biden administration’s target of carbon pollution-free electricity by 2035 and a net-zero emissions economy by 2050. Other states have long-standing goals lower than 100%.

    But many local officials say giving states the power to site large-scale energy projects clashes with cherished U.S. political principles. Local officials, they say, are the public servants closest to and most directly accountable to voters. They argue that’s especially important when it comes to land use and what gets built near homes.

    In Kansas, Osage County’s moratorium on commercial solar and wind projects came in 2022 after multiple hearings. County Commissioner Jay Bailey said the decision reflected most residents’ concerns. Even after all the hearings and discussions, he said he just didn’t feel he had enough information about the effects of large turbines or solar farms.

    “Here’s the difference,” he said. “If you allow them, you can’t go back and change it, but if you don’t allow them, you can always change it.”

    In other places, such as the Flint Hills of Kansas — home to most of the nation’s remaining tall grass prairie — moratoriums on energy projects stem from environmental concerns.

    But even with the restrictions in place in parts of Kansas, renewable energy has boomed there. Wind farms now provide 47% of the state’s electricity, up from 7% in 2010. The gains came as the clean energy lobby worked steadily to counter opposition from the state’s Republican-controlled Legislature.

    Elise Caplan, vice president for regulatory affairs at the nonprofit American Council on Renewable Energy, said local rules restricting green energy facilities are “not really based on science.” Projects can benefit local environments by retiring generating plants powered by fossil fuels, she said.

    Michigan has pursued its clean-energy goals by rapidly developing facilities where there’s ample farmland. It’s a choice that can divide rural communities, as it did in the Monroe County case in which Ostrander sought to lease property for a solar farm.

    Michigan’s new siting law could revive the project.

    “No one’s forcing this on us,” Ostrander said. “This was something we decided and felt it would be good for us to build to keep our property in the family.”

    Michigan is unusual in that its more than 1,200 townships have the power to enact and enforce zoning ordinances. Twenty of the state’s 83 counties have passed ordinances blocking or delaying wind or solar developments.

    Scripps, the chair of Michigan’s Public Service Commission that can now override those restrictions, has said an additional 209,000 acres (84,579 hectares) will be needed for projects to hit the state’s 60% renewable energy goal by 2035. It’s a massive increase from the 17,000 acres (6,880 hectares) currently being used.

    Developers will still need to go through local communities to approve projects, Scripps said. But if the project is denied, and meets the state’s criteria to proceed, the three-person commission can overrule the local decision and approve solar projects with a capacity of 50 megawatts or greater and wind projects with a capacity of 100 megawatts.

    A 2023 law in Illinois limits local authorities’ power and bans moratoriums on clean-energy projects. In addition to Michigan, the Columbia University study reported that state boards or agencies in California, Connecticut, New York and Rhode Island control decisions about siting projects. Local rules also can be bypassed by the state in Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, New Jersey, New Mexico, Florida and South Dakota.

    Local government groups in Michigan have overwhelmingly opposed the new law giving the state power to site projects, saying it creates a “one-size-fits-all” process. Citizens for Local Choice, a group with four state lawmakers, announced in early January that it will try put the issue before Michigan voters in November, which would require collecting nearly 357,000 signatures by May 29.

    Green energy advocates are frustrated by what they often see driving local opposition to projects: A fear of change, widely circulating misinformation about wind turbines and solar panels and a desire by suburbanites who move to rural areas to preserve views.

    Josh Svaty, who assists renewable energy companies seeking county-level approval and lobbies for them at the Kansas Statehouse, decries how opponents can make local officials’ lives “absolutely miserable.” Yet, he said, he still believes in local decision making.

    “County governments — city governments, the same way — they are designed to be accessible to their citizens,” Svaty said. “So you can go to that planning and zoning meeting and if you want to say your view, you can do that.”

    ___

    Hanna reported from Topeka, Kansas.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • South Korea’s parliament endorses landmark legislation outlawing dog meat industry

    South Korea’s parliament endorses landmark legislation outlawing dog meat industry

    [ad_1]

    SEOUL, South Korea — South Korea’s parliament on Tuesday endorsed landmark legislation outlawing the country’s dwindling dog meat industry, as public calls for the ban have grown sharply amid animal rights campaigns and worries about the country’s international image.

    Some angry dog farmers said they plan to file a constitutional appeal and launch rallies in protest, a suggestion that heated debate over the ban would continue.

    Dog meat consumption, a centuries-old practice on the Korean Peninsula, is neither explicitly banned nor legalized in South Korea. Recent surveys show more people want its ban and a majority of South Koreans don’t eat dog meat any longer. But the surveys also indicated one in every three South Koreans still oppose the ban even though they don’t eat dog meat.

    On Tuesday, the National Assembly passed the bill by a 208-0 vote Tuesday. President Yoon Suk Yeol’s government supports the ban, so the subsequent steps to make it law are considered formality.

    “This law is aimed at contributing to realizing the values of animal rights, which pursue respect for life and a harmonious co-existence between humans and animals,” the legislation reads.

    The bill would make the slaughtering, breeding, trade and sales of dog meat for human consumption illegal from 2027 and punish such acts with 2-3 years in prison. But it doesn’t stipulate penalties for eating dog meat.

    The bill would offer assistance to farmers and others in the industry for shutting down their businesses or shifting to alternatives. Details of outlawing the industry would be worked out among government officials, farmers, experts and animal rights activists, according to the bill.

    Humane Society International called the legislation’s passage “history in the making.”

    “I never thought I would see in my lifetime a ban on the cruel dog meat industry in South Korea, but this historic win for animals is testament to the passion and determination of our animal protection movement,” said JungAh Chae, executive director of HSI’s Korea office.

    The legislation left farmers extremely upset and frustrated.

    “This is a clear state violence as they’re infringing upon freedom of occupational option. We can’t just sit idly,” said Son Won Hak, a farmer and leader of a farmers’ association.

    Son said dog farmers will file a petition to the constitutional court and launch rallies in protest. He said farmers will meet Wednesday to discuss other future steps.

    There is no reliable official data on the exact size of South Korea’s dog meat industry. Activists and farmers say hundreds of thousands of dogs are slaughtered for meat each year in South Korea.

    [ad_2]

    Source link