ReportWire

Tag: Legislation

  • Bitwise CIO: U.S. stablecoin bill may trump Bitcoin ETF impact

    Bitwise CIO: U.S. stablecoin bill may trump Bitcoin ETF impact

    [ad_1]

    Bitwise CIO Matt Hougan said that the U.S. adopting comprehensive stablecoin legislature could signal the long-awaited “mainstreaming of crypto.” 

    In a note addressed to clients, Hougan theorized that stablecoin regulations may have an even bigger impact than the largely successful spot Bitcoin (BTC) ETFs. 

    “The launch of bitcoin ETFs in the U.S. epitomizes this transition, but it’s not the only road marker. Others include BlackRock launching a tokenized Treasury fund on the Ethereum blockchain, Europe passing comprehensive crypto legislation, Ray Dalio calling on investors to own “non-debt money” like bitcoin, and more.”

    Matt Hougan, Bitwise CIO

    Stars align for stablecoins in the U.S. 

    Hougan pointed to several indicators that suggest the U.S. Congress is closer to unveiling a framework for overseeing fiat-pegged cryptocurrencies. 

    The Lummis-Gillibrand Payment Stablecoin Act was recently introduced in the Senate, gathering support from lawmakers from various points on the political spectrum. However, some within the crypto industry remain skeptical about the bill’s effect on free speech due to its ban on algorithmic stablecoins. 

    Last week, Maxine Waters, the Ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, disclosed a deal with Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry regarding stablecoin rules.

    Waters told Bloomberg that several members of the Committee were informed and leaning toward the policy, including Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer and Senate Banking Chairman Sherrod Brown, who notoriously holds anti-crypto sentiment. 

    Federal Reserve Governor Chris Waller, Federal Research Chair Jerome Powell, and U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen have publicly expressed support for stablecoins, a sign that Washington’s approach to this particular crypto sector may have flipped. 

    Bipartisan interest spurred by three catalysts 

    According to the Bitwise CIO, three primary reasons exist for the narrative shift. First, U.S. dollar-pegged coins could solidify global USD dominance by allowing more investors access to the popular greenback currency. 

    Also, passing legislation would bootstrap more demand for U.S. Treasuries. Stablecoin issuers already rank 16 among the largest independent Treasuries holders worldwide. 

    Inclusion in the traditional financial system would allow existing players like banks to contest Tether’s dominance. The USDT provider has 125 employees but earned $6.2 billion in profits last year, compared to Goldman Sachs’s $8.5 billion profits achieved with over 45,000 staffers. Per crypto.news, researchers from the S&P agree with this sentiment.

    “This would be the first piece of comprehensive crypto legislation ever passed by Congress. It would allow big banks like JPMorgan Chase to enter the space, moving them from foes to friends of certain aspects of the crypto/DeFi ecosystem. And millions of people and corporations would be introduced to the speed, low costs, and ease of use that crypto wallets, stablecoins, and blockchain-based payment rails offer.”

    Matt Hougan, Bitwise CIO

    [ad_2]

    Naga Avan-Nomayo

    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

  • TikTok has promised to sue over the potential US ban. What’s the legal outlook?

    TikTok has promised to sue over the potential US ban. What’s the legal outlook?

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Legislation forcing TikTok‘s parent company to sell the video-sharing platform or face a ban in the U.S. received President Joe Biden’s official signoff Wednesday. But the newly minted law could be in for an uphill battle in court.

    Critics of the sell-or-be-banned ultimatum argue it violates TikTok users’ First Amendment rights. The app’s China-based owner, ByteDance, has already promised to sue, calling the measure unconstitutional.

    But a court challenge’s success is not is not guaranteed. The law’s opponents, which include advocacy organizations like the American Civil Liberties Union, maintain that the government hasn’t come close to justifying banning TikTok, while others say national-security claims could still prevail.

    For years, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have expressed concerns that Chinese authorities could force ByteDance to hand over U.S. user data, or influence Americans by suppressing or promoting certain content on TikTok. The U.S. has yet to provide public evidence to support those claims, but some legal experts note that political pressures have piled up regardless.

    If upheld, legal experts also stress that the law could set a precedent carrying wider ramifications for digital media in the U.S.

    Here’s what you need to know.

    That’s the central question. TikTok and opponents of the law have argued that a ban would violate First Amendment rights of the social media platform’s 170 million U.S. users.

    Patrick Toomey, deputy director of the ACLU’s National Security Project, said a TikTok ban would “stifle free expression and restrict public access” to a platform that has become central source for information sharing.

    Among key questions will be whether the legislation interferes with the overall content of speech on TikTok, notes Elettra Bietti, an assistant professor of law and computer science at Northeastern University, because content-based restrictions meet a higher level of scrutiny.

    ByteDance had yet to officially file a lawsuit by late Wednesday, but Bietti said she expects the company’s challenge to primarily focus on whether a ban infringes on these wider free-speech rights. Additional litigation involving TikTok’s “commercial actors,” such as businesses and influencers who make their living on the platform, may also arise, she added.

    TikTok is expressing confidence about the prospects of its planned challenge.

    “Rest assured, we aren’t going anywhere,” TikTok CEO Shou Chew said in a video response posted to X Wednesday. “The facts and the Constitution are on our side, and we expect to prevail again.”

    Toomey also said that he is optimistic about the possibility of TikTok being able to block the measure in court, noting that both users and the company “have extremely strong” First Amendment claims.

    “Many of the calls to completely ban TikTok in the U.S. are about scoring political points and rooted in anti-China sentiment,” Toomey added. “And to date, these steps to ban TikTok had not been remotely supported by concrete public evidence.”

    Still, the future of any litigation is hard to predict, especially for this kind of case. And from a legal perspective, legal experts say it can be difficult to cite political motivations, even if they’re well-documented, as grounds to invalidate a law.

    The battle could also string along for some time, with the potential for appeals that could go all the way to the Supreme Court, which would likely uphold the law due to its current composition, said Gus Hurwitz, a senior fellow at the University of Pennsylvania’s Carey Law School.

    TikTok’s legal challenge won’t go on without a fight. The government will probably respond with national-security claims, which were already cited prominently as the legislation made its way through Congress.

    Toomey maintains that the government hasn’t met the high bar required to prove imminent national-security risks, but some other legal experts note that it’s still a strong card to play.

    “One of the unfortunate and really frustrating things about national-security legislation (is that) it tends to be a trump card,” Hurwitz said. “Once national-security issues come up, they’re going to carry the day either successfully or not.”

    Hurwitz added that he thinks there are legitimate national-security arguments that could be brought up here. National security can be argued because it’s a federal measure, he added. That sets this scenario apart from previously unsuccessful state-level legislation seeking to ban TikTok, such as in Montana.

    But national-security arguments are also vulnerable to questioning as to why TikTok is getting specific scrutiny.

    “Personally, I believe that what TikTok does isn’t that different from other companies that are U.S.-based,” Bietti said, pointing to tech giants ranging from Google to Amazon. “The question is, ‘Why ban TikTok and not the activities and the surveillance carried out by other companies in the United States?’”

    Still, legal experts note that there could be repercussions beyond TikTok in the future.

    The measure was passed as part of a larger $95 billion package that provides aid to Ukraine and Israel. The package also includes a provision that makes it illegal for data brokers to sell or rent “personally identifiable sensitive data” to North Korea, China, Russia, Iran or entities in those countries.

    That has encountered some pushback, including from the ACLU, which says the language is written too broadly and could sweep in journalists and others who publish personal information.

    “There’s real reason to be concerned that the use of this law will not stop with TikTok,” Toomey said. “Looking at that point and the bigger picture, banning TikTok or forcing its sale would be a devastating blow to the U.S. government’s decades of work promoting an open and secure global internet.”

    [ad_2]

    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

  • Connecticut Senate passes wide-ranging bill to regulate AI. But its fate remains uncertain

    Connecticut Senate passes wide-ranging bill to regulate AI. But its fate remains uncertain

    [ad_1]

    HARTFORD — The Connecticut Senate pressed ahead Wednesday with one of the first major legislative proposals in the U.S. to rein in bias in artificial intelligence decision-making and protect people from harm, including manufactured videos or deepfakes.

    The vote was held despite concerns the bill might stifle innovation, become a burden for small businesses and make the state an outlier.

    The bill passed 24-12 after a lengthy debate. It is the result of two years of task force meetings in Connecticut and a year’s worth of collaboration among a bipartisan group of legislators from other states who are trying to prevent a patchwork of laws across the country because Congress has yet to act.

    “I think that this is a very important bill for the state of Connecticut. It’s very important I think also for the country as a first step to get a bill like this,” said Democratic Sen. James Maroney, the key author of the bill. “Even if it were not to come and get passed into law this year, we worked together as states.”

    Lawmakers from Connecticut, Colorado, Texas, Alaska, Georgia and Virginia who have been working together on the issue have found themselves in the middle of a national debate between civil rights-oriented groups and the industry over the core components of the legislation. Several of the legislators, including Maroney, participated in a news conference last week to emphasize the need for legislation and highlight how they have worked with industry, academia and advocates to create proposed regulations for safe and trustworthy AI.

    But Senate Minority Leader Stephen Harding said he felt like Connecticut senators were being rushed to vote on the most complicated piece of legislation of the session, which is scheduled to adjourn May 8. The Republican said he feared the bill was “full of unintended consequences” that could prove detrimental to businesses and residents in the state.

    “I think our constituents are owed more thought, more consideration to this before we push that button and say this is now going to become law,” he said.

    Besides pushback from Republican legislators, some key Democrats in Connecticut, including Gov. Ned Lamont, have voiced concern the bill may negatively impact an emerging industry. Lamont, a former cable TV entrepreneur, “remains concerned that this is a fast-moving space, and that we need to make sure we do this right and don’t stymie innovation,” his spokesperson Julia Bergman said in a statement.

    Among other things, the bill includes protections for consumers, tenants and employees by attempting to target risks of AI discrimination based on race, age, religion, disability and other protected classes. Besides making it a crime to spread so-called deepfake pornography and deceptive AI-generated media in political campaigns, the bill requires digital watermarks on AI-generated images for transparency.

    Additionally, certain AI users will be required to develop policies and programs to eliminate risks of AI discrimination.

    The legislation also creates a new online AI Academy where Connecticut residents can take classes in AI and ensures AI training is part of state workforce development initiatives and other state training programs. There are some concerns the bill doesn’t go far enough, with calls by advocates to restore a requirement that companies must disclose more information to consumers before they can use AI to make decisions about them.

    The bill now awaits action in the House of Representatives.

    [ad_2]

    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

  • Ireland: Lawmakers Consider Exception for Ads by Gambling Charities

    Ireland: Lawmakers Consider Exception for Ads by Gambling Charities

    [ad_1]

    Similarly to the overhaul of the gambling sector in Great Britain, lawmakers in Ireland are considering significant changes to the gambling regulations. The review of the 2022 Gambling Regulation Bill is expected to protect consumers, while establishing strict rules related to gambling advertising and inducements that licensed casinos and sports betting operators may offer.

    Wednesday marks the final stop of the proposed legislation with Dáil Éireann, the country’s lower house, before the bill arrives at the Seanad for additional assessment. In light of this, lawmakers are currently debating changes related to the gambling regulation.

    One of the changes, supported by James Browne, the Minister of State, involves the exclusion of certain organizations from the controversial gambling advertising blanket ban proposed as a part of the country’s new gambling laws. He proposes charities or other gambling organizations that advertise “for a charitable or philanthropic purpose” to be excluded from the advertising ban, as announced by The Irish Times.

    The change from the initially proposed blanket ban came after lawmakers and representatives of the gambling and racing industry raised their concerns about the impact of such drastic restrictions. Moreover, broadcasters such as Racing TV for example, also sounded the alarm about the potential detrimental impact a blanket gambling advertising ban may have on the sector.

    Earlier this month, the operator that offers bettors options for wagers on national lottery results, rather than engaging in the draws themselves, Lottoland, revealed its concerns, explaining that despite addressing a number of issues in a letter to the Minister, Browne is yet to sit down for a discussion with the company.

    Irish Gambling Charities Continue Their Noble Work

    GamblingCare, a service funded and administered by the independent charity that focuses on research, education and treatment for people affected by problem gambling in Ireland, the Gambling Awareness Trust, released a comprehensive report about its services provided throughout 2023 late last month.

    In its report, GamblingCare revealed that last year, it provided 5,971 counseling sessions, recording a significant uptick considering the 4,230 figure recorded in 2022. During last year, the charity also recorded an exponential growth in the traffic for its website which increased from 14,000 in 2022 to nearly 103,000 in 2023.

    Data about the spending on advertising and promotion of services by GamblingCare was not immediately available.

    Still, if the lawmakers agree on the proposed changes, groups such as GamblingCare and Gamblers Anonymous Ireland, among other charitable organizations, may be exempt from the initially proposed blanket gambling advertising ban.

    [ad_2]

    Jerome García

    Source link

  • Senate overwhelmingly OKs aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan

    Senate overwhelmingly OKs aid for Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The Senate has passed $95 billion in war aid to Ukraine, Israel and Taiwan, sending the legislation to President Joe Biden after months of delays and contentious debate over how involved the United States should be in foreign wars.

    The bill passed the Senate in an overwhelming 79-18 vote late Tuesday after the House approved the package Saturday. Biden, who worked with congressional leaders to win support, said in a statement immediately after passage that he will sign it Wednesday and start the process of sending weapons to Ukraine, which has been struggling to hold its front lines against Russia.

    “Tonight, a bipartisan majority in the Senate joined the House to answer history’s call at this critical inflection point,” Biden said.

    The legislation would also send $26 billion in wartime assistance to Israel and humanitarian relief to citizens of Gaza, and $8 billion to counter Chinese threats in Taiwan and the Indo-Pacific. U.S. officials said about $1 billion of the aid could be on its way shortly, with the bulk following in coming weeks.

    In an interview with The Associated Press shortly before the vote, Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y., said that if Congress hadn’t passed the aid, “America would have paid a price economically, politically, militarily.”

    “Very few things we have done have risen to this level of historic importance,” he said.

    On the Senate floor, Schumer said the Senate was sending a message to U.S. allies: “We will stand with you.”

    Schumer and Senate Republican Leader Mitch McConnell made passage of the legislation a top priority, agreeing to tie the Ukraine and Israel aid to help ensure passage and arguing there could be dire consequences for the United States and many of its global allies if Russian President Vladimir Putin’s aggression is left unchecked. They worked with House Speaker Mike Johnson, a Republican, to overcome seemingly intractable Republican opposition to the Ukraine aid, in particular — eventually winning large majorities in both chambers.

    McConnell said in a separate interview before the vote that it “is one of the biggest days in the time that I’ve been here.”

    “At least on this episode, I think we turned the tables on the isolationists,” McConnell said.

    In the end, 31 Republicans voted for the aid package — nine more than when the Senate passed a similar version in February, and a majority of the Senate GOP conference. The House approved the package in a series of four votes on Saturday, with the Ukraine portion passing 311-112.

    The $61 billion for Ukraine comes as the war-torn country desperately needs new firepower and as Russian President Vladimir Putin has stepped up his attacks. Ukrainian soldiers have struggled as Russia has seized the momentum on the battlefield and gained significant territory.

    Bidentold Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy on Monday the U.S. will send badly needed air defense weaponry as soon as the legislation is passed.

    “The President has assured me that the package will be approved quickly and that it will be powerful, strengthening our air defense as well as long-range and artillery capabilities,” Zelenskyy said in a post on X on Monday.

    In an effort to gain more votes, Republicans in the House majority also added a bill to the foreign aid package that could ban the social media app TikTok in the U.S. if its Chinese owners do not sell their stake within a year. That legislation had wide bipartisan support in both chambers.

    The TikTok bill was one of several tweaks Johnson to the package the Senate passed in February as he tried to move the bill through the House despite significant opposition within his conference. Other additions include a stipulation that $9 billion of the economic assistance to Ukraine is in the form of “forgivable loans”; provisions that allow the U.S. to seize frozen Russian central bank assets to rebuild Ukraine; and bills to impose sanctions on Iran, Russia, China and criminal organizations that traffic fentanyl.

    Those changes appears to have brought some of the nine additional Senate Republicans on board, bringing support to more than half of McConnell’s conference.

    South Carolina Sen. Lindsey Graham, a longtime hawk who voted against the foreign aid package in February because it wasn’t paired with legislation to stem migration at the border, was one of the Republicans who switched their votes. “If we don’t help Ukraine now, this war will spread, and Americans who are not involved will be involved,” Graham said.

    The package has had broad congressional support since Biden first requested the money last summer. But congressional leaders had to navigate strong opposition from a growing number of conservatives who question U.S. involvement in foreign wars and argue that Congress should be focused instead on the surge of migration at the U.S.-Mexico border.

    Ohio Sen. J.D. Vance, a Republican who is a close ally to Donald Trump, said that despite the strong showing of support for funding Ukraine’s defense, opposition is growing among Republicans.

    “The United States is spread too thin,” Vance said, “And that that argument I think, is winning the American people and it’s slowly winning the Senate, but it’s not going to happen overnight.”

    The growing fault line in the GOP between those conservatives who are skeptical of the aid and the more traditional, “Reagan Republicans” who strongly support it may prove to be career-defining for the two top Republican leaders.

    McConnell, who has made the Ukraine aid a top priority, said last month that he would step down from leadership after becoming increasingly distanced from many in his conference on the Ukraine aid and other issues. Johnson, who said he put the bills on the floor after praying for guidance, faces threats of an ouster after a majority of Republicans voted against the aid to Ukraine.

    Johnson said after House passage that “we did our work here, and I think history will judge it well.”

    Opponents in the Senate, like the House, included some left-wing senators who are opposed to aiding Israel as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has bombarded Gaza and killed thousands of civilians. Sens. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., and Jeff Merkley, D-Oregon, voted against the package.

    “We must end our complicity in this terrible war,” Sanders said.

    [ad_2]

    By MARY CLARE JALONICK, STEPHEN GROVES and FARNOUSH AMIRI – Associated Press

    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

  • The House votes for possible TikTok ban in the US, but don’t expect the app to go away anytime soon

    The House votes for possible TikTok ban in the US, but don’t expect the app to go away anytime soon

    [ad_1]

    WASHINGTON — The House passed legislation Saturday that would ban TikTok in the United States if the popular social media platform’s China-based owner doesn’t sell its stake within a year, but don’t expect the app to go away anytime soon.

    The decision by House Republicans to include TikTok as part of a larger foreign aid package, a priority for President Joe Biden with broad congressional support for Ukraine and Israel, fast-tracked the ban after an earlier version had stalled in the Senate. A standalone bill with a shorter, six-month selling deadline passed the House in March by an overwhelming bipartisan vote as both Democrats and Republicans voiced national security concerns about the app’s owner, the Chinese technology firm ByteDance Ltd.

    The modified measure, passed by a 360-58 vote, now goes to the Senate after negotiations that lengthened the timeline for the company to sell to nine months, with a possible additional three months if a sale is in progress.

    Legal challenges could extend that timeline even further. The company has indicated that it would likely go to court to try and block the law if it passes, arguing it would deprive the app’s millions of users of their First Amendment rights.

    TikTok has lobbied hard against the legislation, pushing the app’s 170 million U.S. users — many of whom are young — to call Congress and voice opposition. But the ferocity of the pushback angered lawmakers on Capitol Hill, where there is broad concern about Chinese threats to the U.S. and where few members use the platform themselves.

    “We will not stop fighting and advocating for you,” TikTok CEO Shou Zi Chew said in a video that was posted on the platform last month and directed toward the app’s users. “We will continue to do all we can, including exercising our legal rights, to protect this amazing platform that we have built with you.”

    The bill’s quick path through Congress is extraordinary because it targets one company and because Congress has taken a hands-off approach to tech regulation for decades. Lawmakers had failed to act despite efforts to protect children online, safeguard users’ privacy and make companies more liable for content posted on their platforms, among other measures. But the TikTok ban reflects widespread concerns from lawmakers about China.

    Members of both parties, along with intelligence officials, have worried that Chinese authorities could force ByteDance to hand over American user data or direct the company to suppress or boost TikTok content favorable to its interests. TikTok has denied assertions that it could be used as a tool of the Chinese government and has said it has not shared U.S. user data with Chinese authorities.

    The U.S. government has not publicly provided evidence that shows TikTok shared U.S. user data with the Chinese government or tinkered with the company’s popular algorithm, which influences what Americans see.

    The company has good reason to think a legal challenge could be successful, having seen some success in previous legal fights over its operations in the U.S.. In November, a federal judge blocked a Montana law that would ban TikTok use across the state after the company and five content creators who use the platform sued.

    In 2020, federal courts blocked an executive order issued by then-President Donald Trump to ban TikTok after the company sued on the grounds that the order violated free speech and due process rights. His administration brokered a deal that would have had U.S. corporations Oracle and Walmart take a large stake in TikTok. The sale never went through for a number of reasons; one was China, which imposed stricter export controls on its technology providers.

    Dozens of states and the federal government have put in place TikTok bans on government devices. Texas’ ban was challenged last year by The Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University, which argued in a lawsuit that the policy was impeding academic freedom because it extended to public universities. In December, a federal judge ruled in favor of the state.

    Organizations such as the American Civil Liberties Union have backed the app. “Congress cannot take away the rights of over 170 million Americans who use TikTok to express themselves, engage in political advocacy, and access information from around the world,” said Jenna Leventoff, a lawyer for the group.

    Since mid-March, TikTok has spent $5 million on TV ads opposing the legislation, according to AdImpact, an advertising tracking firm. The ads have included a range of content creators, including a nun, extolling the positive impacts of the platform on their lives and arguing a ban would trample on the First Amendment. The company has also encouraged its users to contact Congress, and some lawmakers have received profanity-laced calls.

    “It is unfortunate that the House of Representatives is using the cover of important foreign and humanitarian assistance to once again jam through a ban bill that would trample the free speech rights of 170 million Americans, devastate 7 million businesses, and shutter a platform that contributes $24 billion to the U.S. economy, annually,” said Alex Haurek, a spokesman for the company.

    California Rep. Ro Khanna, a Democrat, voted against the legislation. He said he thinks there could have been less restrictive ways to go after the company that wouldn’t result in a total ban or threaten free speech.

    “I think it’s not going to be well received,” Khanna said. “It’s a sign of the Beltway being out of touch with where voters are.”

    Nadya Okamoto, a content creator who has roughly 4 million followers on TikTok, said she has been having conversations with other creators who are experiencing “so much anger and anxiety” about the bill and how it’s going to impact their lives. The 26-year-old, whose company “August” sells menstrual products and is known for her advocacy around destigmatizing menstrual periods, makes most of her income from TikTok.

    “This is going to have real repercussions,” she said.

    ___

    Hadero reported from New York.

    [ad_2]

    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

  • Sweeping gun legislation approved by Maine lawmakers after mass shooting

    Sweeping gun legislation approved by Maine lawmakers after mass shooting

    [ad_1]

    AUGUSTA, Maine — The Maine Legislature approved sweeping gun safety legislation including background checks on private gun sales, waiting periods for gun purchases and criminalizing gun sales to prohibited people before adjourning Thursday morning, nearly six months after the deadliest shooting in state history.

    Democratic Gov. Janet Mills and the Democratic-led Legislature pressed for a number of gun and mental health proposals after the shooting that claimed 18 lives and injured another 13 people, despite the state’s strong hunting tradition and support for gun owners.

    “Maine has taken significant steps forward in preventing gun violence and protecting Maine lives,” said Nacole Palmer, executive director of the Maine Gun Safety Coalition, who praised lawmakers for listening to their constituents.

    The governor’s bill, approved early Thursday, would strengthen the state’s yellow flag law, boost background checks for private sales of guns and make it a crime to recklessly sell a gun to someone who is prohibited from having guns. The bill also funds violence prevention initiatives and opens a mental health crisis receiving center in Lewiston.

    The Maine Senate also narrowly gave final approval Wednesday to a 72-hour waiting period for gun purchases and a ban on bump stocks that can transform a weapon into a machine gun.

    However, there was no action on a proposal to institute a “red flag” law. The bill sponsored by House Speaker Rachel Talbot Ross would have allowed family members to petition a judge to remove guns from someone who is in a psychiatric crisis. The state’s current “yellow flag” law differs by putting police in the lead of the process, which critics say is too complicated.

    Lawmakers pushed through the night and into the morning as they ran up against their adjournment date, which was Wednesday. But it didn’t come without some 11th-hour drama. Lawmakers had to approve a contentious supplemental budget before casting their final votes and didn’t wrap up the session until after daybreak.

    The Oct. 25 shooting by an Army reservist in Lewiston, Maine’s second-largest city, served as tragic backdrop for the legislative session.

    Police were warned by family members that the shooter was becoming delusional and had access to weapons. He was hospitalized for two weeks while training with his unit last summer. And his best friend, a fellow reservist, warned that the man was going “to snap and do a mass shooting.” The shooter killed himself after the attack.

    Republicans accused Democrats of using the tragedy to play on people’s emotions to pass contentious bills.

    “My big concern here is that we’re moving forward with gun legislation that has always been on the agenda. Now we’re using the tragedy in Lewiston to force it through when there’s nothing new here,” said Republican Sen. Lisa Keim. “It’s the same old ideas that were rejected year after year. Using the tragedy to advance legislation is wrong.”

    But Democrats said constituents implored them to do something to prevent future attacks. They said it would’ve been an abdication of their responsibility to ignore their pleas.

    “For the sake of the communities, individuals and families now suffering immeasurable pain, for the sake of our state, doing nothing is not an option,” the governor said in late January when she outlined her proposals in her State of the State address. Those in attendance responded with a standing ovation.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Nancy Pelosi book, ‘The Art of Power,’ will reflect on her career in public life

    Nancy Pelosi book, ‘The Art of Power,’ will reflect on her career in public life

    [ad_1]

    NEW YORK — Former House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has completed a book about her years in public life, from legislation she helped enact to such traumatizing moments as the Jan. 6 siege of the U.S. Capitol and the assault at her San Francisco home that left her husband with a fractured skull.

    Simon & Schuster announced Thursday that Pelosi’s “The Art of Power” will be released Aug. 6.

    “People always ask me how I did what I did in the House,” Pelosi, the first woman to become speaker, said in a statement. “In ‘The Art of Power,’ I reveal how — and more importantly, why.”

    Pelosi, 84, was first elected to the House in 1986, rose to minority leader in 2003 and to speaker four years later, when the Democrats became the majority party. She served as speaker from 2007-2011, and again from 2019-2023, and was widely credited with helping to mobilize support for and pass such landmark bills as the Affordable Care Act and the Inflation Reduction Act.

    She stepped away from any leadership positions after Republicans retook the majority in the 2022 elections, but she continues to represent California’s 11th district.

    According to Simon & Schuster, Pelosi also will offer a “personal account” of Jan. 6, 2021, when a mob of President Donald Trump’s supporters rampaged through the Capitol as Congress voted to certify Joe Biden’s victory over Trump. She also recounts the night in 2022 when an intruder broke into the Pelosi home and assaulted her husband, Paul Pelosi, with a hammer. (Nancy Pelosi was in Washington at the time).

    “Pelosi shares that horrifying day and the traumatic aftermath for her and her family,” the publisher’s announcement reads in part.

    Pelosi’s previous book, “Know Your Power: A Message to America’s Daughters,” came out in 2008. In 2022, she was the subject of the HBO documentary “Pelosi in the House,” made by daughter Alexandra Pelosi.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Lawmakers blast Iran for attack on Israel

    Lawmakers blast Iran for attack on Israel

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — Members of the state’s all-Democrat congressional delegation are condemning Iran’s strike against Israel over the weekend and calling for stepped-up diplomacy to end the widening conflict.

    Iran launched a missiles and drone attack on Israel on Saturday in retaliation for the alleged Israeli strike on the Iranian embassy that took out two senior Iranian officers. Most of the drones and missiles were either shut down by Israeli, U.S. or British forces, or failed to hit their intended targets, authorities said.

    Rep. Seth Moulton, a Salem Democrat, blasted the attacks and said Iran’s actions risk sparking a “catastrophic” Middle Eastern war that could drag the U.S. and other Israeli allies into the conflict.

    “Iran’s evil regime murders its own people at home and innocents abroad, funding terrorist groups across the Middle East – from Hamas and Hezbollah to the Houthis and proxies in Iraq that have killed scores of U.S. troops,” he said in a statement.

    But Moulton, a Marine veteran, also urged Israel to show restraint in its response to the Iranian attacks and work toward a bilateral cease fire in the Gaza strip.

    “It is neither in America’s national security interests, nor in Israel’s, to escalate into a full regional war,” he said. “As Israel weighs its next steps, it is critical that it remains focused on finishing its operations in Gaza and achieving a cease-fire-for-hostages deal – not on starting a new war while still having no endgame for their first.”

    Rep. Lori Trahan, a Westford Democrat, issued a statement also condemning Iran’s attack and pledging to work to “support Israel’s ability to defend itself and its people, and bring an end to this conflict which threatens regional stability.”

    “This is a dangerous and unnecessary escalation, and it comes at a time when the world’s focus should be on stopping the bloodshed in Gaza, releasing the hostages still held by Hamas, surging humanitarian support to innocent Palestinians, and returning to the hard work of achieving peace,” Trahan said.

    Gov. Maura Healey posted on social media that “Massachusetts stands with the people of Israel and @POTUS in the face of this unprecedented attack by Iran.”

    The attack on Israel came more than six months after Hamas terrorists invaded the country on Oct. 7, after which the Israeli military began its bombardment of the Gaza Strip. Iran had signaled that it planned to respond militarily to the Israeli strike on its embassy.

    Republicans also criticized the strike, but pointed blame at President Joe Biden’s administration for its “appeasement” policy towards Iranian government.

    House Speaker Mike Johnson said Israel is facing a “vicious” attack and the U.S. “must stand” by its ally. The Louisiana Republican accused the Biden administration of “undermining” Israel with conflicting policies about U.S. support.

    “As Israel faces this vicious attack from Iran, America must show our full resolve to stand with our critical ally,” Johnson’s office said on social media. “The world must be assured: Israel is not alone.”

    House Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., said the lower chamber will reconvene this week to consider legislation supporting Israel and to hold “Iran and its terrorist proxies accountable.”

    “The House of Representatives stands strongly with Israel, and there must be consequences for this unprovoked attack,” he posted on social media.

    But Moulton and other Democratic lawmakers pushed back on claims that the Biden administration contributed to the attacks.

    “It shouldn’t be hard for the Republican Party to support democracies like Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan rather than catering to Russia, China, and insurrection-backing extremists in their own ranks,” he said.

    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

  • Paris Hilton backs California bill to bring more transparency to youth treatment facilities

    Paris Hilton backs California bill to bring more transparency to youth treatment facilities

    [ad_1]

    SACRAMENTO, Calif. — Paris Hilton joined California state lawmakers Monday to push for legislation aimed at cracking down on the industry that cares for troubled teens by requiring more transparency from youth treatment facilities.

    The bill supported by the Hilton Hotel heiress and media personality aims to pry open information on how short-term residential facilities for youth dealing with substance abuse and behavioral issues use disciplinary methods such as restraints or seclusion against minors. It would require such centers to notify parents and the state any time they use restrains or seclusion rooms for minors. It’s authored by Republican state Sen. Shannon Grove and Democratic state Sens. Aisha Wahab and Angelique Ashby.

    On Monday, Hilton testified in a legislative hearing in support of the bill, detailing her harrowing abuse as a teenager at a facility in Utah that she said still haunts her and urging lawmakers to take actions before more children have to suffer similar treatment.

    “Our current system designed to reform, in some horrific instances, does the exact opposite,” Hilton told lawmakers Monday. “It breaks spirits and instills fear, and it perpetuates a cycle of abuse. But today, we have the power to change that.”

    The California bill passed committee with bipartisan support on Monday. Under the bill, facilities would have to report details such as what disciplinary actions were taken, why and who had approved the plan. The state department regulating the facilities also would be required to make public the reports and update the database on the quarterly basis. It would not ban the use of such practices.

    Hilton has become a prominent advocate for more oversight and regulation of teen treatment centers after publicly sharing the physical and mental abuse she suffered as a teenager. She alleged staff members would beat her, force her to take unknown pills, watch her shower and send her to solitary confinement without clothes as punishment.

    In 2021, her testimony about her experience at Utah’s Provo Canyon School helped pass a bill to impose stricter oversight over youth treatment centers in the state. Hilton has also traveled to Washington D.C. to advocate for federal reforms and helped changed laws to protect minors in at least eight states. Earlier this month, she spoke in support of boys sent to a private school for troubled teens in Jamaica.

    Hilton, whose company called 11:11 Media is sponsoring the bill, called the legislation “a game changer” that would shed light on child abuse at youth residential treatments and hold them accountable.

    “This would have been so helpful to myself and so many others to have known what was happening behind closed doors,” Paris said in an interview. “Because I was cut off from the outside world, I couldn’t tell my family anything, and that’s what they do.”

    Between 2015 and 2020, California sent more than 1,240 children with behavior problems to out-of-state facilities due to the lack of locked treatment centers for youths, according to Sen. Grove’s office. As reports about abuse happening at these programs emerged, including an incident where a 16-year-old boy died after being restrained for about 12 minutes at a Michigan facility, California also found significant licensing violations at these facilities and decided to do away with the program in 2020. Legislation passed in 2021 formally banned the use of out-of-state residential centers. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom also authorized $8 million to bring all the minors home by last year.

    Minors with behavioral issues are now sent to in-state short-term residential centers, which were created in 2017 to replace group homes. But under current laws, these facilities are not required to share information on how often they use seclusion rooms, restraints, and how many times those methods result in serious injuries or deaths.

    Children at these facilities make up one of the most vulnerable populations, including foster youths who have previously been sexually exploited, Grove said.

    “It’s a small but critical step to ensure the increased transparency and accountability for California’s children,” she said Monday.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Semiautomatic firearm ban passes Colorado’s House, heads to Senate

    Semiautomatic firearm ban passes Colorado’s House, heads to Senate

    [ad_1]

    DENVER — Colorado’s Democratic-controlled House on Sunday passed a bill that would ban the sale and transfer of semiautomatic firearms, a major step for the legislation after roughly the same bill was swiftly killed by Democrats last year.

    The bill, which passed on a 35-27 vote, is now on its way to the Democratic-led state Senate. If it passes there, it could bring Colorado in line with 10 other states — including California, New York and Illinois — that have prohibitions on semiautomatic guns.

    But even in a state plagued by some of the nation’s worst mass shootings, such legislation faces headwinds.

    Colorado’s political history is purple, shifting blue only recently. The bill’s chances of success in the state Senate are lower than they were in the House, where Democrats have a 46-19 majority and a bigger far-left flank. Gov. Jared Polis, also a Democrat, has indicated his wariness over such a ban.

    Last year, a similar bill died in committee, with some Democratic lawmakers citing concerns over the sweep of a ban and promises they made to their constituents to avoid government overreach affecting most gun owners’ rights.

    Democrats last year passed and Polis signed into law four less-expansive gun control bills. Those included raising the age for buying any gun from 18 to 21; establishing a three-day waiting period between the purchase and receipt of a gun; strengthening the state’s red flag law; and rolling back some legal protections for the firearms industry, exposing it to lawsuits from the victims of gun violence.

    Those laws were signed months after five people were killed at an LGBTQ+ nightclub in Colorado Springs last year. Soon, the state will mark the 25th anniversary of the 1999 Columbine High School shooting that killed 13 people. Other mass shootings in Colorado include 12 people killed in 2012 at an Aurora movie theater and 10 people killed in 2021 at a Boulder supermarket.

    “This is the state where the modern era of the mass shooting began with Columbine,” Democratic Rep. Javier Mabrey said in urging fellow lawmakers to join other states that ban semiautomatic weapons.

    Republicans decried the legislation as an onerous encroachment on the U.S. Constitution’s Second Amendment. They argued that mental illness and people who do not value life — not guns — are the issues that should be addressed. People with ill intent can use other weapons, such as knives, to harm others, they argued.

    Democrats responded that semiautomatic weapons can cause much more damage in a short period of time.

    “In Aurora, when the shooter walked in that theater and opened fire,” Mabrey said, “and in less than 90 seconds shot up a room full of people. That cannot be done with a knife, that can’t be done with a knife.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • House seeks more money for MBTA upgrades

    House seeks more money for MBTA upgrades

    [ad_1]

    BOSTON — House Democrats are seeking hundreds of millions of dollars more for MBTA upgrades and workforce needs as part of their annual spending plan.

    The House’s version of the budget unveiled Wednesday calls for spending what legislative leaders described as a “record” $555 million for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority in the next fiscal year and an additional $184 million for regional transit systems that operate across the state.

    House Speaker Ron Mariano said the “historic” level of spending “will allow the new leadership at the T to meet the immense challenges that they face head on.”

    “Given the workforce recruitment and training challenges that have plagued the MBTA, I am particularly proud of the House’s proposal to establish an MBTA Academy that would help to bolster their workforce development efforts,” the Quincy Democrat said in a statement.

    House leaders said the spending plan for the fiscal year that begins July 1 would be funded in part by revenue from the state’s new “millionaire’s tax,” a voter-approved law that set a 4% surtax on incomes above $1 million.

    “Having a well-run transit system is critical to the success of the commonwealth,” House Committee on Ways and Means Chair Aaron Michlewitz, D-Boston, said in a statement. “This record amount of funding shows the House’s commitment to improving our transportation infrastructure in every area of the commonwealth.”

    The House plan earmarks $314 million for direct operating costs at the MBTA, $184 million for the state’s 15 regional transit authorities, and $75 million for MBTA capital investments.

    The plan also calls for spending $40 million to create an MBTA academy to oversee recruiting and training efforts, and create a pipeline for skilled workers.

    An additional $20 million would be set aside for reduced fares for riders with low incomes, which was recently approved by the MBTA’s board of directors.

    The low-income fare program is expected to cost $60 million a year and Gov. Maura Healey has proposed $45 million in funding from the “millionaire’s tax” in her fiscal 2025 budget proposal. Members of an advisory board that recommended approval of the plan also cautioned that the state does not have a dedicated source of funding.

    The move to pump more taxpayer money into the state’s beleaguered public transit system comes as the MBTA wrestles with projected budget deficits driven by a mountain of debt, some dating back to the Big Dig project.

    T officials estimate the transit agency’s operating deficit for the next fiscal year is $182 million, which is projected to grow to $859 million by 2029.

    Meanwhile, the MBTA said it would need about $24.5 billion to bring the system into a state of “good repair” by replacing tracks, facilities, power equipment, trains and other infrastructure.

    Healey attributes the deficit to a lack of investment in the system over decades and said she wants to make “transformative investments” to improve service and reliability. She touted $250 million in MBTA funding in her $56.1 billion budget proposal unveiled in January.

    Lawmakers are expected to file hundreds of proposed amendments to the House’s spending package, the fate of which will be debated in closed-door leadership negotiations.

    The budget would also need to be approved by the state Senate before heading to Healey’s desk for review.

    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