The legislative session in the MA State House ends this Sunday. That’s right: whatever doesn’t happen between now and Sunday will have to wait until next year.
But we know that so many things can’t wait.
Email Your State Legislators: MA Needs the HOMES Act
Last week, the Senate passed the HOMES Actas part of its economic development bill.
The moment that an eviction case is filed, a tenant has an eviction record for life. These eviction records are unfairly held against people when they try to rent a new place. Tenants should be able to seal their eviction record when they have done nothing wrong, when they pay what they owe, or when their case is dismissed or resolved.
The HOMES Act language will protect many tenants from being unfairly marked with an eviction record and would establish a fair process for tenants to petition the court on a case-by-case basis.
The Senate and House are right now working on reconciling the differences between the House and Senate bills.
The House did not include this essential tenant protection in their bill, and it’s vital that the HOMES Act remains in the final package.
Last Thursday, the House and Senate passed climate legislation that, among other things, invests in off-shore wind and solar energy, accelerates the transition to electric vehicles, and ends renewable energy credits for wood-burning power plants (read our write-up here).
Please get this important legislation over the finish line! Urge Governor Baker to sign the bill ASAP with no changes.
Call Governor Baker at 617-725-4005 or (toll-free) 888-870-7770
Sample message:
“Hi, my name is ________ and I live in _____________. I urge the Governor to sign the climate bill into law as soon as possible, with no changes. I support ending clean energy subsidies for woody biomass. It’s crazy to burn wood for electricity.”
The following summary was written in conjunction with Jess Nahigian and Veena Dharmaraj from the Massachusetts Sierra Club and adapted from the overview done by the Mass Power Forward coalition (done by Jess — s/o again) and materials produced by the Legislature.
Last Thursday, the MA House and Senate finally came to an agreement on climate legislation this year: An Act driving clean energy and offshore wind (H.5060).
The bill was the conclusion of negotiations between the House and Senate merging two bills passed earlier this year that varied significantly in scope. In early March, the House passed a bill focused on offshore wind. In April, the MA Senate passed a more comprehensive bill focused on clean energy, buildings, and transportation electrification (See a write-up here).
The bill passed the House 146 to 7, with the only NO votes coming from Republicans Donnie Berthiaume, Nicholas Boldyga, Angelo D’Emilia, Marc Lombardo, Norman Orrall, Kelly Pease, and Alyson Sullivan. It passed the Senate 38 to 2, with Senators Ryan Fattman and Patrick O’Connor voting no.
The bill includes many strong provisions, as detailed below, and some notable omissions. Disappointingly, the bill omitted several large financial investments as well as language about air quality monitoring. Additionally, the transportation policy and building emissions reduction policy were limited in scope. The transportation section of the bill remains limited to electrification, rather than exploring ways to expand public transit usage (as well as biking/walking) and reducing the number of automobiles on the road in the first place (a limitation more of the reach of the original Senate bill than of the negotiations). The buildings emissions portion of the bill falls short of creating the investment and infrastructure to decarbonize buildings at the 100,000 building per year scale identified as necessary in the state’s pathway to decarbonization by 2050.
Now the bill must go to the governor’s desk, where he has until July 31 to pass it, send it back with revisions, or veto it.
Offshore Wind
Establishes a Massachusetts Offshore Wind Industry Investment Program, administered by the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center (MassCEC), consisting of annual tax incentives, grants, loans, and other investments
Creates the Massachusetts Offshore Wind Industry Investment Trust Fund to promote the manufacture of domestic supply chain components of the offshore wind industry; stimulate increased financing for permanent manufacturing facilities; advance clean energy research, technology, and innovation; and prepare individuals for offshore wind careers by supporting workforce training
Removes the price cap for new offshore wind projects, which requires each new project to offer power at a lower price than its predecessor, if there are fewer than three bidders.
Gives preference to offshore wind bids from companies that invest in local manufacturing, provide employment opportunities for underrepresented populations, adopt good labor practices, and mitigate environmental impacts, and takes utilities out of the bid selection process.
Establishes a commercial fisheries commission to provide input on best practices for avoiding, minimizing, and mitigating impacts to wildlife related to offshore wind
Solar Energy
Allows agricultural and horticultural land to be used to site solar panels and establishes a commission to study the deployment of these “dual use sites” while minimizing ecosystem and agricultural impact
Removes net metering constraints on solar up to 25kw and removes smaller solar arrays from the net metering cap
Other Renewable Energy Measures
Prevents wood-burning biomass power plants from qualifying for renewable energy incentives in the Renewable Portfolio Standard Program but, lamentably, does not exclude it from other incentive programs
Directs a study of the advantages and disadvantages of a regional or multi-state clean energy market
Enhances regional collaboration by allowing the Commonwealth to coordinate with nearby states on clean energy solicitation and transmission
Shifting Utilities Away from Fossil Fuels
Requires utility companies to proactively and regularly submit plans to upgrade the transmission and distribution grid, as overseen by a new grid modernization advisory council (the council lacks the public input requirements in the Senate plan).to improve reliability and resilience and accommodate the shift to renewables
Reduces incentives for fossil fuels by limiting ratepayer-funded efficiency programs from incentivizing fossil fuel equipment starting in 2025
Establishes a grid modernization advisory council (but without the public input requirements in the Senate bill) and requires distribution companies to submit regular modernization plans
Creates a working group to develop recommendations for regulatory and legislative changes necessary to align our pipeline replacement program (GSEP) with the state’s climate goals
Requires additional scrutiny of the utility-controlled investigation into the “future of gas”
Paves the way for expanded use of renewable thermal energy, including geothermal networks
Workforce
Ensures clean energy workforce development programs include workers in impacted and disadvantaged communities
Expands and develops workforce development programs in clean energy, particularly wind
Buildings
Requires an assessment of K-12 schools with an eye toward improving efficiency, air quality
Allows 10 municipalities to pilot fossil-free new and major renovations, but with newly added specifications that exclude life science labs and health care facilities, and requires any participating community to (a) meet the 10% affordable housing target set by state law (chapter 40B) or (b) have approved a zoning ordinance permitting multi-family housing by-right in at least one area
Requires that large buildings (20,000 sq. ft. and larger, more expansive than the Senate’s original 25,000 sq. ft. and larger) report their energy usage annually, and allows only Boston and Cambridge to set their own building energy reporting requirements (as opposed to allowing any city/town to do so, as in the Senate bill)
Increases public accountability and reporting requirements to ensure utilities are providing efficiency services to low-income ratepayers and households
Transportation
Provides up to $5000 in point-of-sale rebates for the purchase of electric passenger cars and light duty vehicles less than $55,000, with an additional $1500 rebate for low-income individuals. Rebates of at least $4500 for medium and heavy duty electric vehicles and for those trading in their internal combustion engine vehicle
Calls for the MBTA bus fleet to be all-electric by 2040 (with no more fossil-fuel buses purchased after 2030)and prioritizes deployment on routes that go through underserved communities (Note that environmental groups advocated for full electrification by 2030, and that the Senate bill had “no new non-electric purchases” after 2028)
Mandates all new cars sold in the state to be zero-emission starting 2035
Creates aninteragency coordinating Council to develop and implementa plan for deploying EV charging infrastructure in an equitable and accessible manner and establishes a Charging Infrastructure Deployment Fund
Mandates off-peak rates for EV charging and requires distribution companies to submit proposals for time-of-use rates
Requires the Department of Public Utilities (DPU) to develop vehicle electrification and GHG emission regulations for ride-hailing companies like Uber and Lyft)
Requires MasDOT to provide technical and funding assistance to help Regional Transit Authorities electrify their fleets
Requires MassDOT to install EV charging stations at all service plazas on the MA Turnpike, at least five commuter rail and subway stations, and at least one ferry terminal.
Requires the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education (DESE) and the Department of Energy Resources (DOER) to conduct a study on electrifying our school bus fleet
A Few Notable Omissions
Unlike the Senate bill, the final bill did not contain the following:
Banning competitive electricity suppliers, who often prey on the most vulnerable, from operating in Massachusetts
Increasing publicly available air quality monitoring and directing the state to establish baseline air quality in air pollution hotspots and corridors
Teeing up a successor to the state’s SMART solar program that favors development in the built environment
Interim and full electrification targets for the commuter rail system
Allocating $100 million to the Electric Vehicle Adoption Incentive Trust Fund; $50 million to the Charging Infrastructure Deployment Fund; and $100 million toward Clean Energy Investment Fund from the Senate bill (Funding for these programs is in the Economic development bill under consideration by the legislature)
Authorizing all public pensions, with the exception of the state employees retirement system, the state teachers retirement system, and the State Boston retirement system, to divest from any investment in fossil fuel companies
And a Few Red Flags…
Expands the definition of clean energy for Massachusetts Clean Energy Center research purposes to include “renewable biofuels, renewable biodegradable chemicals, advanced thermal-to-energy conversion, fusion energy, hydrogen produced by non-fossil fuel sources and methods, and carbon capture and sequestration”
Allows existing (grandfathered) anaerobic digestors to qualify for clean peak standard
Includes biofuels, “green” hydrogen, landfill gas, “low-emission advanced biomass power conversion technologies” are called “innovations” in the list of technologies eligible for educational grants
Thank you for taking swift action in support of reproductive justice after the Supreme Court’s recent shameful and misguided ruling in Dobbs. When rights are under attack on the national level, it is important for Massachusetts to send a clear message that we will not only protect but also strengthen rights here at home—as well as serve as a model to other states.
Progressive Massachusetts would like to emphasize the importance of several provisions in S.3003 and H.4954.
Provider Protections: S.3003 and H.4954 will both establish critical protections for those in Massachusetts who provide or help someone access reproductive health care and gender-affirming care. These provisions state unequivocally that access to reproductive health care and gender-affirming care are rights secured by the constitution and laws of the Commonwealth. This language takes steps to protect defendants from abusive litigation based on such care, ensures that officials in the Commonwealth will not voluntarily facilitate investigations or lawsuits into such care, and offers protections to providers who may face impacts on their professional license or medical malpractice insurance premiums as repercussions of abusive litigation.
Medication Abortion: Thousands of college students in Massachusetts currently live in “access deserts” where the nearest abortion provider is hours away via public transit, if accessible at all. Language adopted by an amendment from Sen. Lewis to S.3003 will ensure that public college students can access medication abortion in the early stage of pregnancy at the locations where they already receive other reproductive health care services—at their campus health center. We wouldn’t accept having to travel over four hours for a dentist appointment. Abortion care shouldn’t be any different.
Delivering on the Promise of the ROE Act: We must do everything we can to ensure pregnant patients can access compassionate care in our Commonwealth. In a post-Roe reality, it is simply not safe for a patient at any stage of pregnancy to have to travel out of state to access an abortion provider. To this end, we urge you to realize the full intent of the ROE Act by clarifying the statutory framework for abortion care after 24 weeks to ensure no one is forced to travel out of state for care.
The Massachusetts state primary is now less than 7 weeks away: Tuesday, September 6. And the general election is less than 16 weeks away: Tuesday, November 8.
With those dates rapidly approaching, we are proud to release our second group of legislative endorsements for this cycle.
Curious about our process?
You can find all of the comprehensive questionnaires we have received from candidates this cycle so far here and here.
We encourage our chapters to vote on endorsements first so that we can align and amplify their work.
As we believe in the importance of small “d” democracy, all of our endorsements get voted on by our members, and candidates must receive at least 60% of the vote for an endorsement.
This list will be growing soon! We are planning to release more endorsements in the coming weeks, so stay tuned.
But now the endorsees….
7th Essex: Manny Cruz
Manny Cruz is a member of the School Committee in Salem and brings an impressive background in public service. He was formerly the Chair of the Governor’s State Wide Youth Council and a legislative staffers to both Representative Matias. He is currently the Advocacy Director at Latinos for Education, through which he created the Educator Diversity Coalition and helped found the MA Alliance for Early College. He has been a strong advocate for the environment, public education, and reproductive justice, and he has been endorsed by our new Salem chapter.
Margareth Shepard is a former Framingham City Councilor and was the first Brazilian immigrant elected to a City Council in the US, and she has been endorsed by our Framingham chapter. She has served as a member of the MetroWest Commission on the Status of Women, Chair of the Massachusetts Brazilian Citizens Council, secretary of the Brazilian American Center, and board member of the Brazilian Women’s Group, and she founded Brazilians for Political Education to increase voter registration and civic engagement. In these roles, and in her role as a Councilor, she was a major advocate for the Work & Family Mobility Act and a reliable ally for progressives in Framingham.
Where’s the District? Framingham (Precincts 1-8, 9B, 10-16)
Learn More: https://www.margarethforstaterep.com/
9th Middlesex: Heather May
Heather May is an educator at Emerson College, teaching classes in public speaking, debate, mental health, and healthcare policy as well as a community activist in Waltham. Having been active in the push to unionize the non-tenured faculty at Emerson, she understands the value of organizing (something the House certainly needs), and she is running on strong progressive policies and the need for systemic change in the MA House. She is challenging an incumbent with a record of voting in lockstep with the Speaker, if not worse (given the incumbent’s opposition to the 2020 police reform bill).
Zoe Dzineku brings the experiences as an immigrant, a small business owner, a single mother, and a community organizer. As Chair of the Lowell Election Commission, she successfully fought back the City’s attempt to reduce the number of polling locations in the first election with newly drawn Council districts. She has been involved in community organizing with the African community in the Merrimack Valley and with the Merrimack Valley Project, fighting for racial and economic justice. She has channeled that work in her role as a well-regarded Director of Constituent Services in the State Senate. Solidarity Lowell endorsed her, and we are proud to as well.
Tara Hong is a Cambodian immigrant and a community activist in Lowell. He is the Civic Engagement Coordinator at the Cambodian Mutual Assistance Association, where he has worked on voter education and community empowerment. He serves on the board of the Lowell Litter Krewe and Mill City Grows, making sure Lowell is a more sustainable and equitable city. He is running on a strong progressive platform, rooted in transparency, affordable housing, and bold climate action, and he is challenging an incumbent who has voted lockstep with the Speaker (if not worse, given the incumbent’s votes against police reform). Solidarity Lowell endorsed him, and we are proud to as well.
Teresa English is a public school teacher in Lawrence with a lifelong commitment to public service. She is running to fight for increased aid for public schools, bold climate action, stronger worker protections, and a Massachusetts where people can afford to live at any stage of their life. She understands the importance of investing in the future of the Commonwealth and ensuring that government is accessible to the public. She is challenging a Republican incumbent who has one of the most conservative records in the entire State House. Solidarity Lowell endorsed her, and we are proud to as well.
Where’s the District? Billerica
Learn More: https://www.voteteresaenglish.org/
6th Norfolk: Tamisha Civil
Tamisha Civil combines a history of community involvement and strong progressive values. She has been a legal advocate for women and children impacted by domestic violence, a Commissioner for the Eastern Regional Commission on the Status of Women, a committee member for the Diversity and Inclusion for the Massachusetts Trial Court, a volunteer of the Stoughton’s Energy & Sustainability Committee, and a board member of Canton Residents for Sustainable Equitable Future (CR4SEF). She is running against a conservative Democratic incumbent who has opposed the Fair Share Amendment as well as police reform legislation.
Where’s the District? Avon, Canton, Stoughton
Learn More: https://www.tamishacivil.com/
15th Norfolk: Raul Fernandez
Raul Fernandez has been an impressive local leader in the fight for more progressive municipal government, expanding the vision of what’s possible. As a member of the Select Board in Brookline, he chaired the Task Force to Reimagine Policing in Brookline, leading a community process to imagine a crisis response system that puts mental health and well-being first. At Boston University, where he is a lecturer, he co-developed the course “Identity, Inclusion & Social Action,” which helps students to examine systems of oppression and identify opportunities to work toward social justice, and he is a Board Member of the Racial Imbalance Advisory Council at the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education. Through both lived and professional experience, Raul understands the urgency of action on the many crises the Commonwealth faces and the need for systemic change to address them.
Where’s the District? Brookline (Precincts 1-4, 5A, 6-12, 17)
Did you know that the current legislative session at the MA State House ends in just two weeks?
That’s right: any bills that don’t pass between now and July 31st are done until next year (at the earliest).
That means that there will be a flurry of activity in the coming weeks, and we want to keep you in the loop.
Stop the MA Legislature from Giving Massive Tax Breaks to the Wealthiest Estates
The Massachusetts tax system hits the wallets of lower-income people harder than high earners, with the bottom 20% of earners paying a higher percentage of their income in state and local taxes than the top 1%. An exception is the Commonwealth’s relatively robust estate tax. The estate tax is one of the main policies we have focused on reducing the gaping racial wealth gap in Massachusetts.
Nonetheless, the Massachusetts House voted last week to roll back the estate tax, to the cost of $207 million. This lost revenue means money isn’t available for important investments or for tax relief for the struggling residents of the Commonwealth.
Even worse, the estate tax rollback was designed in a way that disproportionately benefits the largest estates, namely those over $3 million. This would be the biggest increase in the racial wealth gap in decades.
If legislators want to help comparatively smaller estates, they should design their design their policies to do so, not advance a costly giveaway to the wealthiest estates.
A climate bill is in the works, but it hasn’t reached the Governor’s desk yet. Together, the provisions laid forth in the House and Senate proposed bills put Massachusetts in a good position to implement strategies to reduce our emissions 50% by 2030 – as required by law – and create healthier communities.
But these strategies cannot wait two years more to be passed into law! Let’s ensure that lawmakers finalize a climate bill that moves us toward our shared climate and justice goals.
The conference committee and House and Senate leaders must send a bill to the Governor’s deskby Thursday, July 21 to avoid the chance of a pocket veto by Governor Baker.
Your legislators need to hear from you: no climate bill is not an option! Advocates are circulating a public sign-on letter for legislators to show their support for moving this forward swiftly. Your legislators need to hear from you that it’s important they demonstrate support!!
Take action!
Check if your legislators have signed onto the letter
If not, send your legislators a message asking them to sign on – either by emailing them or calling them.
Email
Dear _________
I am alarmed to hear that, in the final days of the legislative session, a comprehensive climate bill is still not on the governor’s desk. We have very little time before the end of the session.
[why passing a climate and justice bill is important to you]
We must get a climate bill to the governor’s desk by Thursday. Please join me in voicing your support for swift passage by signing on to this public “Dear Colleague” letter.
Thank you,
Call
I’m calling to voice concern that the legislature has still not passed a climate bill this session. Climate advocates are circulating a public sign-on letter for legislators in support of quickly moving a bill. Has the Representative/Senator seen the letter? You can view the form and the letter at bit.ly/maclimate22. Will the Representative/Senator sign on?
If yes: Wonderful, thank you. They can use the sign-on form found in the letter
If not sure/need to get back to you: Please let me know what the legislator says.
Yesterday, the Massachusetts Legislature released their economic development bill, a mix of investments and tax reforms. While there are many parts of the bill that are welcome and overdue, the Legislature misses the mark on others.
No Excuse for Excluding Those Most in Need from Rebates
The economic development bill includes a provision to send one-time taxpayer rebates of $250 (or $500 for married couples) to individuals who reported between $38,000 and $100,000 in income (or up to $150,000 for joint filers) in 2021 as a way of blunting the impact of inflation on households.
But what about those with less than $38,000? Speaker Mariano argued that such individuals already received support through essential worker bonuses earlier this year, but if anyone could benefit from additional money right now in our increasingly unaffordable state, it is those who have the least.
Rep. Tami Gouveia’s Amendment #813 would eliminate this income floor.
Regressive Tax Cuts
All in all, the bill spends $523.5 million through tax policy changes. $207 million of that (almost 40%) will go to more affluent residents—an estimated 2,500 taxpayers.
That’s because of a change to the estate tax in the bill. Currently, the estate tax kicks in for estates valued $1 million or more (with a graduated rate above that), with a “cliff” effect leading to the whole value of the estate being taxed after that $1 million.
Rep. Erika Uyterhoeven’s Amendment #621 would eliminate the estate tax language entirely and send the House back to the drawing board for a better proposal and Amendment #630 would would eliminate the cliff effect while preserving the progressive nature of the estate tax.
A Whiff on Housing Policy
In last year’s economic development bill, the Legislature included important zoning reforms and tenant protections. The economic development bill is one of the last chances for the Legislature to continue that work, and they missed that opportunity — a stunning decision as this state becomes increasingly unaffordable.
Rep. Mike Connolly filed several amendments to address this gap in the bill:
Amendment #26: Increase rental deduction to $5,000, which increases the rental deductions from $4,000 to $5,000.
Amendment #113: Simple-majority approval standard for inclusionary zoning ordinances, which would enable municipalities to approve inclusionary zoning ordinances by simple majority vote
Amendment #176: Local Option Real Estate Transfer Fee for Housing Affordability, which would enable municipalities to pass locally appropriate transfer fees on high-end real estate transactions to create dedicated funds for affordable housing
The national discourse around inflation tends to leave out major sources of rising costs facing individuals and families across the Commonwealth and the whole country: the spiraling costs of child care and housing.
Fortunately, the MA Senate is planning to vote on a bill this Thursday that represents a substantial step toward implementing a vision of a high-quality early education and child care system that is affordable and accessible for all families. You can read the Common Start Coalition’s statement on the bill here.
Let’s talk about housing for a moment too. There are less than four weeks left in the Legislative Session, and we need action–fast.
The Housing Crisis Requires Every Tool in the Toolbox
CONTEXT: At the end of the last legislative session, the MA Legislature passed an economic development bill that included several key provisions to address the housing crisis in Massachusetts:
Reducing the voting threshold to a simple majority for smart growth zoning and affordable housing
Requiring cities and towns served by the MBTA to create at least 1 district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted as of right because transit-oriented development is good for equity and for the environment (“MBTA communities”)
Allowing municipalities the option of providing tenants in multi-family buildings the right to match a third-party offer when their homes are being sold, a key tool for preserving affordable housing stock (“tenant opportunity to purchase”)
Creating a process to seal eviction records for no-fault evictions, as eviction records can stay with tenants for life and make it prohibitive to find stable housing
But, on all four fronts, the work is unfinished.
A 2/3 majority approval threshold is still required for municipalities to adopt inclusionary zoning ordinances that would require a certain percentage of new construction be affordable.
The MBTA communities requirement lacks an enforcement mechanism, and it is too limited in application.
Charlie Baker VETOED the two pro-tenant proposals, and because the legislative session had already ended, the Legislature could not override him.
OPPORTUNITY: The Legislature is going to be passing another economic development bill in the final weeks of the session, and it’s essential that that bill finish the work of last year’s bill. And it’s essential that the Legislature doesn’t wait until the last minute to pass it.
H.1448: An Act Relative to Housing Production, which would lower the threshold for municipalities to approve inclusionary zoning ordinances, require multi-family zoning around public transportation and other suitable locations, and facilitate the conversion of underutilized public land and vacant commercial properties for housing
H.1426: An Act to guarantee a tenant’s first right of refusal, which would let cities and towns adopt “tenant opportunity to purchase” ordinances that can preserve affordable rental housing stock, provide a mechanism for tenant associations to collectively purchase their buildings, and stabilize low-income households.
H. 4505: An Act promoting housing opportunity and mobility through eviction sealing (HOMES), which would create a process for the sealing of no-fault eviction records
On Thursday, the MA Senate passed two bills to advance the “justice” component of our criminal justice system.
First, the Senate voted 31 to 9 to reform the civil asset forfeiture system, raising the legal bar that law enforcement must meet to seize and keep people’s money and property in suspected drug crimes. MA currently allows DAs the lowest legal burden of proof to keep property that’s seized, even when charges are never filed, and we’re the only state to do so.
The Senate also rejected 29 to 10 an amendment from Senator Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) to strip the language of the bill that would create a right to counsel for (1) defendants in related criminal cases (regardless of indigency) and (2) defendants in cases where there’s no related criminal case and who meet the indigency standard.
Unfortunately, however, the Senate, on voice vote, adopted an amendment from Senator John Keenan (D-Quincy) to strip language from the bill that would have prevented funds seized through civil asset forfeiture from going to local police departments and DA offices and allocated them to the general fund instead. Allowing police departments and DA’s offices to keep the money creates a perverse set of incentives and also enables them to use the money for propaganda purposes.
The Senate also voted 32 to 8 to pass a bill (S.2942) that would increase opportunities for judicial diversion for youth.
Bruce Tarr (R-Gloucester) roll-called three amendments to limit the scope of the bill.
The first was to eliminate options for diversion for a long list of offenses. It failed 30 to 9, with Senators Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Anne Gobi (D-Spencer), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), Marc Pacheco (D-Taunton), Walter Timilty (D-Milton), and John Velis (D-Westfield) joining the 3 Republicans in voting for the amendment.
His second was to strip the offense of “assault and battery with a dangerous weapon” from the list of offenses for which diversion would be an option. This offense, as Citizens for Juvenile Justice explain in an earlier link, is widely invoked, with things like eggs or lotion having been called “dangerous weapons” in past cases. It failed 26 to 12. The aforementioned 9 were joined by Sen. Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough), and Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford).
His third amendment, to limit diversion opportunities to only a first offense, was defeated 33 to 6, with only Finegold, Montigny, and Pacheco joining Republicans.
Dear Chair Michlewitz, Chair Rodrigues, and members of the Committee:
I am writing on behalf of Progressive Massachusetts to thank you for your support of legislation that would keep families connected by eliminating the cost of phone calls for those who are incarcerated and for their loved ones. As you and the other members of the Conference Committee consider the FY23 budget reports, we urge you to consider that, to truly keep families connected, calls should be free, fully funded, and guaranteed.
We are proud to be among the 70 organizations, including legal service providers, public defenders, social workers, bar associations, and directly-affected people, that have advocated for No Cost Calls. We recognize that criminal legal reform is a racial justice issue and that mass incarceration disproportionately affects Black and Brown communities and people living in poverty. We understand that families often have to choose between staying connected to an incarcerated loved one and paying for necessities like rent or food—or risk going into debt.
We urge you to include the following essential pieces in the ultimate budget language:
Guaranteed Telephone Access
Currently, Massachusetts jails and prisons do not restrict how many minutes incarcerated people can talk to their loved ones each day. Calls are only limited by the cost. The Legislature must ensure that this current level of contact does not decrease once calls are free. Both the House and the Senate have approved language that aims to avoid new restrictions on access to phone calls. We urge you to bar any new caps on calls in order to maintain continuity and to guarantee at least 120 minutes per person per day.
Funding of Communication Services
We strongly support the House language creating a $20M Trust Fund dedicated to communication services. Upon proof of expenditures, the Fund would reimburse prisons and jails for their spending on communication services. That Trust Fund should be in the final FY23 budget, to take effect this year.
Prohibition on Commissions
Both the House and Senate budgets address site commissions, i.e., payments made by phone companies to jails and prisons, taken from revenue paid by consumers. While some Sheriffs have said they need this money to provide programs, the House and Senate have agreed that low-income telephone consumers should not pay for programs in the jails and prisons. Instead, the Sheriffs should seek such funding through their budget requests, with full transparency and accountability, and the Legislature should ban site commissions.
Start Date
Families have shouldered the financial hardship of paying the high costs of maintaining contact with their incarcerated loved ones for too long. We respectfully request that you include fully funded, guaranteed No Cost Calls in the final FY23 budget, to take effect this year.
