Category Archives: Legislature

We’re #1

Posted on August 1, 2014 | Comments Off on We’re #1

Email from Bill Massaro below.  I never knew the Governor had to have a schedule to sign bills. –

FYI-
Looks like the MSH bill is still on track for Governor’s signing on 8/2.  It has moved from being #6 on his desk on 7/28 to its current #1 position:

Daily Legislative Update

July 31, 2014 All Legislation on the Governor’s Desk

1.)  H. 4216, “An Act Authorizing the Commissioner of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance to Convey Certain Parcels of Land in the Town of Medfield

Sponsors: Rep. Garlick and Sen. Timility

Action Due: 08/02/2014

 

 

Bill

Comments Off on We’re #1

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital

MMA on new bills

Posted on August 1, 2014 | Comments Off on MMA on new bills

This alert today from the Massachusetts Municipal Association with a summary of the onslaught of legislation just passed before the legislative session ended at midnight last night –

Friday, August 1, 2014

LEGISLATURE ENDS ITS FORMAL SESSIONS

Lawmakers Work Past Midnight to Complete Action on Major Bills

The Following Bills Were Passed Last Night and are on the Governor’s Desk:

• Economic Development Bill
• Gun Violence Reduction Bill
• Local Housing Authority Reform Bill
• Environmental Bond Bill
• Water Infrastructure Finance Bill
• Solar Net Metering Bill
• Information Technology Bond Bill
• MMA Analyzing “Shift Swapping” Collective Bargaining Bill


With a midnight deadline looming on Thursday night, members of the House and Senate worked past that time into the early hours of Friday morning to enact dozens of bills, including several major pieces of legislation that had been the subject of extensive negotiation between the branches.  The Legislature’s rules set July 31 as the last day for formal sessions and roll call votes.  From August 1 until a new Legislature is seated in January 2015, the House and Senate can only meet in “informal” sessions to consider issues that have unanimous support and do not require recorded roll call votes.

Among the dozens and dozens of bills that received attention and action this week, six major bills passed that will impact cities and towns, and the MMA is analyzing a seventh bill that would add “shift swapping” to collective bargaining.  These measures are on the Governor’s Desk and will require his signature in order to become law.

ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL PROVIDES SOLID TOOLS FOR CITIES AND TOWNS
MMA Succeeds in Preserving Local Zoning and Permitting Authority for Wireless Antennas
Final Bill Omits the Proposal to Eliminate the Cap on Local Liquor Licenses

The final compromise economic development bill passed by the Legislature includes $10 million for Brownfields remediation, expands the successful I-Cubed infrastructure program and increases eligibility for the Economic Development Incentive Program, increases tax credits for the Housing Development Incentive Program from $5 million to $10 million and creates and capitalizes the Transformative Development Fund at $16 million for Gateway Cities, and retains broad eligibility standards for MassWorks grant funding.

In a major victory for the MMA and local officials, the Legislature rejected language that would have allowed the telecommunications industry to site wireless antennas in virtually any location regardless of local zoning.  This provision, which was included in the House bill and was not in the Senate version, was held in conference and did not become part of the final bill.  Thank you for your calls and letters to your legislators to maintain the fundamental right of local control of land use.

Unfortunately, the final compromise economic development bill passed by the Legislature does not lift the cap on the number of liquor licenses each municipality may issue, despite the strong support of the MMA and municipal leaders for this important economic development tool for local governments.  The Governor and Senate supported this important measure, but the House opposed it.  The MMA will continue fighting to return liquor licenses to local control in the next legislative session.  The bill did include changes reported in the media to allow Boston to appoint its own licensing board, and to add a limited number of licenses in Boston, provisions that originated in local legislation filed by the City.
Click here for a copy of the economic development bill
http://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4377

AN ACT RELATIVE TO THE REDUCTION OF GUN VIOLENCE
Final Bill Includes Major Program Expansions in Local School Districts
Discuss the Potential Impact with Your Superintendent as Soon as You Can

The media attention on the compromise gun violence legislation passed by lawmakers focused on the provision to allow police chiefs to go to court to prevent “unsuitable” individuals from accessing a firearms identification card for rifles and long guns.  However, the bill also contains a number of sections that apply to public schools and would add new responsibilities at the local level.  We urge you to immediately discuss the implications of the new mandates and programs in the gun control bill with your school superintendent to determine how the measure could impact your public schools and local budgets.

The law contains a Safe and Supportive Schools (S3) framework, which supporters claim will foster a “safe, positive, healthy, and inclusive whole-school learning environment.” DESE is required to develop guidelines and regulations outlining how the program should be implemented locally.  Cities, towns and school districts are not mandated to accept and implement the program, because the law stipulates that S3 must first be adopted by a vote of a school committee, and is subject to local appropriation.

The legislation does require that each school district must have at least one school resource officer and that each school possess a two-way radio communication device for use in communicating solely with police and fire departments in the event of an emergency, although these requirements are both subject to local appropriation. The MMA successfully advocated for the inclusion of language limiting potential legal liability for districts in both sections.

Under the bill, each school is required to create a mental health plan for its students, families, teachers, and administrators.  DESE is charged with developing the guidelines and requirements for implementation.  There is no state funding, and the program is a new mandate on cities, towns and school districts.  The MMA requested that this provision be held in conference because it is an unfunded mandate with major complexity, but the language remained in the final bill.  Similarly, each school must also provide suicide prevention training of at least 2 hours every 3 years for all licensed school personnel.  The MMA was successful in sponsoring language to limit legal liability for districts on both of these new requirements.

Click here for a copy of the gun violence prevention bill
http://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4376

HOUSING AUTHORITY REFORM

A compromise housing authority reform measure passed by the House and Senate would require the state Department of Housing and Community Development (DHCD) to create a comprehensive training program focused on proper management for all housing authority board members. Further, DHCD will be responsible for creating a performance-based monitoring program for all housing authorities. The bill establishes a program based on best practices in collaborative capital, maintenance, and repair planning, with participation required for those housing authorities with under 500 state-aided units. An annual plan will be required of each housing authority for submission to the state. Each housing authority must contract with an external auditor, but must not use the same auditor for more than 5 consecutive years without a waiver. DHCD will develop a voluntary regional public housing innovation program open to up to 4 regional housing authorities, with the goal of achieving innovative models for public housing development and management. DHCD will also implement a centralized waitlist for state-aided public housing within a year.

Click here for a copy of the housing authority bill
http://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4374

$2.2 BILLION ENVIRONMENTAL BOND BILL

The Legislature enacted a sweeping $2.2 billion environmental bond bill that includes a broad range of resources that cities and towns can access, if the Administration releases the funds under its capital plan.  The initiatives include: $49 million for dam removal and repair; $120 million for coastal infrastructure projects; $111 million for urban parks; increases in conservation tax credits to facilitate local land preservation; and a provision sponsored by Sen. Richard Moore to require DEP to report to the Legislature on the costs created by the new Sustainable Water Management Initiative (SWMI) regulations.

Click here for a copy of the environmental bond bill
http://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4375

WATER INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE BILL

The Legislature’s water infrastructure finance bill would add $50 million to the state revolving loan fund administered by the Water Pollution Abatement Trust (now renamed the Clean Water Trust).  Currently, the SRF program is capped at $88 million a year, and the bill would raise the program up to $138 million.  In the past, the WPAT did not release all available funds, and this legislation requires the state to release at least 80% to cities and towns. Further, the program will provide subsidized loans and/or principal forgiveness to more communities due to the increased capacity.  The bill also includes, at local option, the ability for communities to assess up to a 3% property tax surcharge to raise funds for water infrastructure related projects.  Unfortunately, the final bill did not include “water banking,” an innovative funding mechanism that would allow communities to create additional capacity for economic growth by charging fees to fund necessary water and sewer infrastructure improvements for new developments.  The Senate included water banking in its version of the bill, but the House, under pressure from the development community, balked and with time running out in the session, the measure did not remain in the bill.  The MMA will continue to prioritize this important tool.

Click here for a copy of the water infrastructure finance bill
http://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/Senate/S2342

SOLAR NET METERING BILL

Cities and towns have been very successful in promoting important solar energy projects, so successful that municipalities are now being stalled because of the statutory limit in the amount of solar energy that can be returned to the grid or sold to the utilities.  The statutory cap on “net metering” needs to be lifted in order to make additional solar projects viable.  Municipalities, environmentalists and solar developers joined forces to remove the cap on solar net metering, but some large utilities resisted strongly.  In the end, the Legislature passed a compromise bill that would offer a temporary solution by raising the net metering cap by enough to allow those municipal projects that have been stalled to now go forward.  However, it is expected that this problem will re-emerge next year, which will renew calls for a permanent solution.

Click here for a copy of the solar net metering bill
http://malegislature.gov/Bills/188/House/H4385

MMA ANALYZING “SHIFT SWAPPING” COLLECTIVE BARGAINING BILL

With breakneck speed, the Legislature acted in the final hours of the session to pass S. 1218, Sen. Ken Donnelly’s bill that would make shift swapping a subject of collective bargaining under Chapter 150E of the General Laws.  The bill was strongly supported by the fire unions, and had been lodged in the Senate Ways and Means Committee until the last day of the session.  The bill simply includes “employee and employee exchange of tours” in the list of items subject to collective bargaining under section 7 of Chapter 150E.  The MMA is analyzing the potential impact, and expressing its concern over the measure with the Governor’s office.

Comments Off on MMA on new bills

Posted in Legislature, Massachusetts Municipal Association

MSH legislation scheduled for signing 8/2

Posted on July 29, 2014 | Comments Off on MSH legislation scheduled for signing 8/2

Email from Bill Massaro about the Medfield State Hospital land urchase bill being lined up on teh Governor’s desk for signing on 8/2/14.  Who knew that bills get assigned signing dates a week in advance.

FYI,

Here  is the link to legislation on the Governor’s desk:

http://www.mass.gov/governor/legislationeexecorder/update/

 

According to the latest (7/28) posting, the MSH Purchase is scheduled for action on August 2.

On the Governor’s Desk

Update on legislation on the Governor’s desk for review and action.

All Legislation on the Governor’s Desk

6.  H. 4216, “An Act Authorizing the Commissioner of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance to Convey Certain Parcels of Land in the Town of Medfield”

                       Sponsors: Rep. Garlick and Sen. Timility

                        Action Due: 08/02/2014

Bill

 

Comments Off on MSH legislation scheduled for signing 8/2

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital

MSH purchase passed

Posted on July 23, 2014 | Comments Off on MSH purchase passed

Both branches of the legislature within the past hour passed the legislation to allow the Town of Medfield to buy the Medfield Sate Hospital site.   John Nunnari tracks things at the legislature for the architects, and has an alert for bill passage (a copy of John’s email trail appears below).  John Harney also had a call from Senator Timilty to advise once the Senate had passed the bill.

Now just the Governor’s signature is needed, and the purchase can then happen soon.

7/23/2014 2:35PM
RE: HB4216
Nunnari, John
===========================================================
Senate just enacted.

The bill will now be placed before the Governor.

john
From: MassTrac Bill Action Alert [mailto:noreply@instatrac.com]
Sent: Wednesday, July 23, 2014 2:02 PM
To: John Nunnari
Subject: HB4216

HB4216<http://www.instatrac.com/Class_Controller_Main.php?value=219356&type=billma&loadtype=main&email=true&gt; – House Ways and Means – An Act authorizing the commissioner of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance to convey certain parcels of land in the town of Medfield
Action: 07/23/14 – H – Enacted in the House (148/0)

Comments Off on MSH purchase passed

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital

MSH bill passage can come any day now

Posted on July 23, 2014 | Comments Off on MSH bill passage can come any day now

Passage of the legislation to allow Medfield to purchase the former Medfield State Hospital site from the state may be passed any day now, but reportedly before the end of the month when this legislative session ends.

Bill Massaro’s emailed status update on the legislation appears below.  John Harney reported to me last night that from his regular discussions with Senator Timilty, that passage can happen any day now, just depending upon the press of the many other bills seeking action before the legislature’s session ends on July 31.

Update from the MA Legislature website this afternoon

 
Date Branch Action
6/23/2014 House Reported from the committee on House Ways and Means
6/23/2014 House Pending new draft of H4107
6/23/2014 House New draft of H4107
6/23/2014 House Ordered to a third reading
6/26/2014 House Read third and passed to be engrossed
6/27/2014 Senate Read; and referred to the committee on Senate Ways and Means
7/21/2014 Senate Committee recommended ought to pass
7/21/2014 Senate Rules suspended
7/21/2014 Senate Read second, ordered to a third reading, read third and passed to be engrossed
7/22/2014 House Emergency preamble adopted
7/22/2014 Senate Emergency preamble adopted

My understanding of engrossment is that it is the final reconciliation of amendments made as the bill progressed through House & Senate.

 

The original draft’s Emergency Preamble had been deleted in error at some point in its earlier progress thru the House.   The  House (Denise Garlick) subsequently amended the bill  to add the Emergency Preamble back in.. According to the MA Legislature website, this was the only amendment made..

 

As I understand the process, next step is preparation of the the legislative document for final pasage.  This passage is via 2/3 approvals in  roll call votes  in the House and Senate.  As reported yesterday, passage could be any day now…

 

Bill

Comments Off on MSH bill passage can come any day now

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital

MSH purchase bill passed

Posted on July 21, 2014 | Comments Off on MSH purchase bill passed

Email this afternoon from Bill Massaro about the special legislation to purchase the former Medfield State Hospital site, which has now been reported out of the Senate Ways & Means Committee, where it had languished for the past month.  It is not clear to me whether the full Senate has voted on the bill, or just the Senate Ways & Means Committee, but the Senate action appears to mirror the House action when it passed the bill, so perhaps it just needs the Governor’s signature.

Next step for the MSH purchase process will be for DCAMM to get to work on preparation of the Land Disposition Agreement between them and the town, which DCAMM had refused to prepare and negotiate until the bill was passed.

Looks like the Medfield Hospital Purchase Bill is finally moving.  From the MA legislature website this afternoon::

Actions for Bill H.4216–MEDFIELD
Date Branch Action
6/23/2014 House Reported from the committee on House Ways and Means
6/23/2014 House Pending new draft of H4107
6/23/2014 House New draft of H4107
6/23/2014 House Ordered to a third reading
6/26/2014 House Read third and passed to be engrossed
6/27/2014 Senate Read; and referred to the committee on Senate Ways and Means
7/21/2014 Senate Committee recommended ought to pass
7/21/2014 Senate Rules suspended
7/21/2014 Senate Read second, ordered to a third reading, read third and passed to be engrossed

Bill

Comments Off on MSH purchase bill passed

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital

CPA update

Posted on July 18, 2014 | Comments Off on CPA update

This summary update on the Community Preservation Act from the state Department of Revenue’s Division of Local Services’ e-newsletter:

CPA: Past, Present and Future
Zack Blake – Director of Technical Assistance

Nearly two years ago, Governor Patrick signed into law a number of changes to the Community Preservation Act (CPA). These amendments expanded the acceptable uses for CPA funds and offered communities more flexibility in how these funds are raised. Reflecting back, we thought we would reintroduce readers to CPA by briefly highlighting some of those changes and ways in which communities are taking advantage of them. We also delve into recent collection trends at the state level that impact the distribution of matching funds.

Enacted in 2000 as MGL c. 44B, the CPA enables adopting cities and towns to raise additional revenue beyond the tax levy for community preservation purposes that include providing community affordable housing, protecting open space, preserving historic resources and developing outdoor recreational opportunities.

Under the CPA an adopting city or town elects to implement up to a three percent surcharge on its real estate tax bills. The revenue is deposited into a special revenue fund along with an annual distribution of matching funds from a state trust derived from a surcharge on Registry of Deed recordings. At a minimum, the city or town must spend or reserve ten percent of its annual CPA revenue towards each of the community preservation purposes of open space, historic resources and community housing. Revenue can also be appropriated to a discretionary budgeted reserve, providing the flexibility to fund any CPA purpose until the end of the fiscal year.

Once the CPA is adopted, the community must establish a Community Preservation Committee (CPC). Whether elected or appointed, CPC members are selected from the community’s conservation, historical, planning, park and housing authority boards. The city or town can also choose up to four additional at-large members for a maximum total of nine. Overall, the committee’s role in administering the program locally involves studying the community’s needs, possibilities and resources as they relate to community preservation; accepting and reviewing project proposals; and making recommendations to the legislative body for spending, citing the reasoning behind each choice. Both an affirmative recommendation of the CPC and a legislative body appropriation vote are required to expend CPA funds on a project.

Throughout the last 14 years, CPA has been amended eight times. Early changes largely clarified various aspects of the law or added minor modifications. More recently, however, Chapter 139 of the Acts of 2012, Sections 69-83, contained several significant changes, including an expansion of the allowable CPA spending purposes and the creation of a new option for local CPA funding.

Before the 2012 amendment, communities could use CPA funding to rehabilitate recreational lands only if the recreational land was acquired or created with CPA funding. Today, however, because of the 2012 amendment, communities have the ability to appropriate funds towards previously prohibited recreational-related projects. In expanding the program, these new CPA funding purposes allow cities and towns to rehab existing outdoor recreational spaces and invest in capital improvements to make them more functional for the intended recreational use, including the replacement of playground equipment. Changes in the law also now credit spending on recreational projects towards meeting the annual ten percent open space spending (or reservation) requirements.

In exploring ways in which these changes are expanding CPA spending, we found funds being appropriated to purchase ADA accessible playground equipment, construct a new skate park, resurface outdoor basketball courts, install lighting for a multipurpose athletic field, rebuild a dock landing and create community gardens.

The second significant change in the law offers communities an alternative funding method to supplement the surcharge on real estate tax bills. A community may now adopt CPA, pursuant to MGL c. 44B, s. 3(b1/2), which allows it to approve at least a one percent surcharge on the levy and to appropriate additional revenues up to two percent of the levy from other general fund sources, such as meal and room occupancy taxes. The total surcharge and additional revenue cannot exceed three percent. To date, Somerville and Salem have adopted the CPA through Section 3(b1/2), sometimes referred to as the “blended” method. Quincy and Littleton recently amended its original CPA acceptance by adopting Section 3(b1/2) so that it can appropriate other local revenue into the Community Preservation Fund. Communities that have already adopted CPA, but wish to appropriate other general fund revenues to CPA as described above, must amend their CPA acceptance under MGL c. 44B, s. 16(a) and seek voter approval at a town-wide referendum.

Lastly, a new provision in the law added an optional surcharge exemption for commercial and industrial properties on the first $100k of property value to mirror the existing exclusion for residential property. To add this exemption, an existing CPA community must follow the CPA amendment process, MGL c. 44B, s. 16(a). The law also now requires that preservation restrictions be recorded as separate instruments regarding property acquired with CPA funds to better protect CPA long-term interests, MGL c. 44B, s. 12.

Future Outlook

As of May 2014, 155 communities have accepted CPA with over a billion dollars appropriated to more than 6,000 projects. It is also worth noting that CPA funds have allowed communities to leverage funds from other outside sources that might not otherwise have been available.

This year also marks a point where a larger number of communities are scheduled to vote on whether to adopt CPA than in the past. Several communities are even seeking to increase their levy surcharge, with at least one looking to reduce it. This renewed interest may be the result of the $25 million infusion of surplus state revenue from the Legislature last year along with the potential for more this year. Another motive could be the recent changes in the law expanding the recreational-related purposes cities and towns can fund.

Ria Knapp, Communications Director for the Community Preservation Coalition, says the combination of these two factors sparked the interest of communities that otherwise might not have considered CPA in the past. She adds that “many communities are embracing the new provision in the CPA legislation allowing the rehabilitation of existing parks, playgrounds, and athletic fields,” with “over $40 million in such projects approved recently, and many more proposals being voted on during this spring’s municipal budget process.”

Despite amendments to the law and renewed interest, local advocates are concerned that this year’s state match could be significantly less. Current Registry of Deed collection trends reported by the Department of Revenue are lagging collections of the previous three years. Concern in the real estate market over high home prices and low inventory levels could also continue to hamper buying over the coming months, creating further uncertainty. The rising number of new communities participating in the program also further dilutes the initial distribution of state matching funds.

CPA Trust Fund Collections as of May 2014
.
.
In FY2014, 148 participating communities were eligible for a state match that totaled $54.9 million. Funded through Registry of Deed revenue collections and a one-time infusion of $25 million in state budget surplus, these combined sources allowed for a first round state match of 52.2 percent. Without the additional $25 million appropriation added to the trust fund, cities and towns in the program would have received a first round match of less than 31 percent based on total state funding of $32.7 million.

Although the recent drop in collections at the state level is cause for concern, CPA advocates are applauding the Legislature’s inclusion and the Governor’s signing of the FY2015 budget, which transfers $25 million in state budget surplus to the CPA Trust Fund. Because this additional funding is coming from the state budget surplus, the amount will not be known until the state closes its books on October 31st.

 

Comments Off on CPA update

Posted in Affordable housing / 40B, Budgets, History, Legislature, Open space, Recreation

MMA on cell tower bill

Posted on July 2, 2014 | Comments Off on MMA on cell tower bill

The Massachusetts Municipal Association issued an alert this afternoon about the cell industry’s bill that they got through the House (Rep. Garlick reports that she was not even aware it was in the bill), but which was rebuffed by the Senate, and whose fate now therefore depends on a conference committee.

Bottom line would be cell towers anywhere, without any local town controls, if it becomes law.

July 2, 2014

LOCAL ZONING THREATENED BY WIRELESS TELECOM INDUSTRY PROVISION IN HOUSE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL

HOUSE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL WOULD STRIP CITIES & TOWNS OF CONTROL OVER WIRELESS FACILITIES

SENATE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL DOES NOT CONTAIN THE TELECOM PROPOSAL TO REMOVE LOCAL CONTROL

A House-Senate Conference Committee Will Now Decide Whether the Provisions to Weaken Local Siting Authority Will Remain in the Final Version of the Legislature’s Economic Development Bill

The FCC Will Issue Nationwide Siting Standards for Wireless Antennas Later this Year, and the Legislature Should Not Act until the FCC Finishes Its Process

PLEASE CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TODAY TO OPPOSE THE HOUSE-PASSED LANGUAGE TO GIVE TELECOM COMPANIES CONTROL OVER LOCAL SITING

The telecommunications industry is pushing legislation to pre-empt virtually all municipal zoning or control over the siting of wireless antennas and equipment in Massachusetts.

These powerful companies have attached legislation to the House version of the Legislature’s economic development bill that would allow them to place wireless antennas and equipment on nearly any building or structure in any location in any community, and override all zoning and any local provision or condition to protect neighborhoods and the public from unsightly and intrusive antennas.

Please Call Your Representatives Today to Stop This Effort to Trample Municipal Control.

On June 11, by a voice vote, House members attached this industry-written language to the House’s economic development bill (Sections 74 and 75 of H. 4181), which was passed by the House of Representatives. The Senate passed its version of the economic development bill on July 1, and did NOT include any language regarding the siting of wireless antennas. House and Senate leaders will now negotiate over the issue in a special conference committee to develop the final compromise bill.

Local officials must call their Representatives immediately and ask for their commitment to OPPOSE any legislation, including the economic development bill, that weakens municipal oversight and authority regarding wireless antennas and equipment.

Please Click Here to Download a Copy of MMA’s June 19 Letter to the House of Representatives Opposing the Wireless Industry’s Legislation

The Telecom Industry Bill Would Override All Local Decision-Making

Sections 74 and 75 in H. 4181, the House economic development bill would allow telecommunications companies to “collocate” unlimited new antennas and equipment on any and all existing buildings and structures, regardless of the impact on neighborhoods or interference with public rights-of-ways.

The language would allow all wireless telecommunications companies to install or upgrade wireless antennas and equipment on nearly any building or structure in Massachusetts. These structures could include commercial or residential buildings, water towers, cell towers and even homes – with NO effective local government authority to regulate. The telecom companies could ignore all municipal zoning provisions, ordinances and bylaws – including height limits, set-back requirements, or the ability to require aesthetic modifications to ensure the antennas and equipment blend in.

Municipalities would also have no recourse to ensure that unused or abandoned facilities must be removed in the future. The wireless telecommunications provider would only need to comply with the state building code, which is a very low technical standard.

The measure envisions no role for the general public, and fails to recognize that citizens have a right to basic zoning protections that guarantee accountability on the part of developers.

Under this proposal, in order to obtain a “collocation” permit, a mobile broadband provider would merely need to submit an application to the appropriate issuing authority in a municipality, and the city or town would have only 90 calendar days to review and act upon the “collocation” application, and could only reject applications that fail to meet the state building code. Under the language of the bill, telecom companies could start the “90 day shot-clock” by submitting incomplete applications, and have up to 45 days to complete their submissions, leaving cities and towns only 45 days to review a completed application.   If a municipality does not complete its review 90 days from the start of the “shot clock,” applicants could immediately go to court to compel the issuance of a license, short-circuiting the local process. This irresponsible provision would in no way benefit the community.

The cities and towns of the Commonwealth support expanding and upgrading wireless telecommunications services throughout the state for the benefit of consumers, but the expansion simply cannot come at the expense of the quality of life for residents.

Specific provisions of the telecom provisions include:

• No zoning ordinance or bylaw shall prohibit, regulate or restrict collocation of wireless facilities on existing structures in any way inconsistent with the industry legislation;

• The issuing authority of a city or town must grant approval of all applications for the “collocation” of wireless antennas and equipment on any existing building or structure (except utility poles), as long as the application complies with the state building code;

• Cities and towns must also approve all applications to expand existing stand-alone cell towers (including monopoles), unless the proposals would increase the height or width of the tower by 10 percent or 20 feet (whichever is more) – which means that the industry could take camouflaged antennas inside a monopole and attach a 20-foot wide antenna, and go up 20 feet, and communities would have no say;

• The issuing authority has only 90 days to approve the application – if cities and towns take longer than 90 days, then the telecom companies could immediately go to court, with approval virtually assured because the court’s only standard would be compliance with the state building code, and NO local bylaws, ordinances or zoning provisions would be allowed;

• Local historic commissions would be omitted from the process, and communities could be forced to approve applications to locate antennas and equipment on buildings in local historic districts – and proposals for siting antennas on buildings listed on the state or federal register of historic buildings would be approved if the state historic preservation officer (not the locality) agrees;

• Communities could NOT require companies to remove obsolete, abandoned or unused antennas and equipment; and

• Communities could not require a higher fee for reviewing an application than for other types of commercial applications, and fees for technical consulting would be capped at $1,000.

The FCC is Promulgating National Standards on Wireless Antenna Siting – But the Telecomm Industry is Working Feverishly to Win More Favorable Rules in Massachusetts

In 2012, Congress and the President enacted “The Spectrum Act” that will implement a nation-wide uniform process for the collocation of wireless antennas and equipment. At this moment, the FCC is promulgating final regulations that will govern the build-out of the wireless telecommunications network, and it is expected that the FCC will give industry its often-stated top goal of a time-limited expedited application process. The FCC’s rules are expected by September 2014.

Why is the telecom industry jumping to Massachusetts and other states to win a complete override of local zoning, when the FCC is on the verge of issuing its decision? The answer is clear: the FCC may give deference to local zoning rules, and allow cities and towns to act in the public interest. In particular, the FCC could allow municipalities to have zoning provisions, ordinances and bylaws on height limits, set-back requirements, or the ability to require aesthetic modifications to ensure the antennas and equipment blend in.

Ask your Representatives and Senators to reject this fast-track attempt by the wireless industry to ignore the FCC process. The Legislature should wait until the federal government issues its final rules later this year.

PLEASE CALL YOUR REPRESENTATIVES TODAY AND ASK THEM TO OPPOSE ANY ATTEMPT TO PREEMPT LOCAL AUTHORITY FOR SITING WIRELESS ANTENNAS IN THE FINAL ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT BILL. THE LEGISLATURE SHOULD WAIT UNTIL THE FCC MAKES ITS FINAL RULING ON NATIONAL STANDARDS.

After you call your Representatives, please call your Senators to thank them for omitting the wireless provisions from the Senate’s economic development bill, and ask them to oppose S. 2183, a stand-alone bill that is in the Senate Ways and Means Committee that is identical to the House amendment – ask for their commitment to stop this attempt by the telecom industry to build whatever they want, wherever they want, whenever they want.

THANK YOU!

 

Comments Off on MMA on cell tower bill

Posted in Legislature

Rep. Garlick on MSH legislation

Posted on June 27, 2014 | Comments Off on Rep. Garlick on MSH legislation

This email from Represenative Garlick with the account on the passage in the House of the Medfield State Hospital purchase legislation and her amendment to re-insert the emergency preamble.

From: “Garlick, Denise – Rep (HOU)”
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 4:49 PM
To:
Subject: FW: HOUSE SESSION – THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2014

Dear Mike and through you to the Board of Selectmen,

The House of Representatives engrossed the MSH bill today (see below) with an emergency preamble and it now moves to the Senate.

Please do not hesitate to contact me with any questions or concerns.

 

Yours in service,

Denise C. Garlick

State Representative

13th Norfolk District
Needham, Dover and Medfield

Telephone: 617-722-2070

E-mail:

 

 

From: State House News Service []
Sent: Thursday, June 26, 2014 2:55 PM
To:
Subject: HOUSE SESSION – THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2014

 

HOUSE SESSION – THURSDAY, JUNE 26, 2014

To track a bill’s legislative history or view its text, go here and enter bill number:
https://malegislature.gov/Bills/Search

For more in-depth information about how a bill becomes a law, go here:
https://malegislature.gov/Engage/HowIdeaBecomesLaw

The News Service features gavel-to-gavel summaries of all sessions and audio of formal sessions on our web page:
http://www.statehousenews.com

The Legislature offers a handy glossary of parliamentary terms:
https://malegislature.gov/Site/Glossary

CONVENES: The House convened at 11:07 a.m. with Rep. Paul Donato (D-Medford) presiding.

PLEDGE: Members and guests rose to recite the Pledge of Allegiance.

RESOLUTIONS: The House adopted a few congratulatory resolutions.

ORDERS OF THE DAY: There was no objection to proceeding with the orders of the day.

NORTHBRIDGE BRIDGE: The House engrossed S 1759 to designate a certain bridge in the town of Northbridge as the Corporal Thomas S. Perron, USMC Memorial Bridge.

HARWICK – SEWER EXTENSION: The House engrossed S 2081 relative to the financing and construction of a sanitary sewer extension in the town of Hardwick.

HOLYOKE – LAND CONVEYANCE: The House engrossed H 4113 authorizing the conveyance of certain land in the city of Holyoke.

MEDFIELD – LAND CONVEYANCE: The House adopted a Rep. Garlick amendment to H 4216, authorizing the commissioner of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance to convey certain parcels of land in the town of Medfield. The House then engrossed the bill.

The chair called a brief recess. Time was 11:10 a.m.

RECESS: At 11:20 a.m., the House recessed until 1:30 p.m.

At 1:41 p.m. a photographer led a group of children and a few adults into the House chamber, where Rep. Lawn greeted them. Rep. Lawn stood on the rostrum and the guests gathered around it for a photo.

At 2:02 p.m., Rep. Donato gaveled the House to order.

INTERIM BUDGET: The House enacted H 4217 making appropriations for the fiscal year 2014. The total appropriation is $4.6 billion and the bill is designed to fund state government for 30 days.

Rep. Garlick joined Rep. Donato on the rostrum. Time was 2:19 p.m.

At 2:23 p.m., people wearing blue Massachusetts Nurses Association jackets entered the House chamber. One woman took photos of Reps. Garlick, Donato and D’Emilia on the rostrum.

Rep. Garlick took the gavel.

SAFE NURSE STAFFING: The House enacted H 4228 relative to patient limits in all hospital intensive care units.

Guests and staff clapped.

Rep. Garlick said, I would like to recognize the proponents are in the chambers. To the nurses and the hospitals, we extend our gratitude for this thoughtful work and this historic landmark legislation. (Applause)

ADJOURNS – FORMAL SESSION MONDAY: The House adjourned at 2:27 p.m. under an order calling for the next session to be held Monday at 11 a.m., a full formal session.

DISCLAIMER: Bill texts and histories are available at www.malegislature.gov. All votes are voice votes, unless otherwise noted. Bills ordered to third reading have been given initial approval. To engross a bill is to pass it and send it to the other branch. The last of three votes taken on bills that reach the governor’s desk is the vote on enactment. So, it’s third reading (initial approval), engrossment (passage) and enactment. The News Service coverage of legislative debate is an accurate summary of remarks, not a verbatim transcript.

-END-
06/26/2014

Serving the working press since 1910

http://www.statehousenews.com

Comments Off on Rep. Garlick on MSH legislation

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital

MSH bill’s emergency preamble in again

Posted on June 26, 2014 | Comments Off on MSH bill’s emergency preamble in again

Bill Massaro’s email reports that Representative Garlick amended the MSH purchase bill to have the emergency (effecive upon signing) preamble re-inserted –

Pete,

After seeing your blog item on House passage, I checked the Legislature web site.  For our H.4216 it reports that Denise Garlick had amended it to include an Emergency preamble. Not sure how this fits with John Nunnari’s report, but after it passed House , it may be on it’s way to engrossment  and then for Senate vote/passage.  So it would seem that the emergency preamble may be back in …

Westborough’s H4157 is still shown as having gone to Senate Ways and Means on 6/23  with no further status reported…

Bill

Comments Off on MSH bill’s emergency preamble in again

Posted in Legislature, Medfield State Hospital