Beacon Hill Roll Call reports on local representatives’ and senators’ votes on roll calls from the week of March 16 to March 20.
$1.8 billion supplemental budget (H 5264)
The House, 150-5, approved and sent to the Senate a $1.8 billion supplemental budget that funds $885 million in public transportation, including $740 million for the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), $417 million for public education and millions for several fiscal year 2026 deficiencies.
The $1.8 billion bill is funded in part by $1.3 billion from the 2022 voter-approved Fair Share Amendment, which imposes an additional 4% income tax, in addition to the current flat 5% one, on taxpayers’ earnings of more than $1 million annually. Language in the constitutional amendment requires that “subject to appropriation, the revenue will go to fund quality public education, affordable public colleges and universities, and for the repair and maintenance of roads, bridges and public transportation.”
MBTA funding in the supplemental budget includes $525 million for the Deficiency Reserve; $125 million for the Workforce and Safety Reserve; $60 million for physical infrastructure with a focus on the core subway system; and $20 million for low-income reduced fares.
Education funding includes $150 million for Special Education Circuit Breaker costs; $150 million to fund early education child care costs; $8 million for child care providers; $7.5 million for the loan forgiveness program for these providers; a $20 million endowment for Match for UMass and other state colleges and universities; and $5.1 million for the Tomorrow’s Teachers Loan Forgiveness program.
Another provision would decouple Massachusetts from recently approved federal tax provisions that reduce federal taxes if voters approve a possible November 2026 state ballot question that would lower the state income tax rate from 5% to 4%.
Other provisions include $10 million for FIFA World Cup-related expenses; establishment of a food donation tax credit of up to $5,000 per individual for farm businesses based on the amount of food donated to a nonprofit food distribution organization; and ratification of eight collective bargaining agreements.
“From significant investments in public transportation and public education, to support for Department of Transitional Assistance caseworkers and expenses related to the World Cup, to fiscally prudent tax conformity measures — this legislation is representative of the responsible approach that the House will continue to take as we navigate a period of significant economic uncertainty,” said House Speaker Ron Mariano, D-Quincy.
“The use of these one-time surplus funds provides us with a unique opportunity to better strengthen the commonwealth in numerous ways,” said Rep. Aaron Michlewitz, D-Boston, chair of the House Committee on Ways and Means. “By further improving our educational and transportation sectors, we will build off the work we have done in the last several budget cycles with a judicious use of the Fair Share funds.”
“I voted against … the supplemental [budget] simply because there is too much unnecessary spending in this bill,” said Rep. John Gaskey, R-Carver. “This was essentially an earmark bill. If it had been narrowly focused on public safety, it would’ve been a good bill. Unfortunately, it becomes a free-for-all bill to hand out cash driving further spending.”
Some opponents criticized the language that would decouple Massachusetts from key federal tax provisions if voters approve a possible November 2026 ballot question to lower the state income tax rate from 5% to 4%. They said this would tie the hands of future policymakers and deny Massachusetts taxpayers the benefit of federal tax relief.
“This is not fiscal responsibility,” said Paul Craney, executive director of the Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance. “This is political retaliation against taxpayers. Beacon Hill leadership is telling voters that if they choose to lower their own taxes, the Legislature will step in and make sure they don’t see the full benefit. It’s petty, and an outrageous abuse of power. They cannot help themselves. Even before the ink is dry on federal tax changes, Beacon Hill politicians are already scheming ways to block relief and keep more money in government hands. That’s exactly why voters are demanding change — change that actually delivers transparency with legislative audits, openness in public records and policies that prioritize taxpayers over seemingly limitless growth in state government spending.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Rep. Aaron Saunders — Yes
- Rep. Susannah Whipps — Yes
$100 million for cities and towns (H 5264)
The House, 25-128, rejected an amendment that would provide a minimum of $100 million annually from the surtax surplus to cities and towns, which must use 50% of the funds for the repair, maintenance, construction or reconstruction of roads and bridges and 50% for public school facilities and equipment. Each city and town would receive a proportional share of the $100 million based on its population as a percentage of the state’s total population as determined by the most recent federal decennial census or the most recent annual municipal census certified by the secretary of state, whichever is more recent.
Amendment supporters said this would average roughly $14 per person based on 7.2 million Massachusetts residents broken up into legislative districts each comprised of some 44,000 residents. They noted this would guarantee each district more than $600,000 per year. Each district would be required to spend $300,000 for roads and bridges and $300,000 for education.
They said that the state currently has allocated the majority of these surplus surtax funds to programs such as $867 million for the MBTA, $419 million for free school meals, $287 million for free community college tuition and $422 million for regional transit. Directing funds toward these priorities has come at the expense of greater local aid. This shift has exacerbated budget shortfalls in many cities and towns. As a result, local governments have been forced to raise property taxes, cut essential services like teaching positions or public safety, or both, effectively shifting the funding burden for these “free” statewide programs back onto middle-class and working-class homeowners through higher property taxes.
Amendment sponsor Rep. Justin Thurber, R-Somerset, said the amendment would provide meaningful relief to the 95% to 99% of Massachusetts cities and towns facing fiscal struggles while fulfilling the original intent of the Fair Share Amendment to support public needs. “I hope this sparks broader discussions on ensuring the Fair Share surtax, now generating billions beyond expectations, truly meets voter expectations for funding public schools, and road and bridge maintenance,” Thurber said.
Rep. James Arciero, D-Westford, opposed the amendment and said the distribution formula does not adequately serve the road and bridge repair needs of rural and less populated areas. The House has heard how funding distribution formulas that weigh population as a determining factor harm rural communities due to their lower population numbers. Rural municipalities have been clear that road mileage is the most important factor in addressing their repair needs since these towns have extensive local road networks.
He continued that last year, the Legislature authorized $300 million for the Chapter 90 program, a 50% increase over historic funding levels. Of this funding, $200 million was distributed to all municipalities based on the standard Chapter 90 program distribution formula of 60% road mileage, 20% population and 20% employment. Then, in support of our rural communities, the remaining $100 million of that funding was distributed to all municipalities based on their proportional amount of local road mileage. The passage of this amendment would undermine that progress to build regional equity.
A “No” vote is against the amendment.
- Rep. Aaron Saunders — No
- Rep. Susannah Whipps — No
PETS Act (S 3014)
The Senate, 38-0, approved and sent to the House legislation, named the PETS Act, that supporters said would end the inhumane puppy-mill-to-pet-shop system by banning commercial sales of cats and dogs in pet stores; ending harsh, unnecessary testing of animal subjects for non-medical purposes; strengthening animal cruelty protections; and prohibiting breed-based discrimination in public housing and insurance coverage.
“Animals who provide us with boundless love and companionship must be protected from cruel and abusive actions by neglectful individuals,” said Sen. Mark Montigny, D-New Bedford, the sponsor of several of the original bills upon which this comprehensive bill is based. “Sadly, we have done far too little to punish and deter heartless abuse and to push back against a weak system that has too often failed to hold abusers accountable. This legislation will crack down on such abhorrent treatment by empowering local authorities to intervene and remedy cruel conditions, and by banning the use of painful vanity testing on animals when cosmetics and other household products can easily be tested through alternative means.”
“Today’s vote is a major step forward for animals and families across Massachusetts,” said Preyel Patel, the Massachusetts state director of Humane World for Animals. “The PETS Act shuts off the cruel puppy-mill-to-pet-store pipeline and puts our state at the forefront of humane science by requiring the use of non-animal test methods for cosmetics and household products when validated alternatives are available. Combined with stronger cruelty protections and provisions to keep families and their pets together in their homes, this bill reflects the values our commonwealth strives to uphold.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — Yes
Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Day (S 2145)
The Senate, 38-0, approved and sent to the House a bill that would establish Oct. 15 as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Day to increase public awareness of the prevalence of pregnancy loss and the physical and mental toll individuals face following a pregnancy loss. The day would also include loss from an unsuccessful round of intrauterine insemination or of an assisted reproductive technology procedure, a failed adoption arrangement, a failed surrogacy arrangement, a diagnosis or event that impacts pregnancy or fertility, a stillbirth or the death of the newborn child.
“For many people, the journey to starting a family is a joyful time filled with hope and excitement for the future,” said sponsor Sen. Paul Feeney, D-Foxborough. “For others, the path is devastating and a constant reminder of what could have been. I filed this legislation on behalf of families like mine: those that may have heard a slight heartbeat, only to have that flicker disappear at the next visit; those enduring IVF treatment, only to see their hopes dashed; and those who gave birth to a baby who was already an angel. These forms of loss are heartbreaking beyond words, yet far more common than we may realize.”
Feeney continued, “It is my hope that by designating Oct. 15 as Pregnancy and Infant Loss Awareness Day, we can create the space to recognize this form of loss, bring hope where there is despair and hold all those impacted in a collective embrace.”
A “Yes” vote is for the bill.
- Sen. Jo Comerford — Yes
- Sen. Paul Mark — Yes
Also up on Beacon Hill
Firefighter rights (S 2960)
The House, on a voice vote without a roll call, gave initial approval to a bill that would ensure that firefighters who become full-time can receive creditable service for their time as call firefighters, or part-time firefighters, regardless of what department they worked for.
The office of Sen. John Velis, D-Westfield, who is currently on an active-duty deployment with the Massachusetts National Guard, told Beacon Hill Roll Call, “The bill creates parity between our dedicated first responder professions as currently local law enforcement officers can purchase similar time from any department and are not restricted to the same standards as call firefighters currently are.”
Lease signing (H 336)
The House, on a voice vote without a roll call, gave initial approval to a measure that would mandate that the signing of a residential lease for renewal can’t be required to be executed more than four months ahead of the termination date of the current lease agreement.
“For years now, constituents have brought to my attention that they have experienced landlords pushing lease renewals six months or longer in advance,” said sponsor Rep. Tackey Chan, D-Quincy. “This legislation is similar to a New York City ordinance.”
Widowed spouses and foreclosures (H 1329)
The House, on a voice vote without a roll call, gave initial approval to a bill requiring banks and other mortgage lenders to delay foreclosure proceedings for 60 days after the death of a borrower and to refrain from taking any action to accelerate foreclosure proceedings. The surviving spouse or family member must notify the lender and provide proof of the death of the borrower for the halt on foreclosure to take effect.
Supporters say that widowed spouses are going through a difficult time and should not be harassed by mortgage lenders who are trying to foreclose on their property.
Electronic wage cards (H 2074)
The House, on a voice vote without a roll call, gave initial approval to legislation designed to protect the rights and money of workers who receive their wages through electronic wage cards. It updates Massachusetts wage laws to reflect the increasing use of payroll card accounts and is designed to ensure that employees who are paid through electronic wage cards have full, fair and transparent access to their earned wages.
The legislation would require that employees be able to access the full amount of their net wages at least once per pay period without incurring fees. It also mandates clear disclosure of any fees associated with payroll cards and guarantees that employees can check their account balances at no cost.
“I first drafted part of this bill nearly a decade ago while I was in law school, long before I ever imagined serving in public office,” said sponsor Rep. Francisco Paulino, D-Methuen. “Even then, I saw how workers could lose part of their paycheck to hidden fees simply because of how they were paid. Today, this legislation turns that early work into action, ensuring every worker has full, fair access to every dollar they earn, with the transparency and protections they deserve.”
Minimum wage (H 2145)
The House, on a voice vote without a roll call, gave initial approval to a bill that would mandate that airline catering employees be paid at least the same minimum wage as many other Massport employees. Since 2023, the minimum wage for certain Massport service workers has been $17 per hour. These roles include wheelchair assistants, skycaps, ticket agents, janitorial staff, aircraft and cabin cleaning, and baggage handlers.
“Airport workers keep operations running smoothly at Logan Airport, the busiest transportation hub in the region, and they deserve to be paid a fair, livable wage,” said sponsor Rep. Adrian Madaro, D-East Boston. “Massport’s minimum wage increase reflects the crucial role these workers play in travelers’ experience at Logan. Airline catering company employees deserve to be equally recognized, and compensated accordingly, for the work they do as airport service workers.”
Prison labor (H 5125)
The House, on a voice vote without a roll call, gave initial approval to a measure that would prohibit any prisoner from being transferred to another state and being required to work on labor projects in that state. The ban does not apply if the governor determines that an emergency in another state or territory creates the need for inmates or prisoners to be transferred from Massachusetts and the prisoner agrees in writing to be transferred.
The measure was first filed in 2017 when former Bristol County Sheriff Tom Hodgson was planning to transport Bristol County prisoners across state lines to the nation’s southern border to help build President Donald Trump’s proposed border wall.
Supporters said that unless there is an emergency and the prisoner agrees to go, the state should not ship prisoners elsewhere, leaving Massachusetts with no control over them. They said rehabilitation works better in the local community where the inmate has been.