BOSTON — On the morning of Oct. 7, Jamie Eldridge received a crash course in the health-care system.

Eldridge, 36, suffered a one-minute seizure while sleeping in his Acton home. In that minute, the 6-foot-5-inch state senator fell out of bed and broke bones in his back, strained his spine and tore his shoulder from its socket.

“I don’t remember any of the above,” Eldridge wrote in his blog on Nov. 2.

Eldridge was rushed to Massachusetts General Hospital, where he had three surgeries in 10 days. He spent two weeks recuperating at the Spaulding Rehabilitation Center, where he had to learn to walk again.

He also learned some finer points about the health-care system.

While in the hospital, Eldridge met other patients who were being discharged before they had fully recovered because their insurance would not pay for further care.

“That was something really upsetting,” said Eldridge. “I just think it’s a really broken system that health-insurance companies are really doing their best to reduce their care at a time when people need it most, when people get sick.”

In April 2006, Massachusetts adopted a law that provides insurance or subsidized insurance for those unable to afford it on their own.

According to the Commonwealth Health Insurance Connector Authority, more that 400,000 people have been insured by the state since the bill was passed.

Eldridge acknowledged that the reform has helped many people, but he said it “did not fix the system.”

As he goes through physical therapy for his shoulder, Eldridge is also working on legislation to introduce in the next session that “would move Massachusetts to a truly universal health-care system.”

His bill would eliminate for-profit health-insurance providers. Instead, everyone would be insured by the state. Individuals would be able to upgrade their insurance for a fee.

“About 31 percent of health-care costs are administrative,” said Eldridge. “This would eliminate all that waste.”

Eldridge’s plan also includes a transition process that would provide job training to people who lost their jobs working for health-insurance companies.

The October incident was not the first time Eldridge has had a seizure.

He experienced two previous episodes in 1999 and 2003. Although he will likely take anti-seizure medication for the rest of his life, diagnosis has been elusive. Doctors do not believe Eldridge has epilepsy. The only cause they could come up with is stress.

“I think, as much as I can in this kind of job, I have to reduce stress,” said Eldridge. “Although I don’t know if that will happen.”

Eldridge spent about a month recovering at his home, where he lives with his girlfriend of four years, Yanina Gonzales. He said he missed the Statehouse and was happy to return to work in December, with even more zeal for important issues like health-care reform.

Eldridge considers himself a progressive Democrat, valuing independence in the Legislature.

“I’m proud that I stand up for what I believe,” he said. “I think that sometimes there are legislators who say, ‘I could never be for that because some people in my district don’t support that.’ I really do believe you should make decisions that you believe is the right thing to do.”

Eldridge became interested in politics in high school. His basketball coach at Acton-Boxboro Regional High School was a legislative aide for the then-state Rep. Bob Durand, the year the representative ran for state Senate.

Eldridge became the Acton town coordinator for Durand, who won by fewer than 200 of the 60,000 votes cast in the election.

Eldridge said volunteering on Durand’s campaign showed him the impact one individual can make.

“I think that’s why I really fell into politics,” he said. “I knew right then I wanted to run one day myself.”

While at Boston College Law School, Eldridge managed a successful re-election campaign for then-state Rep. Pam Resor.

Resor said she was impressed with the law student’s work ethic.

“You could see he was determined,” said Resor, who took over Durand’s Senate seat in 1999. “It was evident he would be successful.”

Eldridge saw the 2001 redistricting, which created a new congressional district in Acton, as a rare opportunity to run for office. He left his job at Merrimack Valley Legal Services in Lowell, a nonprofit organization that provides free legal services to the poor and the elderly, to campaign full time. He spent three terms in the House, from 2003 to 2008.

When Resor retired in 2008, she endorsed Rep. Eldridge as her successor. Eldridge said he is doing his best to fill Resor’s shoes as the “environmental conscience of the Legislature.”

As an environmental advocate, Eldridge has worked to pass legislation to create a Water Infrastructure Finance Commission to oversee the repair of aging water infrastructure.

In this session he has filed an “E-waste” bill to promote the recycling of electronics and co-sponsored the Safer Alternatives bill, which would reduce exposure to toxic chemicals found in household products.

Eldridge is proud of what he has done for the commonwealth. He said the great thing about being a state legislator is having a small enough district to really get to know the people he represents.

But he has clearly set his sights higher. In 2007, Eldridge ran for Congress when then-U.S. Rep. Marty Meehan resigned to become chancellor of UMass Lowell. He came in third in the primary and endorsed winner Niki Tsongas.

“I think it’s no secret that I’m someone that’s looking for opportunities to help more people,” said Eldridge. “I definitely see myself in public service for the rest of my life.”

How can the government help more people now? By repairing the health-care system, he argues.

“I can think of few other instances of government assistance that would have as dramatic an impact on people’s lives as a right to health care, and that would make every community richer,” Eldridge wrote in his blog on Nov. 2.

Eldridge was hoping for national reform, but said due to Sen. Scott Brown’s recent victory, any national health-care reform will be “significantly watered down.”

“Now it’s up to each individual state,” he said. “We can do more. That’s what I’m fighting for.”

“This bill will make our roads safer for all drivers, passengers and pedestrians,” said Eldridge.  “Texting while driving is just plain dangerous, and yet you see people doing it every day. Although it’s said ‘you can’t legislate common sense,’ we can reduce the number of people texting while driving by making it clear that this dangerous habit is not okay, and punishable like any other unsafe-driving offense.”

A 2009 study by the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute found that teen drivers are four times more likely than adults to be involved in a crash because of texting, and truck drivers who text while driving are 23 times more likely to have an accident than someone who isn’t distracted.

The final bill included an amendment filed by State Eldridge to address the lack of transportation alternatives for seniors. The amendment would create a special commission to come up with a long term plan to finance and support transportation alternatives for seniors and people with disabilities.

“We need to be better about providing transportation alternatives for older drivers and people with disabilities,” said Eldridge. “This commission will help legislators, municipal leaders and future administrations prepare to meet the growing need for transportation alternatives.”

The legislation makes texting a primary offense, which means someone can be pulled over specifically for the act of texting while driving. It also establishes a fine of up to $200, two years in jail, or both for anyone who causes an accident while texting and driving.

Senator Eldridge supported an amendment to the bill that would have banned the use of hand-held cellphones while driving. Unfortunately, this amendment did not receive enough support and was not adopted.

The bill also prohibits “junior operators,” those under the age of 18, from both texting and talking on a cell phone while driving; and operators of public transit - including the MBTA, school buses and ferries - are prohibited from any use of cell phones, except in the case of an emergency.

The bill requires a person between the ages of 75 and 80 to submit once during those five years an assessment form to be developed jointly by the registry and the medical advisory board, but filled out by the person’s physician or health care provider. Based on that assessment, the registrar would determine if the person can safely operate the vehicle.

After a person turns 80, the form would have to be filed every three years. Those who are denied their license can request a road test in an effort to demonstrate they have the skills necessary to keep their license and continue driving.

Additional provisions in the bill:

• Protects from civil liability those police officers and healthcare providers who notify the RMV that a driver may not be able to safely operate a motor vehicle, and provides immunity from liability for a failure to report;

• Requires drivers with three surcharged moving violations within two years to take a driver re-training course or have their license suspended indefinitely until completing the course. Current law is five incidents in three years; and

• For separate instances of the RMV suspending or revoking the license of a driver 75 or older due to medically diagnosed mental or physical disabilities, the legislation expedites the appeals process for the driver, requiring that a hearing be held within 14 days of the suspension or revocation, and further requiring the registrar to consider all medical evidence and make a decision within seven days after the hearing.

The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives for further action.

Although we do our best to let our constituents know - through press releases and op-eds, through our email newsletters, and even through blogs like this - what we are working on, the fact is that most of what we do each day and week goes unreported.

A typical week for me is 6 or 7 days of work, often starting at 8am (or earlier!) in the morning and going till 9pm or later.  No complaints from me on that front - I love my job and feel honored to have the chance to represent the Middlesex & Worcester District in the State Senate. Every day is different, and there are so many important issues competing for my attention, as well the long-term organizing work that needs to be done to create lasting change in Massachusetts.

Tuesday was a particularly busy day here in the State Senate, and much good was accomplished. I thought I’d take this chance to give you a behind-the-scenes look into what it’s like to be a State Senator.

7:30am: Coffee in hand, I begin the day in the State House by sending notes to constituents I met with last week, and checking my email for requests and inquiries from constituents, assigning them to staff as needed.

On the docket for the day are a few key hearings, plus an all-important budget meeting with the Senate Ways & Means Committee, to prepare for.

9:30am: I speak to the Women’s Bar Association about one of my top priority bills, An Act Removing Barriers to Asset Development and Financial Stability for Low-to-Moderate Income Families. This bill would remove state-imposed barriers to asset development for low-to-moderate income residents of the Commonwealth who receive support through the Department of Transitional Assistance, promoting gainful employment and financial stability. This bill was put together through the work of the Asset Development Commission, which I chaired.

Jamie speaking to Women's Bar Association

It’s a common sense bill that puts our state government in the position of supporting, rather than discouraging, low-income families as they try to build assets and climb out of poverty, and I’m grateful to the WBA for their support of the bill this session.

10:30am: The Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government, which I co-chair, is hosting a hearing on a number of local bills. But today is a particularly important day for the Committee: after many months of work, we have released the Municipal Relief Act, a package of legislative changes and local-option programs - big and small - designed to give our cities and towns the tools they need to operate more effectively and, ultimately, save money.

These are tough times for our cities and towns, with cuts to local aid coming at the same time as rising costs. This bill won’t make all of these problems disappear - but it will give municipal officials the tools they need to tackle these problems head on and govern as effectively as possible in this time of lean resources. Learn more here .

11:15:  - The Joint Committee on Economic Development is holding a hearing on the “An Act Promoting Economic Development Throughout the Commonwealth,” a reorganization of all the economic development agencies in Massachusetts. The room is packed with legislators, lobbyists, staff and media, all there to testify (or observe testimony) on this expansive, complicated legislation.

Jamie with Peter Lowitt, from the Devens Enterprise Coalition

I’m there to testify on some things I’d like to see the bill include: corporate tax credit transparency language, which would allow us to determine which credits are working, and which aren’t; a greater focus on workforce training and economic development for low-income families and poorer areas of the state; and the creation of a state-owned bank to make sure that small businesses receive the loans they need to grow and create jobs.

I’m also there on a more local matter, to ask the Committee to leave the Devens Enterprise Commission (DEC) out of the reorganization, given that the DEC is more of a land use board rather than an economic development agency. This is an issue of great local importance to the towns of Ayer, Harvard, Shirley and the Devens Community, all of which I represent.

Read my testimony to the Committee.

Noon: I’ve got about an hour and a half before my next meeting, with the Senate Ways & Means Committee. This is enough time to go through some legislative updates with my staff, answer a few phone calls from local reporters, review the final documents before the budget meeting, and even grab a quick lunch at my desk. (Chicken Caesar salad wrap, from the Hi-Spot deli across the street.)

Jamie preparing for the budget meeting with staff

1:30: Today I have my annual budget meeting with Senate Ways & Means Chair Steven Panagiotakos. This is my chance to lay out my budget priorities for the year, explain why they are important to my district and the Commonwealth, and press my case. My staff and I spent weeks preparing for this meeting - deciding which priorities I want to push for, and then laying out the case for why these programs and priorities are particularly deserving of support.

In this tight budget climate, I’m well aware that very few programs, if any, will see increases in funding; in most cases I’m asking that the programs at least receive level funding from last year.

My main budget priorities going into this meeting are:

1) Protecting local aid (including Chapter 70, lottery aid and regional school transportation) to cities and towns.

2) Maintaining funding for vital social safety net services (programs to help the homeless, low-income families, at-risk children, those with disabilities, the elderly).

3) Advocating for a fair, adequate and stable tax system that will raise sufficient revenue to support our state’s goals and priorities.

4) Promoting budget transparency and accountability, particularly around the issue of tax credit transparency, so that we can be sure that every penny of the public’s money is being spent effectively.

5) Preventing deeper cuts in spending on environmental protection, stimulating economic development, and investing in transportation.

2:30: The Judiciary Committee is hearing one of my bills, The Massachusetts Civil Rights Restoration Act. This bill would restore the right of an individual to bring a claim where a governmental policy or activity has the effect of unlawfully discriminating on the basis of race, color, national origin or sex. It’s a complicated legal concept, but the end result of the bill would be to allow citizens to bring claims of discrimination against the government in cases where policies have led to systematic, indirect discrimination, particularly in areas of environmental justice, transportation and housing.  I’ve worked closely with ACE, an environmental justice group based in Roxbury, to highlight this legislation.

I join State Representative Byron Rushing, the lead sponsor in the House, to testify before the committee on why this bill is important. Read my testimony here.

Jamie testifies with Rep. Byron Rushing at Judiciary Committee Hearing

3:30pm: Earlier today, the Education Committee reported out a bullying-prevention bill, using a bill I filed last January as a framework. The bill prohibits bullying, including cyberbullying, on school grounds and would require schools to develop a bullying prevention and intervention plan. It’s a comprehensive, prevention-oriented piece of legislation, designed to end the tragic cycle of bullying we’ve seen in the Commonwealth’s schools for years, leading to tragedies like those in South Hadley, Springfield and too many other communities.

I work with my staff to review what’s included in the final bill, and put together a press release on the bill for local papers, which you can read here.

5:00pm: After a few more phone calls, it’s time to catch the train back to Acton. Since my accident last fall, I’ve spent a lot more time riding the Commuter Rail. It’s a good way to do my part to reduce carbon emissions and traffic congestion, plus it gives me some time to relax. That said, it can be a long commute, and I look forward to gaining the extra 10 minutes once the double-tracking project from Fitchburg to Boston is complete. Securing the funding for the project is something I worked on for years with my predecessor, Senator Pam Resor, because we knew it would benefit thousands of constituents who commute to Cambridge and Boston and back every day.

6:30pm: It’s a rare meeting-free evening for me tonight. (In a typical week, I have evening meetings most weekdays, and sometimes on Saturday or Sunday night.) It’s a chance for me to catch up on paperwork: review staff memos, read the papers, and get some writing done as well.

And so ends a day - and night! - in the life of a Massachusetts State Senator.  This particular day involved more meetings at the State House - and fewer in the district - than usual, but it was the sort of jam-packed schedule I’ve gotten used to over the past years. There’s so much going on in the State Legislature and the district that my mind tends to race at night, thinking about what else needs to be done. (To the amusement of my staff, who sometimes joke about the emails they receive from me late, late at night or in the early morning.)

I love the work I do, and hope to continue to have the opportunity to do it for many years to come.

This omnibus relief bill is a combination of the best ideas suggested by the Municipal Relief Commission (co-chaired last year by Chairman Paul Donato and Senator Stanley Rosenberg), Governor Deval Patrick, local officials throughout the state, legislators, municipal advocacy groups, and private citizens.

Many of these are simple, straightforward, and common sense changes, allowing municipalities to do things one might have assumed they already could do. For example, this bill allows municipalities to establish an e-billing program, a money-saving practice that has been used by private companies for years. It also allows cities to offer benefits to their workers - such as healthcare spending accounts and larger optional life insurance maximums - already available for state workers, and gives cities the ability to enter into long term leases.

Other provisions are more pro-active, giving municipalities new tools to manage employee benefits, facilitate regionalization, operate more efficiently and enjoy more flexibility in municipal finance.  For example, provisions to promote sound bidding practices and allow municipalities to enter into cooperative purchasing agreements and mutual aid agreements will help cities and towns save money on services, equipment and staffing.

These are tough times for our cities and towns, with cuts to local aid coming at the same time as rising costs. This bill won’t make all of these problems disappear - but it will give municipal officials the tools they need to tackle these problems head on and govern as effectively as possible in this time of lean resources.

Highlights include:

Transferring Eligible Municipal Retirees into Medicare: The bill will reduce benefit costs for municipalities by requiring that all eligible retired local employees enroll in Medicare as their primary source of health insurance coverage, as is already done on the state level.

Optional Early Retirement Program: The bill includes an Early Retirement Incentive program for cities and towns.  This program would allow a limited number of long term municipal employees to receive early retirement benefits, while restricting the town’s ability to refill those same positions to no more than 30%, 45%, and 60% of the former total salaries over the next three years, respectively.  This program would be at the option of municipalities, giving cities and towns the flexibility to determine for themselves whether this tool is appropriate for their community.

Retirement system funding relief: The legislation proposes a pension funding relief plan to help local pension systems address unprecedented asset losses in a fiscally responsible and manageable way, without the significant increases in payments that would otherwise be required.  Specifically, the legislation allows local systems to extend their funding schedule subject to certain conditions and requires that future asset gains be used to shorten schedules, not reduce payments.

Support for School District Regionalization: The bill includes provisions to facilitate regionalization of school districts by allowing regional school districts to join with municipal districts in a superintendency union, and streamlining the process to allow regional school districts to access their stabilization funds.

Collective Purchasing: Another idea to help participating communities to save money, this would allow education collaboratives to leverage economies of scale by entering into bulk purchasing agreements with public entities outside our state borders. It would also give cities, towns and school departments the ability to participate in cooperative purchasing agreements with public agencies outside of Massachusetts.

Mutual Aid Agreements: The bill would allow cities and towns to join statewide mutual aid agreements to provide police, fire, emergency medical, public works, and other public safety assistance to other municipalities. This would allow cities and towns to save money on staffing and equipment while still being prepared for emergency situations.

Sound Business Practices: This would incorporate a number of changes to procurement law, including a provision to allow cities and towns to use reverse auctions when buying products and services in large amounts, reducing costs by having sellers bid against each other to provide the best price.

Municipal Electronic Billing: The bill would allow cities and towns the option to establish a voluntary e-billing program - an added convenience for residents, and a money-saver for cities and town.

Renewable energy revolving fund and betterment program: The bill would allow municipalities to offer a loan program to property owners for renewable energy improvements.  This would give towns interested in promoting energy conservation and green energy the legal mechanism to set up a revolving fund for this purpose.

Flexibility in Municipal and Regional School District Borrowing: The bill would increase flexibility in municipal and regional school district borrowing by extending the allowable borrowing terms. It would also increase flexibility for emergency borrowing, expedite the process for achieving savings through refinancing, and remove overly restrictive requirements for amortization of debt.

Abandoned and Unclaimed Checks: Currently, a check issued by a municipality is not deemed abandoned until 3 years after issuance.  This new provision would allow towns to print a one year expiration period, to be printed on the checks.  Current requirements to attempt to contact the recipient by mail and provide public notices prior to reclamation remain unchanged.

Local Option Tax Amnesty Program: The bill allows towns to adopt a temporary tax amnesty program. Through this program, municipalities could waive portions of the penalties and interest due on unpaid taxes, so long as the taxpayer paid the principal amount owed and was not the subject of a criminal investigation for failure to pay taxes.

Municipal Relief Act: Section by Section Summary

Tools to Encourage and Facilitate Regionalization of Municipal Services

Joint or Regional Assessing Agreements Section 51 clarifies the law permitting joint or cooperative assessing agreements to allow cities and towns to share assessors as well as assessing department staff.

Collective Purchasing by Educational Collaboratives Section 42 allows education collaboratives to enter into bulk purchasing agreements with public entities outside our state borders, to further leverage economies of scale and save money for participating school districts.

Collective Bargaining and Regional Entities Section 41 provides that a municipal decision to enter into an intermunicipal agreement or join a regional entity shall not be subject to collective bargaining.

Mutual Aid Agreements Sections 43 and 44 allow cities, towns, and other governmental units in Massachusetts to join statewide mutual aid agreements to provide police, fire, emergency medical, public works, and other public safety assistance to other municipalities.

Regionalization Incentive Section 120 requires agencies to encourage and prioritize existing grants for municipalities which apply jointly in regionalization efforts.

Municipal Finance Efficiency

Sound Business Practices (Sections 16-22, 111)

Allows towns to meet procurement requirements through purchase from the General Services Administration supply schedule.
• Allows procurement officers to use reverse auctions to buy products and services in amounts greater than $25,000 from sellers who bid against each other for the product or service being auctioned.  This process provides a method of acquiring best pricing from qualified bidders. Reverse auctions are allowed to use electronic bidding.
• Clarifies that intergovernmental transactions ( state to town, feds to town, town to state, etc) are exempt from Chapter 30B.
• Clarifies that procurements for energy management services have competitive bidding safeguards in place
• Provides that a construction payment bond is required for contracts of more than $25,000, increased from existing levels of $2000 for municipalities and $5,000 for the Commonwealth.
• Allows cities, towns, and school departments to participate in cooperative purchasing agreements with public agencies outside of Massachusetts.

Municipal Electronic Billing Section 92 amends c. 60, § 3A, the tax bill statute.
Allows cities and towns option to establish a voluntary e-billing program with the selectmen/mayor as approving officials. The language provides that any “user charge” bills to be included with tax bill mailing or e-billing should be set out in a by-law/ordinance.  A by-law or ordinance would ensure a thorough discussion of the pros & cons, and then would govern all departments including those headed by elected officials. Requires/allows participating towns to
• display personal exemptions granted to seniors, blind, veterans, etc. and net amount due on the bill (subsection a)
• implement voluntary programs of e-billing subject to approval of selectmen or mayor (subsection b)
• include bills for other municipal charges (water, sewer, trash, light plant) in same envelope or e-billing as tax bill, as authorized by by-law or ordinance.  The bills for the other charges have to be separate and distinct.  Bills for independent water & sewer commission may be included in by-law or ordinance if approved by the commission.

Review of Assessment Certification Schedule Section 46 allows DOR to adjust the scheduled year for triennial certification of local assessing practices in order to equalize the number of communities scheduled in each year and to facilitate or implement regional and other cooperative assessing arrangements.  This will enable DOR and local assessors to more efficiently and effectively carry out their responsibilities in ensuring current fair market values on an annual basis.  Similar and nearby communities will be able to share consultants and market data, thereby resulting in more accurate assessments for local taxpayers.

Audit of Personal Property Returns Sections 80-82, 87-91 would allow assessors to subpoena and audit the records of taxpayers who are required to file an annual return of their taxable personal property in order to determine whether the return is complete and accurate. The assessors will have three years to audit the records.  If taxable property is discovered, they will have six months to make an omitted or revised assessment.   Taxpayers assessed under those sections have the right to apply for an abatement within 3 months after the additional tax bill is mailed.

Streamlined Abatement Process Section 75 streamlines the process by which local assessors can grant abatements without receiving prior approval from the department of revenue.  The commissioner will issue guidelines granting authority to abate for reasons determined by DOR to be in the public interest.

Amortize snow and ice removal costs. Section 77 allows municipalities to amortize 2010 snow and ice removal costs over the fiscal years 2011 and 2012.

Increase the Assessors Penalty Fee Section 83 Currently, Chapter 59, Section 38 D provides for a $50 dollar penalty to a commercial property owner who fails to provide information requested by the Board of Assessors in order to make accurate assessments.  Section 83 would increase that fee to $500 in the case of Class three or four real property.

Assessor Extension Requests Section 84 protects local Boards of Assessors from frivolous extensions of time by providing that failure of an owner or lessee of real property to comply with a request for information within 60 days will be automatic grounds for dismissal of a filing at the Appellate Tax Board.  The Appellate Tax Board and County Commissioners would be prohibited from granting extensions unless the applicant was unable to comply for reasons beyond his control or unless he attempted to comply in good faith.

Overlay Accounts Sections 78, 79, 85, 86 Under current law, a separate overlay account is created by towns for each fiscal year to fund abatements through the appeal of tax bills and other tax abatement programs. Surpluses from one year cannot be used to fund abatements for another year when that year’s overlay has been depleted and a deficit created. A surplus from any year’s overlay account can be used to finance operating or other municipal spending.

Sections 78, 79, 85, and 86 provide that a single overlay account would be created, with the amounts added each year effectively treated as exclusions from the levy limits of prop 2 ½.  However, any surplus overlay could not be used to fund operating or other spending.  Instead, any surplus would remain in the overlay account and continue into the following fiscal year.

Under this approach, municipalities would be more likely to avoid deficits and in some years, may be able to avoid having to raise additional amounts for the fund.  Since no overlay surplus would exist, the amounts added outside of Prop 2 1/2 could never be used to fund operating or other spending

Local Option Tax Amnesty Program Section 115 allows adoption of a temporary tax amnesty program by a town, which as written would expire on June 30, 2011. Through this program, municipalities may waive portions of the penalties and interest due on unpaid taxes, so long as the taxpayer pays the principal amount owed and was not the subject of a criminal investigation for failure to pay taxes.

Abandoned and Unclaimed Checks Section 113 allows a one year expiration period to be printed on checks but does not change the current requirement to attempt to contact the recipient by mail and provide public notices prior to reclamation. Current law states that a check issued by a municipality is not deemed abandoned until three years after date of issuance.

Elimination of Fee for State House Notes Section 71 eliminates the fee charged to municipalities for the processing of State House Notes by the Director of Accounts.  The revenue generated annually is a nominal amount.  Eliminating this fee streamlines the processing of the notes and reduces costs for local governments.

Long term municipal leases Section 40 allows municipalities to enter into leases of up to 30 years without home rule petition to the legislature.  This is an increase from 10 years.

Civil Service Maximum Age Sections 23 and 24 authorize the appointing authority to apply to the personnel administrator to waive the civil service maximum age requirement for certain individuals based on extenuating circumstances, consistent with the fundamental purposes of the requirement.  No longer need to go through home rule.

Separate Taxation of Condo Development Rights/Other Interests Sections 93-95, 112, and 122 allow taxation of additional units constructed or under construction on land subject to a condominium master deed to the developer who retains development rights in the land.  Those improvements now escape taxation until the master deed is amended because they are not separately taxable under the condo statute. 

Renewable energy revolving fund and betterment program. Sections 56 and 57 set up a mechanism for municipalities to offer a loan program to residents for renewable energy improvements.  The fund must be established by ordinance or bylaw after a public hearing.  The fund administrator can apply for and accept grants of gifts for the purpose of the fund, make loans to private property owners to finance or refinance the costs of energy conservation and renewable energy projects after an energy audit has been completed, and receive repayments of the loans and interest.  Whenever the city or town enters into the loan agreement with a property owner in this manner, a betterment agreement subject to Chapter 111 must be recorded.

Motor Vehicle Registration Compliance Sections 105 and 107 require that any new resident must register their vehicle within 30 days or penalty fees would apply.  Any resident who owns a vehicle registered out of state but is for all intents and purposes operating within the Commonwealth would be subject to penalties $250-500$. Half of the penalty fee would remain in municipality where violation occurred.

Due Date Motor Vehicle Excise Tax bill Currently payment due date is 30 days after issue which can cause confusion.  Section 96 requires specific due date to be printed on bills.

Boat Excise Compliance Section 97 requires non-payment of boat excise tax to be reported so that vessel registration is not granted.

Authorizing municipal borrowing for dredging projects Section 58 clarifies that municipalities can borrow for dredging projects

Authorizing municipal borrowing for environmental clean up Section 59 clarifies that municipalities can borrow for the cleaning up or prevention of pollution caused by existing or closed municipal facilities, without legislative approval.

Trench Laws Section 104 would waive the requirement that a contractor need a trench permit so long as the excavation is to be completed in one day, not left unattended, and will be backfilled and graded on the same day.  Any violation would be punishable by fine not to exceed $2500 per day.

Flexibility in Municipal and Regional School District Borrowing Sections 60-70 and 98 increase flexibility in municipal and regional school district borrowing by allowing borrowing for terms consistent with the maximum useful life of the asset, but not more than 30 years, as determined in accordance with guidelines established by the Division of Local Services of the Department of Revenue. Also increases flexibility for emergency borrowing, expedites the process for achieving savings through refinancing and removes overly restrictive requirements for amortization of debt.

Tools for Managing Employee Benefits

Transfer of Eligible Municipal Retirees into Medicare - Sections 36 and 37 reduce municipal benefit costs by requiring that all eligible retired local employees enroll in Medicare as their primary source of health insurance coverage.  The state already requires this of state employees.  Currently cities and towns have the OPTION of doing this, but a large number of cities and towns have not done so.  As a result, their retirees remain in the community’s health plan at considerable and unnecessary expense to local taxpayers.  (As of last January, 174 towns had considered the shift, only 107 voted to do so).

Optional Early Retirement Program - Section 25 is an Early Retirement Incentive program for cities and towns.  This program would allow a limited number of long term municipal employees to receive early retirement benefits, while restricting the town’s ability to refill those same positions to no more than 30%, 45%, and 60% of the former total salaries over the next three years, respectively.  This program would be at the option of municipalities, giving cities and towns the flexibility to determine for themselves whether this tool is appropriate for their community.

Retirement system funding relief: Sections 26 - 29 is a pension funding relief plan to help local pension systems address unprecedented asset losses in a fiscally responsible and manageable way, without the significant increases in payments that would otherwise be required.  Specifically, the legislation allows local systems to extend their funding schedule subject to certain conditions and requires that future asset gains be used to shorten schedules, not reduce payments.

Revised Provisions for Transfer of Municipal Retirement Systems into PRIT. Sections 30 and 31.  Section 30 provides that a system that has voluntarily transferred its assets to PRIT before receiving a notice from PERAC that the system is underperforming shall be exempt from the requirement that the transfer be in perpetuity.  Section 31 provides a simplified appeal process for those systems that appeal for an exemption from a transfer order.

Pro-rating of Insurance for Part-time employees. Section 32 allows a municipality to pro-rate its contribution for a part time employee’s health insurance premium based on the number of hours per week worked by the employee, saving money for cities and towns.

Pro-rating of Insurance for Part Time Retirees Section 33 allows towns to negotiate health insurance contributions on a sliding scale for retirees working part time and hired after the date of this act.

Municipal Life Insurance. Sections 34 and 35 amend Section 11A of Chapter 32B by increasing the optional life insurance maximum for municipal, county, and district employees from $74,000 to $150,000 and allowing the local board to make the determination of amount.

Health Care Spending Accounts. Section 38 allows municipal employees adopting the state’s health insurance to also obtain certain optional benefits under in the GIC.  Employees contribute their own pre-tax dollars to be used for eligible dependent care or health related expenses.

Relative to Elections

Authorize Cities and Towns to send voter information Section 72 sets up a local option mechanism to authorize governing bodies in individual towns to send information to voters at least 10 days prior to any election at which a binding or nonbinding question is submitted solely to the voters of that town.  Information includes the full text of the question;  a fair and concise summary of the question, including a one sentence statement describing the effect of the yes or no vote, prepared by the town counsel; and arguments for and against the question.  It is currently possible to do this only with a home rule petition.

Reduce the number of election officer required for polling places Sections 73 and 74 reduces the number of election officers required under Chapter 54 for polling places.

Validation of Local Elections by Secretary of State Section 39 authorizes the Secretary of State to validate a town election or actions taken at a town meeting where an inadvertent failure to comply with certain procedural requirements occurred, but the result did not contradict the fundamental purposes of those requirements and the error was unlikely to affect the outcome of the election or meeting

Relative to Schools

Regional School Districts Sharing Superintendents Section 101 This section allows regional school districts to join with municipal districts in a superintendency union and will facilitate a step toward regionalization.

Regional School Districts Access to Stabilization Funds. Section 99 Facilitates amd streamlines the process to allow Regional School Districts to access their stabilization funds.

School and Municipal Coordination Section 100 states that towns may accept the provisions of this section, requiring that school and city officials meet annually to review the fiscal status of the school district budget and to identify potential cost savings through shared services.

SPED tuition rates Section 102 specifies that SPED rates can be established only at the start of the fiscal year.  Note that individual plans can still change during the school year.

SPED mileage reimbursement for parents Section 103 allows schools to choose to adopt a program of parental reimbursement for parents who voluntarily choose to transport their disabled child to an approved out of district placement.  This provision would allow a district to reimburse at rates in excess of the standard state mileage reimbursement if it can be demonstrated that such reimbursements represent a cost savings.

Agency review of state and federal school reporting requirements Section 119 directs the Department of Early and Secondary Education to review state and federal reporting requirements in order to consolidate and reduce duplicity of reporting.

Other

Municipal Police Training  - Motor Vehicle Inspection Fee Increase Sections 1-14, 45, 52-55, 108-110, 114, 121, 123

Chapter 6 of the General Laws is amended to change the authority and functions of the existing Municipal Police Training Committee. The membership is unchanged, but the Committee now becomes more advisory:  Chapter 6 of the General Laws is further amended by striking out Section 116 and inserting a new section that establishes a municipal police training agency within the Executive Office of Public Safety and Security.  The agency takes over some of the responsibilities previously held by the Committee, including training and promulgation of regulations. The Secretary of Public Safety and Security is given the authority to promulgate regulations relative to the policies and standards for training municipal police officers.

Language provides that if a municipality pays for a police officer or recruit to attend basic training officer or recruit must remain in the service of that municipality’s police department for a minimum number of consecutive years, determined by the secretary of public safety and security by regulation; otherwise the officer or recruit is required to reimburse the municipality for the cost of the basic training costs; pro-rated, based upon the proportion of required service that such officer or recruit shall have served; provided that the officer’s or recruit’s failure to serve such municipality’s police department for the required period was voluntary.

Section 106 raises the motor vehicle inspection fee by $6 which will be deposited into the General Fund for distribution to cities and towns for municipal police training and community policing and to the department of state police for training and community policing; provided, however, that money distributed for basic police training established by the municipal police training committee shall be contingent upon a match of not less than $1 in municipal contributions for every $1 in state funding; and provided further, that state matching funds shall not exceed the amount available for appropriation. (revenue enhancer)

State Cultural Districts Section 15 establishes criteria for municipalities to create state cultural districts and directs departments and agencies to identify existing incentives and resources to enhance such districts. A cultural district shall be a recognized, labeled, mixed-use, compact area of a city or town in which a high concentration of cultural facilities serves as an anchor.  The purpose is to attract artists and cultural enterprises to a community, while encouraging business and job development, establishing tourist destinations, preserving and reusing historic buildings, enhancing property values and fostering local cultural development.  Agencies are directed to work with towns to identify programs and services that support and enhance the development of cultural districts and assure that they are accessible to such districts.

Tax Increment financing Sections 47, 48, 49, and 76 allow municipalities flexibility to negotiate the amount of the personal property tax exemption provided in a tax increment finance plan. Currently, personal property taxes can be waived, but only by 100%.   The amount of the exemption for personal property shall be determined by multiplying the exemption percentage by the fair cash value of the personal property.

Affordable Housing Excess Profits Section 50 allows municipalities to collect excess profits from 40B projects for use for planning, education, public safety and infrastructure.

Studies

Establish Commission to review Local Aid Formulas Section 116  Commission will review the general unrestricted local aid formula.

Study on collaborative purchase of fuel: Section 117  creates a special commission to investigate reduction of fuel costs through statewide heating fuel collaborative.

Study on county funding. Section 118 would establish a special commission to study the financing of county governments in the Commonwealth; to recommend to the Legislature any proposals for revenue sources that may be necessary to meet the obligations of the counties, including proposed changes in fees, rates, assessments, leases, or permits. 

February 23, 2010

Anti-Bullying Bill Advances

Based on Bullying-Prevention Bill Sponsored by Senator Eldridge

BOSTON - The Joint Committee on Education approved a bullying-prevention bill today that aims to dramatically reduce bullying at schools. The bill, which is based on the frameworks found in the bill filed last January by State Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton), prohibits bullying, including cyberbullying, on school grounds and would require schools to develop a bullying prevention and intervention plan.

“This comprehensive, prevention-oriented legislation will work to end the tragic cycle of bullying we’ve seen in the Commonwealth’s schools for years, leading to tragedies like those in South Hadley, Springfield and too many other communities,” said Eldridge. “It’s a strong step toward a Commonwealth where schools are a safe place for all students.”

The bullying-prevention legislation was originally championed by former State Senator Robert Antonioni, who, upon his retirement, asked Eldridge to carry the torch. “Bob was a strong advocate for this issue for years, and really deserves a lot of credit for the time and energy he put into this bill. I was moved by his passion, and honored to sponsor the bill this year.”

The bill that was passed by the Committee today would:

• Specifically define bullying, including cyberbullying.
• Prohibit bullying at school and at all school facilities, at school-sponsored or related functions, on school buses and at school bus stops, through the use of technology or an electronic device owned, licensed or used by a school, and at non-school-related locations and through non-school technology or electronic devices, if the bullying affects the school environment.
• Require schools to provide age appropriate bullying prevention instruction for students in each grade.
• Require schools to provide professional development for teachers and other staff to help them prevent and stop bullying and to offer education to parents about bullying prevention.
• Mandate that children on the Autism spectrum receive training on how to avoid and respond to bullying.
• Require all school staff to promptly report bullying when they witness or become aware of it. A school principal or his designee must immediately investigate and take appropriate disciplinary action.
• Require each school to develop a bullying prevention and intervention plan, containing:
  • Procedures for responding to and investigating reports of bullying
  • Strategies for protecting those who report bullying
  • Notice to the parents or guardians of students involved in bullying, including perpetrators and victims
  • Appropriate services for students who have been bullied or who are bullies

• Require the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education to develop a model bullying prevention and intervention plan and compile a list of bullying prevention and intervention resources, to aid schools and districts in anti-bullying efforts.

###

Tax Credit Transparency

This bill will increase accountability and oversight of state agencies, quasi-publics and our contracts with private organizations engaged in economic development activities.

This should extend to an examination of where every single public dollar is going, and what impact it is having especially in this time of massive budget cuts,

The committee should include language to amend Chapter 62C of the General Laws to require public disclosure of the results of refundable or transferable tax credit programs that was proposed by Governor Patrick in H2.

This measure would provide us with the information we need to be good stewards of the public’s money, and provide a measure of accountability as to the cost effectiveness of tax credits.

Gathering information on these tax credits would allow us to determine if it makes sense in this fiscal climate to begin pulling back on certain tax credits is so that money and resources can be sent to our economic development agencies allowing them to do their job better and focus additional resources to workforce development programs to help train the unemployed workers.

Asset Development/ Workforce development

As Chair of the Asset Development commission spent two years examining ways in which the state’s agencies can work for low-income people.  This bill is uniquely positioned to streamline the states economic development agencies to benefit businesses and individual development.

This can be realized by demanding that state agencies put particular emphasis on lending to poor families and poor areas of the state, and restoring programs like the Individual Development Accounts and workforce development and training.

The Massachusetts Individual Development Account program is a competitive grant program allows low and moderate wage earners to move towards economic self sufficiency.  They may use these IDA savings for one of three goals: purchase their first home; receiving post secondary education or training; or starting/expanding a small business.

State Owned Bank

Increased lending and credit can be achieved through the formation of State Owned bank.  North Dakota has successfully maintained a state owned bank since its creation in 1919 and other states are currently looking into such a model.

The Bank of North Dakota serves as an economic development agency and a lender to banks that lessens the loan risks of private banks and helps them finance larger projects. It offers cheap loans to farmers, students and businesses

Devens Enterprise Commission

On a local matter, I request that Sections 129, 130 and 131 be changed or removed as a result of their references to the Devens Enterprise commission and Chapter 498 of the Acts of 1993

The three towns Ayer, Harvard and Shirley that comprise Devens found a delicate balance in Chapter 498 and it was seen as sacred that any changes would have to be agreed upon by the towns.

Changes to the DEC and Chapter 498 are interfering in a local matter, and I believe that my constituents and district would see it that way too.

The concern stems from the fact that the Devens Enterprise Commission (DEC) is a land use board which votes on actual proposals like a ZBA, Planning Board, Conservation Commission, and Board of Health would. The DEC is a Land Use Permitting and Regulatory agency, not an economic development agency and it should be left out of the legislation.

Municipal Relief Act Released from Committee

Bill will help cities and towns save money, operate more effectively

BOSTON -Senator Jamie Eldridge and Representative Paul Donato, chairs of the Joint Committee on Municipalities & Regional Government, have announced that the committee has favorably reported out the 2010 Municipal Relief Act. This omnibus relief bill is a package of legislative changes and local-option programs - big and small - designed to give cities and towns the tools they need to operate more effectively and, ultimately, save money.

The Municipal Relief bill is a combination of the best ideas suggested by the Municipal Relief Commission (co-chaired last year by Chairman Paul Donato and Senator Stanley Rosenberg), Governor Deval Patrick, local officials throughout the state, legislators, municipal advocacy groups, and private citizens.

“These are tough times for our cities and towns, with cuts to local aid coming at the same time as rising costs, and the state has a duty to help. This bill won’t make all of these problems disappear - but it will give municipal officials new tools they need to tackle these problems head on and govern as effectively as possible in this time of lean resources,” said State Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton). “I also want to applaud Governor Deval Patrick for his leadership in filing the Municipal Partnership Act, as well as Senator Rosenberg and Representative Donato, for the incredible work they did with the Special Commission on Municipal Relief.”

“Now more than ever it is critical that the Legislature be able to assist our communities with the challenges that they face today and in the future. I’ve been directly involved with this initiative for some time now, and I am confident that we have put together a comprehensive array of cost saving and efficiency creating tools to help our cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth,” added Representative Paul Donato (D-Medford).

“Our cities and towns are in a challenging situation, there’s no question about it,” Senator Rosenberg (D-Amherst) said. “But the good news is that challenges spark creativity and encourage collaboration. I believe this bill represents a good-faith effort to give municipalities as many tools as possible to meet their budgeting needs.”

Convened by the Massachusetts Legislature in 2008, the Special Commission on Municipal Relief, chaired by Senator Rosenberg and Representative Donato, was given the task of finding ways that cities and towns throughout the Commonwealth could raise revenues, reduce costs and operate more efficiently. Through the collaborative efforts of lawmakers, business leaders, educators, labor leaders and municipal officials, the 16 member bi-partisan legislative commission offered a comprehensive report on its findings in May of 2009.

Weighing all the components of Governor Patrick’s Municipal Partnership Act together with the recommendations of the Special Commission on Municipal Relief, the Joint Committee on Municipalities and Regional Government began the process of putting together the best possible proposal that could be offered to the Legislature. Three hearings were held across the state, and the Committee made every effort to listen to the ideas and concerns of all interested parties - including retirees, current municipal employees, unions, municipal officials, and municipal advocacy groups - and build consensus where possible.

Many of the changes proposed in the bill are simple, straightforward, and common sense, allowing municipalities to do things one might have assumed they already could do.

For example, this bill allows municipalities to establish an e-billing program, a money-saving practice that has been used by private companies for years. It also allows cities to offer benefits to their workers - such as healthcare spending accounts and larger optional life insurance maximums - already available for state workers, and gives cities the ability to enter into long term leases.

Other provisions are more pro-active, giving municipalities new tools to manage employee benefits, facilitate regionalization, operate more efficiently and enjoy more flexibility in municipal finance.  For example, provisions to promote sound bidding practices and allow municipalities to enter into cooperative purchasing agreements and mutual aid agreements will help cities and towns save money on services, equipment and staffing.

After careful consideration, the Committee decided not to include municipal healthcare reform in this package. Although the Committee agreed that this controversial issue needs to be addressed, stakeholders remain far apart on a solution to the issue. In the interest of passing an effective municipal relief bill quickly, the Committee opted to continue work on municipal healthcare reform separately.

Highlights of the bill include:

• Transferring Eligible Municipal Retirees into Medicare: The bill will reduce benefit costs for municipalities by requiring that all eligible retired local employees enroll in Medicare as their primary source of health insurance coverage, as is already done on the state level.

• Optional Early Retirement Program: The bill includes an Early Retirement Incentive program for cities and towns. This program would allow a limited number of long term municipal employees to receive early retirement benefits, while restricting the town’s ability to refill those same positions to no more than 30%, 45%, and 60% of the former total salaries over the next three years, respectively. This program would be at the option of municipalities, giving cities and towns the flexibility to determine for themselves whether this tool is appropriate for their community.
• Retirement system funding relief: The legislation proposes a pension funding relief plan to help local pension systems address unprecedented asset losses in a fiscally responsible and manageable way, without the significant increases in payments that would otherwise be required.  Specifically, the legislation allows local systems to extend their funding schedule subject to certain conditions and requires that future asset gains be used to shorten schedules, not reduce payments.
• Support for School District Regionalization: The bill includes provisions to facilitate regionalization of school districts by allowing regional school districts to join with municipal districts in a superintendency union, and streamlining the process to allow regional school districts to access their stabilization funds.

• Collective Purchasing: Another idea to help participating communities to save money, this would allow education collaboratives to leverage economies of scale by entering into bulk purchasing agreements with public entities outside our state borders. It would also give cities, towns and school departments the ability to participate in cooperative purchasing agreements with public agencies outside of Massachusetts.

• Mutual Aid Agreements: The bill would allow cities and towns to join statewide mutual aid agreements to provide police, fire, emergency medical, public works, and other public safety assistance to other municipalities. This would allow cities and towns to save money on staffing and equipment while still being prepared for emergency situations.

• Sound Business Practices: This would incorporate a number of changes to procurement law, including a provision to allow cities and towns to use reverse auctions when buying products and services in large amounts, reducing costs by having sellers bid against each other to provide the best price.

• Municipal Electronic Billing: The bill would allow cities and towns the option to establish a voluntary e-billing program - an added convenience for residents, and a money-saver for cities and town.

• Renewable energy revolving fund and betterment program: The bill would allow municipalities to offer a loan program to property owners for renewable energy improvements. This would give towns interested in promoting energy conservation and green energy the legal mechanism to set up a revolving fund for this purpose.
• Flexibility in Municipal and Regional School District Borrowing: The bill would increase flexibility in municipal and regional school district borrowing by extending the allowable borrowing terms. It would also increase flexibility for emergency borrowing, expedite the process for achieving savings through refinancing, and remove overly restrictive requirements for amortization of debt.

• Abandoned and Unclaimed Checks: Currently, a check issued by a municipality is not deemed abandoned until 3 years after issuance. This new provision would allow towns to print a one year expiration period, to be printed on the checks. Current requirements to attempt to contact the recipient by mail and provide public notices prior to reclamation remain unchanged.

• Local Option Tax Amnesty Program: The bill allows towns to adopt a temporary tax amnesty program. Through this program, municipalities could waive portions of the penalties and interest due on unpaid taxes, so long as the taxpayer paid the principal amount owed and was not the subject of a criminal investigation for failure to pay taxes.

The bill has now been referred to the House Committee on Ways & Means for their review.

###

Governor Patrick has called upon the Legislature to make this information public, a move that many of my colleagues and I strongly support. So I was pleased to see the authors of the recent UMass Boston film industry study agree that it would also be useful to increase public access to granular data on the film tax credit program because this “data would be a great benefit to future research on this complex industry.”

In this time of massive budget cuts, we need to examine where every public dollar is going, and what impact it is having. I hope that film industry leaders will join us in calling for public disclosure of the results of these tax credit programs. If they are truly creating jobs in a cost-effective way, the results will show that.

JAMIE ELDRIDGE
Acton
The writer is state senator for the Middlesex and Worcester district.

“The Senate is focused on doing everything we can to help create jobs here in Massachusetts. By freezing the Unemployment Insurance rate this year, we can prevent an added cost that would have made it more difficult for small businesses to grow and add jobs,” said State Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton).

The Senate bill to freeze the Unemployment Insurance rate would hold steady the current rate schedule for Unemployment Insurance assessments on employers for calendar year 2010, while still providing unemployment insurance benefits to out of work Massachusetts citizens who are struggling in the continuing national economic crisis. In previous recessions the state has frozen the assessment schedule to relieve the burden on small businesses in tough economic times. The years 2008 and 2003 are the most recent examples.

Eldridge noted that the state may, in the future, need to revisit how the state funds the Insurance Trust.  ”To ensure long-term economic stability for the people of Massachusetts, both employers and employees, we need to be careful as a state to avoid putting off our obligations to our citizens and make sure everyone, including corporations, pays their fair share towards unemployment insurance,” said Eldridge. “But at a time when we are trying to encourage small businesses to add jobs in a tough economy, this temporary freeze makes sense.”

The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives for further action.

###

BOSTON – In an effort to relieve economic burdens on small businesses and encourage the creation of new jobs, State Senator Jamie Eldridge on Thursday voted to freeze the Unemployment Insurance rate, which was scheduled to increase by nearly $300 per employee. Without the freeze, the average employer would see the per-employee payment jump from $584 to $852.

“The Senate is focused on doing everything we can to help create jobs here in Massachusetts. By freezing the Unemployment Insurance rate this year, we can prevent an added cost that would have made it more difficult for small businesses to grow and add jobs,” said State Senator Jamie Eldridge (D-Acton).

The Senate bill to freeze the Unemployment Insurance rate would hold steady the current rate schedule for Unemployment Insurance assessments on employers for calendar year 2010, while still providing unemployment insurance benefits to out of work Massachusetts citizens who are struggling in the continuing national economic crisis. In previous recessions the state has frozen the assessment schedule to relieve the burden on small businesses in tough economic times. The years 2008 and 2003 are the most recent examples.

Eldridge noted that the state may, in the future, need to revisit how the state funds the Insurance Trust.  “To ensure long-term economic stability for the people of Massachusetts, both employers and employees, we need to be careful as a state to avoid putting off our obligations to our citizens and make sure everyone, including corporations, pays their fair share towards unemployment insurance,” said Eldridge. “But at a time when we are trying to encourage small businesses to add jobs in a tough economy, this temporary freeze makes sense.”

The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives for further action.