Met according to adjournment, at twelve o’clock noon, with Mr. DiMasi of Boston in the Chair (having been appointed by the Speaker, under authority conferred by Rule 5, to perform the duties of the Chair).

Prayer was offered by the Reverend Robert F. Quinn, C.S.P., Chaplain of the House, as follows:

God, Our Creator, in taking up and in evaluating the items on today’s Calendar, we depend upon You, Your assistance and guidance as we struggle to make conscientious, just and reasonable legislative decisions. Inspire us to address the challenges and opportunities to serve the people in a mature and thoughtful manner. Often our legislative options appear to deal with current issues only, but may have an effect on future generations. When we are engaged in difficult, complex and perhaps emotional discussions, help us to keep our focus clear, our priorities in order and our principles intact. As we carry out our daily responsibilities and tasks, inspire us to remember Your presence in our midst, at our side and on our side.

Grant Your blessings to the Speaker, the members and employees of this House and their families. Amen.

At the request of the Chair (Mr. DiMasi), the members, guests and employees joined with him in reciting the pledge of allegiance to the flag.

A statement of Mr. DiMasi of Boston concerning Mr. Fagan of Taunton was spread upon the records of the House, as follows:

MR. SPEAKER: I would like to call to the attention of the House the fact that one of our colleagues, Representative Fagan of Taunton, was not present in the House Chamber for today’s sitting due to a previously scheduled family obligation. Had he been present for the taking of yea and nay numbers 157 through 167, inclusive, and 169 through 179, inclusive, he would have voted, in each instance, in the affirmative. Any roll calls that he missed today was due entirely to the reason stated.  

A statement of Mrs. Owens-Hicks of Boston was spread upon the records of the House, as follows:

MR. SPEAKER: I would like to call to the attention of the House the fact that I was not able to be present in the House Chamber for yesterday’s sitting due to a longstanding family commitment. Any roll calls that I missed was due entirely to the reason stated.  

A petition (accompanied by bill, Senate, No. 2030) of Stephen M. Brewer and Reed V. Hillman (by vote of the town) for legislation relative to a betterment assessment in the town of Sturbridge, was referred, in concurrence, to the committee on Natural Resources and Agriculture.

By Mr. Scaccia of Boston, for the committee on Rules and the committees on Rules of the two branches, acting concurrently, that Joint Rule 12 be suspended on the following petitions:

Petition (accompanied by resolve) of Patricia A. Haddad and other members of the General Court for an investigation by a special commission (including members of the General Court) relative to middle level education in the Commonwealth. To the committee on Education, Arts and Humanities.

Petition (accompanied by bill) of Christopher P. Asselin for legislation to direct the reinstatement of John P. Moylan as a member in service of the teachers’ retirement system. To the committee on Public Service.

Petition (accompanied by bill) of Scott P. Brown and Cheryl A. Jacques that the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance be authorized to convey a certain parcel of land located in the town of Plainville to Joseph J. Lorusso. To the committee on State Administration.

Under suspension of the rules, on motion of Mr. Flynn of Bridgewater, the reports were considered forthwith. Joint Rule 12 then was suspended, in each instance. Severally sent to the Senate for concurrence.

Mr. Rogers of Norwood, for the committee on Ways and Means, on a message from His Excellency the Governor (for message, see House, No. 4005), returning with His disapproval of certain items and sections and parts of certain items, and reductions in certain items contained in the engrossed Bill making appropriations for the fiscal year 2004 for the maintenance of the departments, boards, commissions, institutions and certain activities of the Commonwealth, for interest, sinking fund and serial bond requirements and for certain permanent improvements (see House, No. 4004), reported, in part, in each instance, that certain items (contained in section 2) and certain sections stand (as passed by the General Court).

Under suspension of the rules, on motion of Mr. Vallee of Franklin, section 12, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

Section 12, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 12. Said chapter 6 is hereby further amended by inserting after section 178P the following section:—

Section 178Q. The sex offender registry board shall assess upon every sex offender a sex offender registration fee of $75, hereinafter referred to as a sex offender registry fee. Said offender shall pay said sex offender registry fee upon his initial registration as a sex offender and annually thereafter on the anniversary of said registration; provided, however, that no such fee shall be assessed or collected until the offender has either (1) waived his right to petition for an evidentiary hearing to challenge his duty to register as a sex offender as set forth in section 178L or (2) has completely exhausted the legal remedies made available to him to so challenge said duty to register pursuant to sections 178L and 178M and has not prevailed in his attempt to eliminate said duty. A sex offender’s duty to pay the fee established by this section shall only terminate upon the termination of said offender’s duty to register as a sex offender as set forth in section 178G.

The sex offender registry board may waive payment of said sex offender registry fee if it determines that such payment would constitute an undue hardship on said person or his family due to limited income, employment status, or any other relevant factor. Any such waiver so granted shall be in effect only during the period of time that said person is determined to be unable to pay the sex offender registry fee. The sex offender registry board shall establish procedures relative to the collection and waiver of such fee by regulation. Said sex offender registry fee shall be collected by the sex offender registry board and shall be transmitted to the treasurer for deposit into the General Fund. The sex offender registry board shall account for all such fees received and report said fees annually to the secretary of administration and finance and the house and senate committees on ways and means.”.

Pending the question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, Mr. Jones of North Reading asked for a count of the House to ascertain if a quorum was present. The Chair (Mr. DiMasi of Boston), having determined that a quorum was not in attendance, then directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to secure the presence of a quorum.

Subsequently a roll call was taken for the purpose of ascertaining the presence of a quorum; and on the roll call 148 members were recorded as being in attendance.

[See Yea and Nay No. 156 in Supplement.]

Therefore a quorum was present.

After debate the question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by Chapter I, Section I, Article II of the Constitution; and on the roll call 134 members voted in the affirmative and 22 in the negative.

Therefore section 12 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Under suspension of the rules, on motion of Mr. Rogers of Norwood, the following items (contained in section 2), which had been vetoed or reduced by the Governor, were considered, as follows:

 “8000-0225 The sex offender registry board may expend an amount not to exceed $750,000 from revenue collected from sex offender registration fees for the purpose of expediting the final classification of sex offenders and reducing the current case backlog; provided, that $200,000 shall be expended for interagency service agreements between the sex offender registry board and the various district attorneys in order to defray the costs incurred by said district attorneys from proceedings relative to the civil commitment of sexually dangerous persons including, but not limited to, probable cause hearings and trials initiated pursuant to sections 12 through 15,

inclusive, of chapter 123A of the General Laws 750,000”.

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 133 members voted in the affirmative and 22 in the negative.

Therefore item 8000-0225 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 2820-4420 (contained in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“2820-4420 For the operation and maintenance of the Ponkapoag golf course; provided, that the division of urban parks and recreation may expend revenues up to $1,100,000 collected from fees generated by the golf course; provided further, that for the purposes of accommodating discrepancies between the receipt of retained revenue and related expenditures, the division may incur expenses and the comptroller may certify for payment amounts not to exceed the lower of this authorization or the most recent revenue estimate as reported in the state accounting system; and provided further, notwithstanding section 1 of chapter 31 of the General Laws, seasonal positions funded by this account are positions requiring the services of an incumbent, on either a full-time or less than a full-time basis beginning no earlier than April 1 and

ending no later than November 30 1,100,000”.

[The Governor reduced the item to $850,000 and reduced the following: “provided, that the division of urban parks and recreation may expend revenues up to $1,100,000 collected from fees generated by the golf course” to the following: “provided, that the division of urban parks and recreation may expend revenues up to $850,000 collected from fees generated by the golf course”.]

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call (Mrs. Harkins of Needham having been in the Chair) 114 members voted in the affirmative and 42 in the negative.

Therefore item 2820-4420 (contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 2820-4421 (contained in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“2820-4421 For the operation and maintenance of the Leo J. Martin golf course; provided, that the division of urban parks and recreation may expend revenues up to $700,000 collected from fees generated by the golf course; provided further, that for the purposes of accommodating discrepancies between the receipt of retained revenue and related expenditures, the division may incur expenses and the comptroller may certify for payment amounts not to exceed the lower of this authorization or the most recent revenue estimate as reported in the state accounting system; and provided further, notwithstanding section 1 of chapter 31 of the General Laws, seasonal positions funded by this account are positions requiring the services of an incumbent, on either a full-time or less than a full-time basis beginning no earlier than April 1 and

ending no later than November 30 700,000”.

[The Governor reduced the item to $550,000 and reduced the following: “provided, that the division of urban parks and recreation may expend revenues up to $700,000 collected from fees generated by the golf course” to the following: “provided, that the division of urban parks and recreation may expend revenues up to $550,000 collected from fees generated by the golf course”.]

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 115 members voted in the affirmative and 40 in the negative.

Therefore item 2820-4421 (contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 4512-0225 (contained in section 2), which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“4512-0225 The department of public health may expend for a compulsive gamblers’ treatment program an amount not to exceed $654,942 from unclaimed prize money held in the state lottery fund for more than 1 year from the date of the drawing when the unclaimed prize money was won, and from the proceeds of a multi-jurisdictional lottery game under subsection (e) of section 24A of chapter 10 of the General Laws; provided, that the state comptroller shall transfer the

amount to the General Fund 654,942”.

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 131 members voted in the affirmative and 25 in the negative.

Therefore item 4512-0225 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 7006-0067 (contained in section 2), which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“7006-0067 The division of standards may expend for enforcement of weights and measures laws an amount not to exceed $358,900 from revenues received from item pricing violations collected through municipal inspection efforts, and from weights and measures fees and fines collected from

cities and towns 358,900”.

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 132 members voted in the affirmative and 23 in the negative.  

Therefore item 7006-0067 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 7006-0068 (contained in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“7006-0068 The division of standards may expend an amount not to exceed $450,000 from revenue received from license fees assessed to owners of motor

vehicle repair shops 450,000”.

[The Governor reduced the item to $200,000 and reduced the following: “The division of standards may expend an amount not to exceed $450,000 from revenue received from license fees assessed to owners of motor vehicle repair shops” to the following: “The division of standards may expend an amount not to exceed $200,000 from revenue received from license fees assessed to owners of motor vehicle repair shops”.]

After remarks the question on passing said item, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 131 members voted in the affirmative and 23 in the negative.

Therefore item 7006-0068 (contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 650, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 650. Notwithstanding any general or special law, rule or regulation to the contrary, the department of public safety shall charge the following fees; (a) fees for annual elevator inspections shall be at least $400 per inspection and (b) overtime elevator inspection fees shall be at least $400 per inspection.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 110 members voted in the affirmative and 44 in the negative.

Therefore section 650 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 630, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 630. Notwithstanding any general or special law or regulation to the contrary, the secretary of administration and finance shall increase the retailer license fee set forth in 801 CMR 4.02 to $200 per license; provided, however, that said fee increase shall take effect on July 1, 2003.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 125 members voted in the affirmative and 31 in the negative.

Therefore section 630 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 638, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 638. Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the division of apprentice training shall charge a fee of $40 for an optician apprentice application.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 128 members voted in the affirmative and 27 in the negative.

Therefore section 638 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 4100-0060 (contained in section 2), which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“4100-0060 For the operation of the division and the administration of the uncompensated care pool established pursuant to chapter 118G of the General Laws; provided, that notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the assessment to acute hospitals authorized pursuant to section 5 of said chapter 118G for the estimated expenses of the division shall include in fiscal year 2004, the estimated expenses, including indirect costs, of the division and shall be equal to the amount appropriated in this item less amounts projected to be collected in fiscal year 2004 from: (1) filing fees; (2) fees and charges generated by the division’s publication or dissemination of reports and information; and (3) federal financial participation received as reimbursement for the division’s administrative costs; provided further, that the assessed amount shall be not less than 65 per cent of the division’s expenses as specified in this item; provided further, that the division shall promulgate regulations requiring all hospitals receiving payments from the uncompensated care pool to report to the division the following utilization information: the number of inpatient admissions and outpatient visits by age category, income category, diagnostic category and average charge per admission; provided further, that the division shall submit quarterly to the house and senate committees on ways and means a summary report compiling said data; provided further, that the division, in consultation with the division of medical assistance, shall not promulgate any increase in medicaid provider rates without taking all measures possible under Title XIX of the Social Security Act or any successor federal statute to ensure that rates of payment to providers do not exceed such rates as are necessary to meet only those costs incurred by efficiently and economically operated providers in order to provide services of adequate quality; provided further, that the division shall meet the reporting requirements of section 25 of chapter 203 of the acts of 1996; provided further, that the division shall share financial data and expertise about the Massachusetts health care industry with the Massachusetts Institute for Social and Economic Research for the purpose of enhancing, developing and marketing data products for the public; provided further, that the division and the institute shall share any revenue generated through sale, licensure, royalty and usage fees charged for said data products; provided further, that not later than October 24, 2003, the division shall submit to the comptroller and to the house and senate committees on ways and means a report describing the method by which the division shall generate revenues through said sale, licensure, royalty, and usage fees in an amount sufficient to meet 25 per cent of the projected costs of the division in any fiscal year, as required by section 612 of chapter 151 of the acts of 1996; provided further, that funds may be expended for the purposes of a survey and study of the uninsured and underinsured in the commonwealth, including the health insurance needs of the residents of the commonwealth; provided further, that said study shall examine the overall impact of programs administered by the division and the division of medical assistance on the uninsured, the underinsured, and the role of employers in assisting their employees in affording health insurance pursuant to section 23 of chapter 118G of the General Laws; provided further, that for hospital fiscal year 2004, the private sector liability of purchasers and third party payers to the Uncompensated Care Trust Fund established pursuant to section 18 of chap­ter 118G of the General Laws shall be $315,000,000; provided further, that the division shall publish annual reports on the financial condition of hospitals and other health care providers through the Health Benchmarks project website, in collaboration with the executive office of health and human services, the office of the attorney general, and the University of Massachusetts; provided further, that the division shall submit to the house and senate committees on ways and means not later than December 6, 2003 a report detailing utilization of the uncompensated care pool; provided further, that the report shall include: (1) the number of persons in the commonwealth whose medical expenses were billed to the pool in fiscal year 2003; (2) the total dollar amount billed to the pool in fiscal year 2003; (3) the demographics of the population using the pool, and; (4) the types of services paid for out of the pool funds in fiscal year 2003; provided further, that the division shall include in the report an analysis on hospitals’ responsiveness to enrolling eligible individuals into the MassHealth program upon the date of service rather than charging said individuals to the uncompensated care pool; provided further, that the division shall include in the report possible disincentives the state could provide to hospitals to discourage such behavior; provided further, that notwithstanding any general or special law or rule or regulation to the contrary, the division shall not allow any exceptions to the usual and customary charge defining rule as defined in 114.3 CMR 31.02, for the purposes of drug cost reimbursement to eligible pharmacy providers for publicly aided and industrial accident patients; provided further, that the division is hereby authorized to change the pricing standard used by said division when determining the rate of payment to pharmacy providers for prescribed drugs for publicly-aided or industrial accident patients if such a change would financially benefit the commonwealth; and provided further, that not­withstanding any general or special law to the contrary said division shall set the rate paid for the dispensing fees to retail pharmacies for prescribed drugs to publicly aided or industrial accident patients at $3 beginning in fiscal year

2004 9,670,807”.

After remarks the question on passing said item, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 102 members voted in the affirmative and 52 in the negative.

Therefore the veto of item 4100-0060 (contained in section 2) was sustained (less than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative).

Subsequently a statement of Mr. Binienda of Worcester was spread upon the records of the House, as follows:

MR. SPEAKER: I would like to call to the attention of the House the fact that, due to a malfunction in the electronic voting machine, on the previous vote I was recorded as having voted in the negative. Had the machine been operating properly, I would have been recorded as having voted in the affirmative.

Mr. Cabral of New Bedford then moved that this vote be reconsidered.

Pending the question on the motion to reconsider, Mr. Rogers of Norwood asked for a count of the House to ascertain if a quorum was present. The Chair (Mr. DiMasi of Boston), having determined that a quorum was not in attendance, then directed the Sergeant-at-Arms to secure the presence of a quorum.

Subsequently a roll call was taken for the purpose of ascertaining the presence of a quorum; and on the roll call 155 members were recorded as being in attendance.

Therefore a quorum was present.

After debate on the motion to reconsider, the sense of the House was taken by yeas and nays, at the request of Mr. Jones of North Reading; and on the roll call 119 members voted in the affirmative and 36 in the negative.

Therefore the motion to reconsider prevailed.

After debate the recurring question on passing said item, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 112 members voted in the affirmative and 45 in the negative.

Therefore item 4100-0060 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 0611-5500 (contained in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“0611-5500 For additional assistance to cities and towns to be distributed according to section 3 and for assistance to certain public entities of the commonwealth which have constructed water pollution abatement facilities; provided, that the distribution to the public entities shall equal $1,249,948; and provided further, that if there is a conflict between the provisions of the distribution set forth in section 3 and any other provisions of this act, the distribution set forth

in section 3 shall control 379,767,936”.

[The Governor reduced the item to $356,767,936 and reduced in combination the corresponding Additional Assistance schedule in section 3 as shown in House document numbered 4005.]

After debate the question on passing said item and said section, notwithstanding said reductions of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 140 members voted in the affirmative and 15 in the negative.

Therefore item 0611-5500 (contained in section 2) in combination with the corresponding schedules contained in section 3 were passed, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 637, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 637. Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the division of apprentice training shall charge an annual fee of $300 to certify apprentice training sponsors.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 128 members voted in the affirmative and 27 in the negative.

Therefore section 637 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 636, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 636. Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, the division of apprentice training shall charge a fee of $50 for apprentice program sponsor verification on public bidding projects.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 130 members voted in the affirmative and 26 in the negative.

Therefore section 636 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 504, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 504. Section 34 of said chapter 262, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking, in line 78, the words ‘four dollars’ and inserting in place the following words: — $50, of which $46 shall be deposited in the General Fund.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 122 members voted in the affirmative and 33 in the negative.

Therefore section 504 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 2001-1001 (contained in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“2001-1001 The secretary of environmental affairs may expend an amount not to exceed $125,000 accrued from fees charged to authorities and units of government within the commonwealth, other than state agencies, for the distribution of digital cartographic and other data, and the review of environmental notification forms pursuant to sections 61 to 62H, inclusive, of chapter 30 of the General Laws the, for the purposes of providing said services; provided further, that the secretary of environmental affairs shall increase any existing digital data and map fees that have not been modified more recently than fiscal year 1989, and provided further, that the increase shall take effect during fiscal year

2004 125,000”.

[The Governor reduced the item to $50,000 and reduced the text contained in said item to the following: “The secretary of environmental affairs may expend an amount not to exceed $50,000 accrued from fees charged to authorities and units of government within the commonwealth, other than state agencies, for the distribution of digital cartographic and other data, and the review of environmental notification forms pursuant to sections 61 to 62H, inclusive, of chapter 30 of the General Laws the, for the purposes of providing said services”.]

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 133 members voted in the affirmative and 23 in the negative.

Therefore item 2001-1001 (contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the reductions of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 631, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 631. Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary and with the exception of fees charged for the testing of blood lead levels, fees charged by the division of occupational safety authorized in subsection (e) of section 197B of chapter 111 of the General Laws, section 46F of chapter 140 of the General Laws or section 6B of chapter 149 of the General Laws under the minimum wage program under 801 CMR 4.02 shall be set at a rate not less than twice the rate charged on July 1, 2002.”.

The question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 132 members voted in the affirmative and 22 in the negative.

Therefore section 631 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Item 4190-1101 (contained in section 2), which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“4190-1101 The Soldiers’ Home in Holyoke may expend revenues up to a maximum of $579,000 from resident fees for long-term care beds and domiciliary beds; provided, that the only revenue available for expenditure in this item shall be amounts collected for fiscal year 2004 from said resident fees; provided further, that funds shall only be expended on items directly related to patient care; provided further, that funds shall not be expended on office furniture or any other ancillary administrative expenses; and provided further, that said Soldiers’ Home shall submit a quarterly report to the house and senate committees on ways and means on any expenditures made from this

account 579,000”.

The question on passing said item, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 136 members voted in the affirmative and 19 in the negative.

Therefore item 4190-1101 was passed, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor (more than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its action.

Section 235, which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:

“SECTION 235. Paragraph (4) of subsection (A) of section 3 of said chapter 90C, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting after the first paragraph the following paragraph:—

Upon his appearance before the clerk magistrate that is assigned to such a noncriminal hearing, the violator shall pay to said clerk magistrate a fee of $10 prior to the commencement of said hearing.”.

After remarks the question on passing said section, notwithstanding the objections of the Governor, was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and on the roll call 11 members voted in the affirmative and 144 in the negative.

Therefore the veto of section 235 was sustained (less than two-thirds of the members present and voting having voted in the affirmative). Mr. Scaccia of Boston then moved that this vote be reconsidered; and the motion to reconsider was negatived.

Mr. Larkin of Pittsfield moved that the report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of the two branches with reference to the Senate amendment of the House Bill providing relief and flexibility to municipal officials (House, No. 3944), be discharged from its position in the Orders of the Day and considered forthwith, under suspension of Rule 47; and the motion prevailed.

After debate on the question on acceptance of the report, the sense of the House was taken by yeas and nays, at the request of Mrs. Walrath of Stow; and on the roll call 151 members voted in the affirmative and 3 in the negative.

Therefore the report of the committee of conference was accepted. The report then was sent to the Senate for concurrence.

On motion of Mr. Finneran of Boston,—

Ordered, That when the House adjourns today, it adjourn to meet tomorrow at one o’clock P.M.

 

Mr. Petrolati of Ludlow then moved that the House adjourn; and the motion prevailed. Accordingly, without proceeding to consideration of the matters in the Orders of the Day, at twenty-eight minutes after six o’clock P.M. (Mr. DiMasi of Boston being in the Chair), the House adjourned, to meet tomorrow at one o’clock P.M.