JOURNAL OF THE HOUSE.
|
Thursday, July 10, 2003. |
Met according to adjournment,
at eleven o’clock A.M.
At the request of the Speaker,
the members, guests and employees joined with him in reciting the pledge
of allegiance to the flag.
Statement Concerning
Representative Fagan of Taunton.
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 in 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
194 to 260, 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.
Statement of Representative
Kennedy of Brockton.
A statement of Mr. Kennedy
of Brockton 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 unable
to be present in the House Chamber for a portion of yesterday’s
sitting due to being unavoidably delayed on my way to the State House.
Had I been present for the taking of yea and nay number 181, I would have
voted in the affirmative. Any roll calls that I missed at the beginning
of yesterday’s sitting is due entirely to the reason stated.
Statement of Representative
Fesolo of Worcester.
A statement of Mr. Fesolo
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 I was unable
to be present in the House Chamber for a portion of today’s sitting
due to a previously scheduled medical appointment. Any roll calls that
I may have missed today is due entirely to the reason stated.
Statement
of Representative Khan of Newton.
A statement of Ms. Khan
of Newton 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 unable
to be present in the House Chamber for a portion of today’s sitting
due to a previously scheduled medical appointment. Any roll calls that
I may have missed today is due entirely to the reason stated.
Statement Concerning
Representative Loscocco of Holliston.
A statement of Mr. Jones
of North Reading concerning Mr. Loscocco of Holliston 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 Loscocco of Holliston, will not be
present in the House Chamber for today’s sitting due to a death
in his family. Any roll calls that he may miss today will be due entirely
to the reason stated.
Resolutions.
The following resolutions
(filed with the Clerk) were referred, under Rule 85, to the committee
on Rules:
Resolutions (filed by Representatives
O’Flaherty of Chelsea and Reinstein of Revere) honoring firefighter
Frederick Anthony Nowicki on the occasion of his retirement;
Resolutions (filed by Ms.
Peisch of Wellesley) honoring United States Marine Lance Corporal Jesse
Davis on the occasion of his return from serving the United States of
America as part of Operation Iraqi Freedom; and
Resolutions (filed by Mr.
Walsh of Boston) honoring Courtney Linnehan;
Mr. Miceli of Wilmington,
for the committee on Rules, reported, in each instance, that the resolutions
ought to be adopted. Under suspension of the rules, in each instance,
on motion of Ms. Peisch, the resolutions (reported by the committee on
Bills in the Third Reading to be correctly drawn) were considered forthwith;
and they were adopted.
Order.
An Order (filed by Mr.
DiMasi of Boston) relative to the appointment of a special committee of
the House to examine and evaluate the various issues relating to the administration,
management and operation of the judiciary (House, No. 3951) was referred,
under Rule 85, to the committee on Rules.
Mr. Scaccia of Boston,
for said committee on Rules, then reported recommending that the order
ought to be adopted. Under suspension of the rules, on motion of Mr. DiMasi,
the order was considered forthwith; and after remarks it was adopted.
Paper
from the Senate.
A petition (accompanied
by bill, Senate, No. 1942) of Michael R. Knapik and Michael F. Kane for
legislation to restrict the authority of the Holyoke Power and Electric
Company and the Holyoke Water Power Company (having been returned to the
Clerk of the Senate by the State Secretary, under provisions of Chapter
3 of the General Laws with memorandum relative thereto) was referred,
in concurrence, to the committee on Government Regulations.
Reports of Committees.
By Mr. Quinn of Dartmouth,
for the committee on Banks and Banking, asking to be discharged from further
consideration
Of so much of the recommendations
of the Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation (House, No.
8) as relates to increasing protections for consumers in the insurance
marketplace (accompanied by bill, House, No. 23),— and recommending
that the same be referred to the committee on Insurance; and
Of the petition (accompanied
by bill, House, No. 3289) of Bradley H. Jones, Jr. and other members of
the House relative to the establishment of homeowners fund bank accounts
for first time home buyers,— and recommending that the same be referred
to the committee on Taxation.
Under Rule 42, the reports
severally were considered forthwith; and they were accepted. Severally
sent to the Senate for concurrence.
By Mr. Kujawski of Webster,
for the committee on House Steering, Policy and Scheduling, asking to
be discharged from further consideration of the Bill further regulating
private detective business (House, No. 1337),— and recommending
that the same be recommitted to the committee on Public Safety. Under
Rule 42, the report was considered forthwith; and it was accepted.
By Mr. Kujawski of Webster,
for the committee on Steering, Policy and Scheduling, asking to be discharged
from further consideration of the Bill relative to police mutual aid agreements
(House, No. 593),— and recommending that the same be referred
to the committee on Rules. Under Rule 42, the report was considered forthwith; and it was accepted.
By Mr. Kujawski of Webster,
for the committee on Steering, Policy and Scheduling, asking to be discharged
from further consideration of the Bill relative to the inspection of certain
elevators (House, No. 982),— and recommending that the same be referred
to the committee on Ways and Means. Under Rule 42, the report was considered
forthwith; and it was accepted.
By Mr. Toomey of Cambridge,
for the committee on Public Safety, on a petition, a Resolve providing
for an investigation and study by a special commission relative to public
safety communications (House, No. 3573). Read; and referred, under Joint
Rule 29, to the committees on Rules of the two branches, acting concurrently.
By Mr. Toomey of Cambridge,
for the committee on Public Safety, on House, Nos. 402, 410, 411, 809,
978, 1340, 2120, 2282 and 3204, an Order relative to authorizing the committee
on Public Safety to make an investigation and study of certain House documents
concerning school buses and commercial vehicles (House, No. 3946).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on House, Nos. 813, 1554,
2284, 2285 and 2286, an Order relative to authorizing the committee on
Public Safety to make an investigation and study of certain House documents
concerning driving under the influence and driver’s licenses (House,
No. 3947).
Severally referred, under
Joint Rule 29, to the committees on Rules of the two branches, acting
concurrently.
Subsequently Mr. Scaccia
of Boston, for said committees, reported, in each instance, asking to
be discharged from further consideration of said orders; and recommending
that the same severally be referred to the House committee on Rules.
Under Rule 42, the reports
severally were considered forthwith; and they were accepted.
By Mr. Mariano of Quincy,
for the committee on Insurance, on a petition, a Bill providing for uniform
regulatory standards (House, No. 2823).
By Mr. Hall of Westford,
for the committee on State Administration, on Senate, No. 1701 and House,
No. 1383, a Bill to promote fair contract provisions (House, No. 1383).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill releasing certain land located
in the town of Danvers from the operation of an agricultural preservation
restriction (House, No. 1594).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill mandating fair market rents
(House, No. 3706).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on House, No. 3596, a Bill relative to the disposition
of certain conservation/recreation lands under the care, custody
and control of the Department of Environmental Management within the town
of Mashpee (House, No. 3948).
Severally read; and referred,
under Rule 33, to the committee on Ways and Means.
By Mr. Hall of Westford,
for the committee on State Administration, on House, Nos. 2361, 2696 and
3439, a Bill further regulating the use of computers in libraries (House,
No. 2361). Read; and referred, under Rule 33B, to the committee on Science
and Technology.
By Mr. Mariano of Quincy,
for the committee on Insurance, on a petition, a Bill to discourage fraud
(House, No. 921).
By Mr. Toomey of Cambridge,
for the committee on Public Safety, on a petition, a Bill requiring audible
warning devices for certain motor vehicles (House, No. 209).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill relative
to the license of school bus operators (House, No. 973).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on House, Nos. 1919 and 2494, a Bill to allow for
motor vehicles to be immobilized to reduce incidents of drunk driving
(House, No. 1919).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on House, Nos. 1726 and
3212, a Bill relative to the regulation of ice cream trucks and ice cream
vendors (House, No. 3212).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill relative to advertising on school
buses (House, No. 3216).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill relative to drag racing in the
city of Springfield (House, No. 3835) [Local Approval Received].
By the same member, for
the same committee, on House, No. 1561, a Bill relative to junior operator’s
licenses (House, No. 3949).
By Mr. Hall of Westford,
for the committee on State Administration, on a petition, a Bill relative
to the Massachusetts Port Authority Board (House, No. 2362).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill relating to public libraries
in the Commonwealth (House, No. 2693).
By the same member, for
the same committee, on a petition, a Bill relative to the Board of Directors
of the Massachusetts Port Authority (House, No. 3705).
Severally read; and referred,
under Rule 7A, to the committee on Steering, Policy and Scheduling.
By Mr. Rogers of Norwood,
for the committee on Ways and Means, on House No. 1, reports, in part,
a Bill making one-time investments in emerging technologies to stimulate
job creation and economic opportunity throughout the Commonwealth (House,
No. 3950). Read; and referred, under Joint Rule 29, to the committees
on Rules of the two branches, acting concurrently.
Mr. Scaccia of Boston,
for said committee, reported that the foregoing bill ought to pass. Referred,
under Rule 7A, to the committee on Steering, Policy and Scheduling.
Mr. Kujawski of Webster,
for the committee on Steering, Policy and Scheduling, reported that the
matter be scheduled for consideration by the House; and, under said rule
it was placed in the Orders of the Day for the next sitting for a second
reading.
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, in each instance, on motion of the same member, the items and sections
were considered; and the sense of the House, in each instance, was determined
by yeas and nays, as required by Chapter I, Section I, Article II of the
Constitution, as follows:
Section 545, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 545. Notwithstanding
the provisions of any general or special law to the contrary, the department
of capital assets maintenance and management may expend from capital authorizations
amounts necessary to cover the operational costs not to exceed $14 million
of the department for fiscal year 2004.”.
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
117 members voted in the affirmative and 31 in the negative.
Therefore section 545 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 5, which had been
vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 5. Sections
43, 44 and 45 of chapter 6 of the General Laws are hereby repealed.”.
After debate 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 18 in the negative.
[Mr. Kelly of Dalton answered
“Present” in response to his name.]
Therefore section 5 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 48, which had been
vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 48. Said
chapter 10 is hereby further amended by adding the following 3 sections:—
Section 70. There shall
be a commission to be known as the alcoholic beverages control commission,
to consist of a commissioner and 2 associate commissioners appointed by
the treasurer. Not more than 2 members shall be members of the same political
party. The commissioner shall serve a term coterminous with the treasurer.
The 2 associate commissioners serving on the alcoholic beverages control
commission on May 1, 2003 shall remain the associate commissioners until
January 2, 2005. The 2 associate commissioners shall thereafter be appointed
by the treasurer for terms of 4 years. The commissioner shall serve as
chairman and shall devote his full time during business hours to his official
duties. The positions of commissioner and associate commissioner shall
be classified in accordance with section 45 of chapter 30 and their salaries
shall be determined in accordance with section 46C of said chapter 30.
Any vacancy may be filled in like manner for the remainder of the unexpired
term. The treasurer may remove any member for neglect of duty, misconduct
or malfeasance in office, after providing the member with a written statement
of the charges and an opportunity to be heard. Two members shall constitute
a quorum for the purpose of conducting the business of the commission.
A vacancy shall not impair the right of the remaining members to exercise
the powers of the commission.
Section 71. The commission
shall have general supervision of the conduct of the business of manufacturing,
importing, exporting, storing, transporting and selling alcoholic beverages
as defined in section 1 of chapter 138, and also of the quality, purity
and alcoholic content thereof.
The commission shall submit
to the governor, the treasurer and to the general court, as soon as possible
after the end of each state fiscal year, a full report of its actions
and of the conduct and condition of traffic in alcoholic beverages during
such year, together with recommendations for such legislation as it deems
necessary or desirable for the better regulation and control of such traffic
and for the promotion of temperance in the use of such beverages. The
members shall receive their necessary traveling and other expenses incurred
while in the performance of their official duties.
Section 72. The commission
may appoint and remove a secretary. It may expend for such investigators,
clerical and other assistants as may be necessary for the performance
of its duties such amounts as may be appropriated and the employees shall
retain all collective bargaining and other rights previously held. The
commissioner may appoint a chief investigator and other investigators,
who shall be exempt from chapter 31, for the purpose of enforcing or causing
to be enforced the penalties provided by law against every person who
is guilty of a violation of chapter 138 of which they can obtain reasonable
proof, and shall make all necessary and appropriate investigations for
that purpose. Each person appointed as an investigator shall complete
a basic reserve police officer training course through the criminal justice
training council and shall attend a basic training course conducted by
the commission. All investigators shall attend an annual in-service training
course pursuant to this section. Each member of the commission, and each
of its employees having access to moneys received by it, shall give to
the treasurer a bond for the faithful performance of his duties in a penal
sum and with sureties approved by the treasurer.
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
131 members voted in the affirmative and 19 in the negative.
[Messrs. Kelly of Dalton
and Hargraves of Groton answered “Present” in response to
their names.]
Therefore section 48 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 0610-0050 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“0610-0050 For the administration
of the alcoholic beverages control commission in its efforts to regulate
and control the conduct and condition of traffic in alcoholic beverages;
provided, that said commission shall maintain at least one chief investigator
and other investigators for the purpose of regulating and controlling
the traffic of alcoholic beverages; provided further, that said commission
is authorized and directed to work and cooperate with the Alcohol, Tobacco,
and Firearms division of the United States Department of Justice and other
relevant federal agencies to assist in its efforts to regulate and control
the traffic of alcoholic beverages; and provided further, that said commission
is directed to seek out matching federal dollars and to apply for federal
grants that may be available to assist in the enforcement of laws pertaining
to the traffic
of alcoholic beverages 1,766,478”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $825,921 and disapproved the following wording: “; provided,
that said commission shall maintain at least one chief investigator and
other investigators for the purpose of regulating and controlling the
traffic of alcoholic beverages”.]
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
136 members voted in the affirmative and 14 in the negative.
[Mr. Kelly of Dalton answered
“Present” in response to his name.]
Therefore item 0610-0050
(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 411, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 411. Section
1 of chapter 138 of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended
by striking out, in line 32, the words ‘forty-three of chapter six’
and inserting in place thereof the following words:— 70 of chapter
10.”.
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
131 members voted in the affirmative and 19 in the negative.
[Messrs. Kelly of Dalton
and Hargraves of Groton answered “Present” in response to
their names.]
Therefore section 411 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 0335-0001 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“0335-0001 For the central
division of the Boston municipal court department including the administrative
cost of said court department
3,185,464”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $1,659,121 and disapproved the following wording: “central
division of the”.]
After debate 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 being in the Chair) 120 members
voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0001
(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 0335-0100 (contained
in section 2), in which the Governor had disapproved certain wording,
was considered, as follows:
“0335-0100 For the Brighton
division of the Boston municipal
court department 326,154”.
[The Governor disapproved
the following wording: “Boston municipal”.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the disapproval of the Governor of said wording,
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 item 0335-0100
(contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the disapproval of
the Governor of said wording (more than two-thirds of the members present
and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its
action.
Item 0335-0200 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“0335-0200 For the Charlestown
division of the Boston munic-
ipal court department 232,655”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $58,164 and disapproved the following wording: “Boston municipal”.]
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0200
(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 0335-0300 (contained
in section 2), in which the Governor had disapproved certain wording,
was considered, as follows:
“0335-0300 For the Dorchester
division of the Boston munic-
ipal court department 1,149,514”.
[The Governor disapproved
the following wording: “Boston municipal”.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the disapproval of the Governor of said wording,
was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and
on the roll call 121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0300
(contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the disapproval of
the Governor of said wording (more than two-thirds of the members present
and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its
action.
Item 0335-0400 (contained
in section 2), in which the Governor had disapproved certain wording,
was considered, as follows:
“0335-0400 For the East
Boston division of the Boston munic-
ipal court department 582,745”.
[The Governor disapproved
the following wording: “Boston Municipal”.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the disapproval of the Governor of said wording,
was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and
on the roll call 120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0400
(contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the disapproval of
the Governor of said wording (more than two-thirds of the members present
and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its
action.
Item 0335-0500 (contained
in section 2), in which the Governor had disapproved certain wording,
was considered, as follows:
“0335-0500 For the Roxbury
division of the Boston municipal
court department 1,116,770”.
[The Governor disapproved
the following wording: “Boston Municipal”.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the disapproval of the Governor of said wording,
was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and
on the roll call 120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0500
(contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the disapproval of
the Governor of said wording (more than two-thirds of the members present
and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its
action.
Item 0335-0600 (contained
in section 2), in which the Governor had disapproved certain wording,
was considered, as follows:
“0335-0600 For the South
Boston division of the Boston munic-
ipal court department 407,439”.
[The Governor disapproved
the following wording: “Boston Municipal”.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the disapproval of the Governor of said wording,
was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and
on the roll call 120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0600
(contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the disapproval of
the Governor of said wording (more than two-thirds of the members present
and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its
action.
Item 0335-0700 (contained
in section 2), in which the Governor had disapproved certain wording,
was considered, as follows:
“0335-0700 For the West
Roxbury division of the Boston
municipal court department
733,061”.
[The Governor disapproved
the following wording: “Boston Municipal”.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the disapproval of the Governor of said wording,
was determined by yeas and nays, as required by the Constitution; and
on the roll call 120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore item 0335-0700
(contained in section 2) was passed, notwithstanding the disapproval of
the Governor of said wording (more than two-thirds of the members present
and voting having voted in the affirmative). Sent to the Senate for its
action.
Section 449, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 449. Section
2 of chapter 211B of the General Laws, is hereby amended by striking out
the first sentence, as recently amended by section 38 of chapter 177 of
the acts of 2001, and inserting in place thereof the following sentence:—
There shall be 82 justices appointed to the superior court department,
10 justices appointed to the housing court department, 6 justices appointed
to the land court department, 51 justices appointed to the probate and
family court department, 30 justices appointed to the Boston municipal
court department, 41 justices appointed to the juvenile court department
and 158 justices and special justices appointed to the district court
department.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 449 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 478, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 478. Section
50 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in line 2, the word “eleven” and inserting in the place
thereof the following figure:— 30.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 478 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 695, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 695. Notwithstanding
any general or special law to the contrary, all judges currently acting
as a presiding judge in any of the divisions of the Boston municipal court
department which were, prior to the passage of this act, formerly under
the jurisdiction of the district court department of the trial court shall
continue performing such duties and responsibilities until such time as
their term expires. All grant or community service programs which were
funded in those divisions of the Boston municipal court department that
were, prior to the passage of this act, under the jurisdiction of the
district court department shall continue receiving such funding as part
of a cooperative agreement between said departments. Notwithstanding any
general or special law to the contrary, the chief justice for administration
and management, the chief justice of the district court division of the
trial court, and the chief justice of the Boston municipal court department
shall, on or before August 1, 2003, enter into agreements regarding the
assignment of judges between the district court department and the Boston
municipal court department in order to preserve the continuity of the
current judicial assignments of those judges serving in courts other than
the court to which such judges were originally assigned and to minimize
the reassignment of such judges to other courts following the passage
of this act.”.
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 120
members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 695 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 479, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 479. Section
51A of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting
after the first paragraph the following paragraph:—
The chief justice of the
Boston municipal court department shall have the power to appoint the
first justice of each of the various divisions within the Boston municipal
court department, subject to the approval of the chief justice for administration
and management, and to define his duties; provided, however, that appropriate
consideration shall be given to seniority, length of service at that particular
division, and managerial ability. Each first justice so appointed shall
serve as the first justice of that court for a five-year term and shall
be eligible to be reappointed for additional five-year terms at that particular
court. Any first justice may be removed from his position as first justice,
when it is determined by the chief justice of the district court department
to be in the best interests of the administration of justice. Any first
justice who is removed from his position as first justice by the chief
justice of the district court department may appeal such removal to the
chief justice for administration and management.”.
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 120
members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 479 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 484, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 484. Section
54 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby further amended by
inserting after the words ‘Suffolk county’ in lines 5 and
8 the following:— , excluding Chelsea and Revere,.”.
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
119 members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 484 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 481, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 481. Said
section 53 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby further
amended by adding the following five paragraphs:—
Four assistant clerks with
salaries payable by the commonwealth may be appointed in: Brighton division
of the Boston municipal court department; East Boston division of the
Boston municipal court department; South Boston division of the Boston
municipal court department; Charlestown division of the Boston municipal
court department.
Eight assistant clerks
with salaries payable by the commonwealth may be appointed in: Dorchester
division of the Boston municipal court department; West Roxbury division
of the Boston municipal court department.
Twelve assistant clerks
with salaries payable by the commonwealth may be appointed in: Roxbury
division of the Boston municipal court department.
One of the 12 assistant
clerks for the Roxbury division of the Boston municipal court department
shall be appointed for juvenile sessions.
In the following courts,
one of the assistant clerks shall be designated in charge of six-person
jury sessions and shall be paid by the commonwealth in accordance with
the job classification and pay plan established, subject to appropriation,
by the chief justice of administration and management: Dorchester division
of the Boston municipal court department.”.
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
119 members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 481 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 480, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 480. Section
53 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting
after the word ‘the’, in line 1, the following words:—
central division of the.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 480 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 234, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 234. Section
1 of chapter 90C of the General Laws, as so appearing, is hereby amended
by striking out the definitions of ‘District court’ and ‘Division’
and inserting in the place thereof the following two definitions:—
‘District court’,
a division of the district court department or a session thereof for holding
court or a division of the Boston municipal court department or a session
thereof for holding court. It shall also include the divisions of the
juvenile court department with respect to automobile law violations that
are treated as a delinquency matter in such department and with respect
to civil motor vehicle infractions that are recorded in conjunction with
and that arise from the same occurrence as automobile law violations that
are treated as a delinquency matter in such department.
‘Division’,
a division of the district court department or juvenile court department
or a division of the Boston municipal court department.”.
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 120
members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 234 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 454, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 454. Section
3 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 to 3, inclusive, the words ‘municipal court of the
city of Boston, the municipal court of the Charlestown district and the
municipal court of the South Boston district, and the East Boston district
court’ and inserting in the place thereof the following words:—
central, Charlestown, South Boston, and East Boston divisions of the Boston
municipal court department.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 454 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 455, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 455. Section
6 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 6 and 7, the words ‘, the municipal court of the Dorchester
district’.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 455 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 456, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 456. Said
section 6 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby further
amended by striking out, in lines 9 and 10, the words ‘the municipal
court of the Roxbury district,’.”.
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 120
members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 456 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 457, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 457. Said
section 6 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is further amended
by striking out the figure ‘177’, inserted by section 44 of
chapter 177 of the acts of 2001, and inserting in the place thereof the
following figure:— 158.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 457 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 458, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 458. Section
8 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out the first sentence and inserting in the place thereof the following
sentence:— Each district court and each division of the Boston municipal
court department shall have a clerk, except that the central division
of the Boston municipal court department shall have two clerks as provided
in section 53.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 458 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 460, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 460. The
fourth paragraph of section 10 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is
hereby amended by striking out the lines reading ‘municipal court
of the Brighton district;’ ‘East Boston district court;’
‘municipal court of South Boston district;’ and ‘the
municipal court of the Charlestown district;’.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 460 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 461, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 461. The
eighth paragraph of said section 10 of said chapter 218, as so appearing,
is hereby amended by striking out the line reading ‘municipal court
of the Dorchester district;’.”.
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 119
members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 461 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 462, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 462. Said
eighth paragraph of said section 10 of said chapter 218, as so appearing,
is hereby further amended by striking out the line reading ‘district
court of West Roxbury district;’.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 462 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 463, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 463. Said
section 10 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby further
amended by striking out the eleventh and twelfth paragraphs.”.
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 119
members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 463 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 464, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 464. The
Fifteenth paragraph of said section 10 of said chapter 218, as so appearing,
is hereby further amended by striking out the line reading ‘municipal
court of the Dorchester district;’.”.
Therefore section 464 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 465, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 465. Said
fifteenth paragraph of said section 10 of said chapter 218, as so appearing,
is hereby further amended by striking out the line reading ‘district
court of Brighton;’.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 465 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 466, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 466. Section
10A of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking,
in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘municipal court of the city of Boston’
and inserting in the place thereof the following words:— central
division of the Boston municipal court department.”.
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 121
members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 466 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 469, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 469. Section
26 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘the municipal court of the city
of Boston’ and inserting in the place thereof the following words:—
divisions of the Boston municipal court department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 469 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 470, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 470. Section
38 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by inserting
after the word ‘courts’, in line 1, the following words:—
and Boston municipal court divisions.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 470 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 471, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 471. Said
section 38 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby further
amended by inserting after the word ‘courts’, in line 10,
the following words:— and Boston municipal court divisions.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 471 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 472, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 472. Section
39 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘municipal court of the city of
Boston’ and inserting in the place thereof the following words:—
central division of the Boston municipal court department.”.
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
123 members voted in the affirmative and 32 in the negative.
Therefore section 472 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 473, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 473. Section
40 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in line 3, the words ‘municipal court of the city of Boston’
and inserting in place thereof the following words:— Boston municipal
court department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 473 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 474, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 474. Said
section 40 of said section 218, as so appearing, is hereby further
amended by striking out, in line 10, the words ‘municipal court
of the city of Boston’ and inserting in the place thereof the following
words:— central division of the Boston municipal court department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 474 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 475, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 475. Section
47 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘the municipal court of the city
of Boston’ and inserting in the place thereof the following words:—
Boston municipal court department.”.
Therefore section 475 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 476, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 476. Section
48 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘or the East Boston district court’.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 476 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 477, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 477. Section
49 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘the municipal court of the city
of Boston, and in the East Boston district court’ and inserting
in the place thereof the following words:— central division of the
Boston municipal court department, and in the East Boston division of
the Boston municipal court department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 477 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 482, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 482. Said
chapter 218 is hereby further amended by striking out section 53A, as
so appearing, and inserting in the place thereof the following section:—
Section 53A. In case of
the absence, death or removal of a salaried assistant clerk of any of
the 8 divisions of the Boston municipal court department, the clerk of
said court, may, subject to the approval of the chief justice, appoint
a temporary assistant clerk, to act until such assistant clerk resumes
his duties or until the vacancy is filled.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 482 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 483, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 483. Section
54 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in line 2, the words ‘said court’ and inserting in the
place thereof the following words:— the central division of the
Boston municipal court department.”.
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 120
members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 483 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 485, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 485. Section
57 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out the paragraphs under the caption ‘Suffolk
County’, and inserting in the place thereof the following 3 paragraphs:
—
held at the Dorchester
division of the Boston municipal court department, within the same territorial
limits as are prescribed for the criminal jurisdiction of the Dorchester
division of the Boston municipal court, as the chief justice of the juvenile
court department may determine.
held at the West Roxbury
division of the Boston municipal court, within the same territorial limits
as are prescribed for the criminal jurisdiction of the West Roxbury division
of the Boston municipal court department, as the chief justice of the
juvenile court department may determine.
held at Boston, within
the same territorial limits as are prescribed for the criminal jurisdiction
of the central division of the Boston municipal court department, the
Roxbury division of the Boston municipal court department, as the chief
justice of the juvenile court department may determine, the Brighton division of the Boston
municipal court department, the Charlestown
division of the Boston municipal court department, the East Boston
division of the Boston municipal court department, the Chelsea division
of the district court department; and the South Boston division of the
Boston municipal court department, as the chief justice of the juvenile
court department may determine.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 485 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 486, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 486. Section
66 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in lines 1 and 2, the words ‘municipal court of the city of
Boston’ and inserting in the place thereof the following words:—
Boston municipal court department.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 486 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 487, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 487. Section
68 of said chapter 218, as so appearing, is hereby amended by striking
out, in line 1, the words ‘district court’ and inserting in
the place thereof the following words:— division of the Boston municipal
court department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 487 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 489, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 489. Said
chapter 218 is hereby further amended by striking out section 75B, as
so appearing, and inserting in the place thereof the following section:—
Section 75B. The salaries
of the first assistant clerks of the central division of the Boston municipal
court department and the first assistant clerk designated in charge of
twelve man jury sessions of said court for criminal business shall be
equal to eighty-three and one-half percent of the salary of the clerks
of said court as provided for in section 53.”.
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
120 members voted in the affirmative and 35 in the negative.
Therefore section 489 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 492, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 492. Section
62B of said chapter 221, as appearing in the 2000 Official Edition, is
hereby amended by striking out, in line 5, the words ‘municipal
court of the city of Boston’ and inserting in the place thereof
the following words: — Boston municipal court department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 492 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 490, which had
been vetoed by the Governor, was considered, as follows:
“SECTION 490. Said
chapter 218 is hereby further amended by striking out section 80A, as
so appearing, and inserting in place thereof the following section:—
Section 80A. The secretary
and assistant secretary to the justices of the Boston municipal court
department shall receive from the commonwealth
in full for all services performed by them such salaries as
shall be fixed by the justices of said department.”.
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
121 members voted in the affirmative and 34 in the negative.
Therefore section 490 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.
At twenty-five minutes
after three o’clock P.M., the Chair (Mrs. Harkins of Needham)
declared a recess until twenty-five minutes before four o’clock;
and at three minutes before four o’clock the House was called to
order with Mrs. Harkins in the Chair.
Item 4510-0790 (contained
in section 2), which had been vetoed by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“4510-0790 For regional
emergency medical services; provided, that state employees previously
paid from this line item shall be paid from line item 4510-0099 or from
item 4510-0100 in fiscal year 2004; provided further, that the regional
emergency medical services councils, designated as such in accordance
with 105 CMR 170.101 and the C-MED communications as of January 1, 1992,
shall remain the designated councils and C-MEDs; provided further, that
the department shall report quarterly on the number of investigations
of ambulance services performed by said inspectors and by inspectors funded
in items 4510-0710 and 4510-0712 as well as the number of investigations
pending at the end of each quarter and the reasons therefor; provided
further, that the department, in conjunction with the regional emergency
services councils, notwithstanding section 27C of chapter 29 of the General
Laws to the contrary, shall promulgate regulations to ensure that all
basic, intermediate, and paramedic emergency medical technicians are certified
to use and have available epinephrine for the emergency treatment of anaphylaxis;
provided further, that the department shall report to the house and senate
committees on ways and means not later than January 15, 2004 on the implementation
of the certifications and availability of epinephrine; and provided further,
that the department shall widely disseminate this requirement to all
relevant parties 1,246,896”.
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
154 members voted in the affirmative and 0 in the negative.
Therefore item 4510-0790
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 0322-0100 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“0322-0100 For the appeals
court, including the salaries, traveling allowances and expenses of the
chief justice, recall judges and the associate justices, and
the expenses of the conference
program 9,236,289”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $8,936,289.]
The question on passing said item,
notwithstanding the reduction 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 item 0322-0100
was passed, notwithstanding the reduction 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 0339-1001 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“0339-1001 For
the office of the commissioner of probation; provided, that notwithstanding
the provisions of any general or special law, rule or regulation to the
contrary, said commissioner, subject to appropriation, shall have exclusive
authority to appoint, dismiss, assign and discipline probation officers,
associate probation officers, probation officers-in-charge, assistant
chief probation officers and chief probation officers; provided further,
that said associate probation officers shall only perform in-court functions
and shall assume the in-court duties of the currently
employed probation officers who shall be reassigned within the probation
service subject to collective bargaining agreements to perform intensive,
community-based supervision of probationers, including the provisions
of intensive supervision and community restraint services as described
in item 0339-1004; and provided further, that notwithstanding
the provisions of any general or special law,
rule or regulation to the contrary, probation officer personnel and probation
clerical support staff assigned to the courts
shall be provided with suitable office space in their current location
in and around the various divisions and departments of the trial court,
as the case may be, or in suitable office space as appropriate, with the
advice and consent of the commissioner
105,861,116”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $90,861,116 and disapproved the following wording: “; provided,
that notwithstanding the provisions of any general or special law, rule
or regulation to the contrary, said commissioner, subject to appropriation,
shall have exclusive authority to appoint, dismiss, assign and discipline
probation officers, associate probation officers, probation officers-in-charge,
assistant chief probation officers and chief probation officers”.]
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
127 members voted in the affirmative and 29 in the negative.
[Mr. Costello of Newburyport
answered “Present” in response to his name.]
Therefore item 0339-1001
(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.
Subsequently a statement
of Mr. Petrolati of Ludlow 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 on the
previous roll call, I was recorded in the affirmative when it was my intention
to be recorded as being present.
Item 0339-1003 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“0339-1003 For the operation
of the trial court office of community corrections, including the costs
of
personnel 3,852,505”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $3,352,505.]
The question on passing
said item, notwithstanding the reduction 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 21 in the negative.
[Mr. George of Yarmouth
answered “Present” in response to his name.]
Therefore item 0339-1003
was passed, notwithstanding the reduction 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 4110-1020 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“4110-1020 For eligibility
determination for the medical assistance program for the blind; provided,
that the commission shall work with the division of medical assistance,
the department of mental retardation and other state agencies to maximize
federal reimbursement for clients so determined through this item including,
but not limited to, reimbursement for home and com-
munity-based waiver clients
323,947”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $223,947 and disapproved the following wording: “; provided,
that the commission shall work with the division of medical assistance,
the department of mental retardation and other state agencies to maximize
federal reimbursement for clients so determined through this item including,
but not limited to, reimbursement for home and community-based waiver
clients”.]
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
134 members voted in the affirmative and 17 in the negative.
Therefore item 4110-1020
(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 4120-3000 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“4120-3000 For employment
assistance services; provided, that vocational evaluation and employment
services for severely disabled adults may, subject to appropriation, be
provided; provided further, that not less than $100,000 shall be expended
on special projects in Charlestown for people with disabilities; and provided
further, that not less than $305,000 shall be expended for the Charlestown
Navy Yard Special Project for
disabled adults 7,780,098”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $7,375,098 and disapproved the following wording: “; provided
further, that not less than $100,000 shall
be expended on special projects in Charlestown for people with disabilities;
and provided further, that not less than $305,000 shall be expended for
the Charlestown Navy Yard Special Project for disabled adults”.]
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
130 members voted in the affirmative and 22 in the negative.
Therefore item 4120-3000
(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 4120-2000 (contained
in section 2), which had been reduced by the Governor, was considered,
as follows:
“4120-2000 For vocational
rehabilitation services operated in cooperation with the federal government;
provided, that no funds from the federal vocational rehabilitation grant
or state appropriation shall be deducted for pensions, group health and
life insurance and any other such indirect cost of the federally reimbursed
state employees; provided further, that not less than $100,000 shall be
expended on special vocational projects in Charlestown for people with
disabilities; provided further, that $155,000 shall be expended for services
provided by the Life Focus Center; and provided further, that the commissioner,
in making referrals to service providers, shall take into account the
client’s place of residence and the geographic proximity of the nearest provider
to said residence 7,259,207”.
[The Governor reduced the
item to $6,934,078 and disapproved the following wording: “; provided
further, that not less than $100,000 shall
be expended on special vocational projects in Charlestown for people with
disabilities; provided further, that $155,000 shall be expended for services
provided by the Life |