State Senator Mike Barrett

Each year, the Alewife MBTA Station in Cambridge serves as an access point for hundreds of thousands of commuters as they travel around Greater Boston.  Unfortunately, after years of wear and tear, Alewife’s car garage is in need of critical repairs and upgrades.  But good news may be on the way.

During recent debate on transportation bonding and policy, local State Senator Mike Barrett offered a successful amendment to authorize the administration to spend $100 Million on major renovation and repairs to the structure.  The money would be used specifically for repairs, re-construction, and climate change adaption.

Alewife Station opened to the public in 1985.  But, Barrett points out, the garage originally provided for 2,733 parking spots. Nowadays at any given moment 250 may be unusable due to falling concrete and roof leakage.

“I hear from constituents on a regular basis about the poor condition of the garage,” Barrett says.  “It’s insecure and, to be honest, a little creepy at night.  At times the garage has had the highest reported crime rate of any station on the entire MBTA.”

A 2011 report revealed extensive decay in the concrete beams and columns holding up the Alewife Garage.  It concluded: “Field observations of the garage revealed a considerable amount of water leakage…The leakage is a major cause of the structural deterioration of the concrete topping on the precast concrete beams.”

A more recent 2017 report found the worst deterioration is on the second and third levels, where the state of the steel reinforced concrete beams is between “critical” and possible “imminent failure” due to the “level of delamination, spalling and cracking” and areas of “exposed, corroded rebar.”

Barrett says that a portion of the money will be used for multi-modal access to Alewife station, an important change in the fight against global warming.  The transportation sector is responsible for roughly 40% of carbon emissions in Massachusetts, Barrett says.  In addition to allowing more riders to access public transportation, he wants the garage upgrades to allow for green transportation like bicycles.

Currently, the garage is equipped to house about 500 bikes.  Even so, the bike cages are crowded and inconvenient; slots for bikes are often high off the ground and inaccessible for many riders.

“Tip of the hat to Cambridge State Rep. Dave Rogers, who offered a similar amendment in the House, and to Tami Gouveia, who’s the sparkplug in the Legislature for improving the Parking Garage,” Barrett says.  “And to Somerville State Senator Pat Jehlen, who signed on to cosponsor my amendment.”

The Senate transportation bond bill must be reconciled with the House version before going to the governor’s desk.

Should the provision survive the Legislative process and become law, it’s still not a done deal, Barrett says.  Because this is a bond authorization, the governor must decide to direct money to the specified improvements and the treasurer must sell bonds to pay for them.

###

In the aftermath of the death of George Floyd and nationwide Black Lives Matter protests, the Mass. Senate has voted in favor of sweeping police reform legislation.  In an effort to advance social and racial justice, the bill creates new forms of oversight, promotes community policing, and strengthens standards of the use of force, among other measures.

One major component in the bill — sponsored by local State Senator Mike Barrett — provides new transparency and oversight to the purchase of military weapons by local, county, and state law enforcement.

After Ferguson, Barrett says, Americans learned that local law enforcement agencies routinely take advantage of massive federal sales and donations of equipment and gear that would otherwise be too expensive for municipal budgets.  Deployment of this material occurs disproportionately in communities of color.

“For Massachusetts, the issue is not academic,” Barrett said.  “Many cities, towns, and regional organizations are heavy users of these federal programs.”

Barrett’s measure is designed to increase state and local accountability for the acquisition of “military-grade controlled property,” like assault rifles and mine-resistant ambush-protected vehicles.

Among other provisions, the bill requires local police to get approval from its town meeting or city council before acquiring military-grade property, ensuring that all such purchases are subject to a public hearing.  Additionally, it requires approval by the state’s Secretary of Public Safety and Security for transfers of military-grade property from a federal agency to the state police or sheriffs.  And, after adoption of an amendment filed by Sen. Barrett, such approvals would also first be subject to a public hearing.

 

Other provisions of the bill include:

 

• Strengthen the use of force standards: The bill bans chokeholds and other deadly uses of force except in cases of imminent harm.  It requires the use of de-escalation tactics when feasible; creates a duty to intervene for officers who witness abuse of force; limits qualified immunity defense for officers whose conduct violates the law; and expands and strengthens police training in de-escalation, racism, and intervention tactics.

• Clarifies and rebalances the understanding of a qualified immunity defense: Under the legislation, the concept of qualified immunity will remain, as long as a public official, including law enforcement, is acting in accordance with the law.  However, this bill will not impact or limit existing indemnification protections for public officials.

• Creates a Police Officer Standards and Accreditation Committee (POSAC): The committee will be an independent state entity composed of law enforcement professionals, community members, and racial justice advocates. The committee is tasked with standardizing certification, training, and decertification of police officers.  The POSAC will maintain a disclosure database of all misconduct complaints, and investigate complaints involving serious misconduct.  It will also prohibit nondisclosure agreements in police misconduct settlements and establish a commission to recommend a correctional officer certification, training, and decertification framework.

• Imposes a moratorium on the use of facial surveillance technology: Government entities will not be able to use this technology while a commission studies its use and creates a task force to study the use of body and dashboard cameras by law enforcement agencies.

• Addresses “school-to-prison pipeline:” The presence of a school resource officer will be at the discretion of the superintendent. The provision also prevents school districts from sharing students’ personal information with police except for investigation of a crime or to stop imminent harm.  The bill also expands access to record expungement for young people by allowing individuals with more than one charge on their juvenile record to qualify for expungement.

• Establishes the Strong Communities and Justice Reinvestment Workforce Development Fund to shift funding from policing and corrections towards community investment. Controlled by community members and community development professionals, the fund will make competitive grants to drive economic opportunities in communities most impacted by excessive policing and mass incarceration.

• Begin dismantling systemic racism: The legislation bans racial profiling, and requires racial data collection for all police stops. It also introduces a police training requirement on the history of slavery, lynching and racism, and creates a permanent African American Commission.  A primary purpose of the commission will be to advise the legislature and executive agencies on policies and practices that will ensure equity for, and address the impact of, discrimination against Black, Indigenous, and people of color.

• Establish the Latinx Commission: Based on the existing Asian-American Commission and the African American Commission created in the current bill, to bring more underrepresented voices to the table and advance equity in policymaking.  Another prohibits decertified law enforcement officers from becoming corrections officers, while a further amendment eliminates statutory language offensive to the LGBTQ+ community.

• Creates a Commission on Structural Racism: The commission is tasked with mapping out the systems impacting the Department of Corrections (DOC) mission using a structural racism lens.  This commission will propose programming and policy shifts and identifying legislative or agency barriers to promoting the optimal operation of the DOC.  It also creates a roadmap for the legislature to establish a permanent publicly-funded entity to continue this work.

The Senate’s Reform, Shift + Build Act now moves to the Massachusetts House of Representatives for consideration.

###

On Thursday, June 25, an organization named the Mass Coalition for Sustainable Energy criticized Massachusetts State Senate climate legislation now pending before the House of Representatives.  In response, State Senators Mike Barrett and Jason Lewis issued the following statement.

 

 

In January of this year, the Massachusetts State Senate passed An Act Setting Next-Generation Climate Policy, now pending before the House of Representatives.  The Senate’s approach to reducing greenhouse gas emissions is radical not in its ideology but in its seriousness; we’re determined to get emissions down across the Massachusetts economy, transportation and buildings included.

 

We should add that the senators who wrote the legislation sat down with a good many commercial interests, listened to what they had to say, and made changes.  At the time of the bill’s final passage — with the votes of both Democrats and Republicans, and with only two dissents in the 40-member Senate — its seriousness of purpose seemed to impress the business community without unsettling it.

 

But that was then.  With the onset of COVID-19, conservative elements are eager to exploit an opening.  Two years ago, an investigative report in the Huffington Post blasted the then-new Mass Coalition for Sustainable Energy as a “front for gas interests,” identifying, as major funders of the group, Eversource, National Grid, and Enbridge, the pipeline conglomerate behind the natural gas compressor station project in Weymouth.

 

Last week the Coalition surfaced anew, patching together a limp critique of Next-Gen that seems less about the bill and more about the Coalition’s longer-range objective, which is to keep fossil fuels at the heart of Massachusetts energy policy.  In a letter dated June 25^th, addressed to leaders of the House, the fossil fuel interests and real estate developers led off with long-winded assurances of their objectivity.  Then they got down to brass tacks, telling readers that “sources of energy like natural gas have important and positive roles” to play, since “renewable sources cannot fill the void.”

 

Interesting.  Especially since the Senate bill hardly mentions natural gas per se, focusing instead on a widely-accepted bottom line — the need for truly dramatic reductions in Massachusetts emissions.  If this means relegating natural gas and its various hybrids to a much-reduced backup role, so be it.  As for any voids that may be left by today’s renewable resources, we certainly intend to see them filled — by tomorrow’s renewable resources.  Clean-energy solutions like heat pumps are already better than fossil fuel lobbyists care to admit, and the Senate wants them to be better still — one good reason we expand the mission of the Massachusetts Clean Energy Center.

 

The Senate’s basic insight is this: Its considerable contributions to first-generation policy notwithstanding, the 2008 Global Warming Solutions Act has generated significant emissions reductions in the electric power sector only.  Today, transportation, buildings, and industrial processes account for 79% of Massachusetts greenhouse gases.  After 12 long years, it’s clear that a law written in 2008 cannot drive reductions in these sectors, nor keep us on the emissions track we need to travel.

 

To get climate policy moving again, the Senate bill sets “net zero” emissions as Massachusetts’ overall greenhouse gas limit for the year 2050.  This is already policy in California and New York; in fact, it’s already policy in the Baker Administration.  The Senate takes the logical next step, baking net zero into law so that future governors will keep a steady course.

 

A 2050 objective set, the Senate then addresses the demanding and multi-faceted challenge of actually reaching it.  For one thing, we appreciate that this far-off goal, however imperative, will not motivate near-term change, so we direct the Executive to set interim limits at five-year intervals starting in 2025.  We insist on sector sublimits, too, so that transportation, buildings et al are asked to hit custom-fit benchmarks, and progress can be readily checked.

 

And, yes, among many other provisions, the Senate proposes a Climate Policy Commission, not to make policy (the prerogative of the Legislature) nor to carry it out (the province of the Executive), but to serve as a guardian of the future for younger generations.  Job One for the Commission is to tell us if we’re on track in bringing down emissions.  Job Two is to give us objective advice on what to do next.  (Omitted altogether from its mission is any power to make rules or regulations — for instance, to change the state building code, a crucial reform we assign to the Massachusetts Department of Energy Resources.)

 

We want the Commission to consist not of special interests (in its June 25^th letter, the fossil fuel lobby demands a seat!) but of engineers, data analysts, and scientists.  We want it insulated from political pressure and made up of the most authoritative and credible Massachusetts voices we can find.

 

And, of course, the Commission should listen.  Which is why the Senate gives it an advisory council broadly representative of the public and specifically including the voices of low-income and moderate-income communities, displaced workers, industry and manufacturing interests, young people, the green economy, transportation, agriculture, housing, and local government.

 

Across the country, fossil fuel interests are mounting counter-attacks on common-sense climate initiatives that once seemed certain to become law.  And, yes, it can happen here, in Massachusetts.  Unless we fight back.

 

• END –