Teachers on the North Shore of Massachusetts are back on the picket line, and students are out of school for another day.
Friday officially marks one week of striking in two school districts, and there’s no deal in sight.
For those tw…
Massachusetts
New York City now requires landlords to pay broker fees. Should Boston do the same?
Renting in Boston is expensive, and some are looking to New York’s recent model for relief.
The New York City Council voted this week to ban broker fees for tenants, shifting the financial burden to landlords.
Some Boston residents are calling for the city to do the same, and Mayor Michelle Wu says she’s supportive of exploring the idea.
“Boston is now the last major city in the country where tenants can still be forced to pay brokers fees, and those are often in the range of thousands of dollars and can be prohibitive,” Wu said.
“If I didn’t have to pay a brokers fee? That would be awesome,” said Abby McDonald, a renter in Allston.
“Anything to just keep rent down, people to just afford bills, take care of what they’ve got to take care of, I think would be nice,” said Drew Robertson, who rents in Brighton.
More on housing
Some in the real estate world are more skeptical of the idea.
“I think it’s a misguided policy that takes away from the real issue at hand, which is zoning reform,” said Demetrios Salpoglou, CEO of Boston Pads.
Salpoglou says a lack of housing supply is the bigger problem.
“If we increase the amount of supply, we would have landlords that would instantly drop prices and pay the fees,” he said. “And so I think we have to look at it from that perspective.”
He also argues that landlords could potentially raise rent even more to cover the costs of that broker commission.
“I think ultimately, it leads to less choices and probably drives the rent higher,” Salpoglou said.
According to data from Boston Pads, 70% of landlords in Boston currently do not pay broker fees.
Somerville holds off on vote to reconfirms sanctuary city status
The city council in Somerville, Massachusetts, held off on a vote to reconfirm its status as a sanctuary city on Thursday ahead of President-elect Donald Trump’s second term.
Somerville has been a sanctuary city since 1987 and reconfirme…
Boston Marathon boosts Massachusetts economy by $500 million: ‘More than just a race’
Boston Marathon boosts Massachusetts economy by $500 million: ‘More than just a race’
Mass. Legislature sends clean energy accord to Healey
After months of delay, the Massachusetts Legislature sent a major clean energy bill to Gov. Maura Healey’s desk amid shifting national energy policy dynamics.
The House voted 125-17 to approve the 139-page House-Senate compromise bill (S 2967), and both chambers took final procedural votes to send it to the governor for her signature, amendment or veto. Healey has been urging lawmakers to complete work on the bill.
The Senate approved the bill in October, when Democrats struck a deal with Republicans to allow them to cast recorded votes for and against it, even during the stretch of informal sessions when roll call votes are usually not allowed.
Since then, U.S. voters elected Donald Trump who is likely to try to boost fossil fuel energy production when his second term launches in January, and has also sworn to target the offshore wind industry and “make sure that that ends on day one.”
The bill would reform the state’s siting and permitting laws for clean energy resources, and also push the state toward a stronger embrace of electric vehicles, make more families eligible for discounted utility rates, and eyes fusion as a possible renewable energy source. One high-profile provision would allow the Department of Energy Resources to coordinate with one or more New England state to solicit long-term clean energy generation, including from nuclear power.
“These investments include $200 million to the Offshore Wind Industry Investment Fund, $200 million to the Clean Energy Investment Fund, and the establishment of a new climate tech tax credit with a $35 million annual cap,” said Rep. Jeff Roy, the primary House negotiator of the bill, said on the House floor. “Now, in light of recent events, these two bills have taken on a new gravity. It is at the state level that we must continue to push forward the necessary clean energy policy to fight the negative effects of the climate crisis.”
Massachusetts Democrats have thrown their full weight behind bolstering the offshore wind industry, but the legislation has splintered the Republican caucus in the Legislature.
More Massachusetts news
During their October session, Senate Republicans cast their votes 2-2, with Sens. Bruce Tarr and Patrick O’Connor voting with Democrats in favor of the bill, and Sens. Ryan Fattman and Peter Durant casting dissenting votes.
Democrats powered the bill to passage in the House Thursday, but there was uncertainty around fault lines in the House Republican caucus, which for the most part has gone along over the years with the policy push favoring clean energy.
The bill drew support from four Republican representatives, and opposition from 17.
Voting against the bill were Reps. Paul Frost of Auburn, Jay Barrows of Mansfield, Donald Berthiaume of Spencer, Nick Boldyga of Southwick, David DeCoste of Norwell, Steven Howitt of Seekonk, John Marsi of Dudley, Joseph McKenna of Sutton, David Muradian of Grafton, Mathew Muratore of Plymouth, Norman Orrall of Lakeville, Kelly Pease of Westfield, Michael Soter of Bellingham, Alyson Sullivan-Almeida of Abington, Marcus Vaughn of Wrentham, David Vieira of Falmouth and Steven Xiarhos of Barnstable.
Four Republican lawmakers voted for the bill, according to the roll call – Reps. Brad Jones, Kim Ferguson, Hannah Kane and Donald Wong. Jones leads the caucus, and recently publicly clashed with House Speaker Ron Mariano over this climate bill.
A Mariano spokesperson last month said that House Republicans had delayed the clean energy bill vote in a way that was “consistent with the national GOP playbook that includes denying climate change and opposing all efforts to transition away from fossil fuels.”
Jones responded by saying that he had consistently supported climate change legislation — which he again voted for on Thursday.
“If they want to take a look at that, I would gently suggest that the spokesperson from the speaker’s office go back and look at who has been the conferee on climate for the last several bills, going back, 2016, ’18, ’20,” Jones said at the time. “Who’s signed ’em, and who’s voted for ’em. A modicum of research would undercut any veracity to that argument whatsoever.”
Though no Republicans spoke about the clean energy bill on the floor on Thursday, Boldyga posted his thoughts about the bill online before casting his dissenting vote. He tweeted Wednesday that “every lawmaker concerned about our oceans, our whales, and our fishing industry should vote against this bill.”
A Boldyga tweet from Thursday morning reads: “I’m headed to the State House, and I’ll be voting NO on two OMNIBUS bondoggle bills being rammed through the Massachusetts House during a special formal session (because the super-majority of Democrats are so inept they couldn’t get it done in July)… 2. Yet another “climate change” bill, which includes more crippling mandates that will inevitably drive your energy costs up even further. This just after the 30% increase in Natural Gas prices this month that were directly correlated to these very policies(per the supplier)!”
USPS defies Boston City Council subpoena over mail delays
Frustrations with mail delivery have reached Boston City Hall.
Residents have written to city councilors about recent mail delays, prompting requests for Boston Postmaster Joshua Balcunas to testify.
“This isn’t about one postal district, this isn’t about one city council district, this is about the entire city,” said Boston City Councilor Sharon Durkan, who represents District 8.
That initial ask was rejected by Balcunas and the United States Postal Service, causing councilors to put forward a subpoena. The USPS responded by sending a letter through legal counsel.
“The request for testimony does not comply with applicable federal regulations,” the letter read, adding that recent service scores are “solid and stable.”
“It is disappointing,” said District 5 City Councilor Enrique Pepén. “We want to work with all levers of government, especially with ones as important as the USPS.”
But Postal Service emails seem to provide insight into the agency’s thinking. Durkan’s office provided NBC10 Boston with a series of correspondence between USPS officials, inadvertently sent to councilors, debating how to respond to the first request made in early October.
“The council has a political agenda and not so much about customers,” one employee wrote.
The emails also discussed the sticking-power of a subpoena.
“I would not have subpoenaed them without those internal conversations that they had, knowing that a subpoena would maybe have more heft,” said Durkan.
The USPS has not responded to NBC10 Boston’s requests for comment. City councilors in Boston say they’ll continue to seek testimony despite recent resistance.
“I think we’re making good headway here,” Pepén said. “I think we’re going to have something very soon.”
“For me, this is really just about getting answers,” said Durkan.
