New Bedford saw a 13.15% voter turnout this Tuesday for the 2023 Municipal Election. Although this is up from a 6% turnout in the preliminaries, it is down from the 2019 Municipal Election, and well, every other election ever recorded beforehand.

The New Bedford voting statistics on the election commission website date back to 1979, and it appears the farther back in history you go, the more people voted. New Bedford was once home to competitive Mayoral races with high voter turnouts.

In 1985 John Bullard (16,337 votes) defeated Brian Lawler (15,377 votes) in a tight race which saw a whopping 75% voter turnout. Back in the day, voter turnout above 50% was just your average election. In 1979 we saw 72%, 1991 saw 68%, but as time went on, New Bedford residents began to vote less and less.

2023 marks Mayor Mitchell’s sixth victorious election and he will go on to serve as mayor for another four years. The highest voter turnout of the six elections involving Mayor Mitchell was the 2011 Municipal Election where 37.8% of voters casted a ballot in a race between Jon Mitchell and Tony Cabral.

What is mind boggling is there was a higher voter turnout in 2013 (18.6%) when Mitchell ran unopposed, than in the 2023 election when there was actually competition.

I can’t offer any valid explanation as to why New Bedford residents are progressively caring less and less in local elections, but I do know there is no shortage of people complaining about the city on the internet.

Interested in looking at New Bedfords voting history yourself? CLICK HERE.

By Chris Lisinski
State House News Service

House Democrats are moving this week to steer $250 million more into the emergency shelter system and impose several new requirements on the state’s response as part of a larger spending bill that also seeks to tie off a score of legislative loose ends.

The House Ways and Means Committee opened a poll Tuesday morning on a $2.74 billion supplemental budget (H 4090) that matches the dollar amount of Gov. Maura Healey’s mid-September shelter funding request, but adds specific requirements on how the money would be distributed, including $50 million for the creation of an “overflow site” for families who are waitlisted for a traditional shelter placement.

If the state fails to create that location within 30 days after the bill is enacted, the legislation would instruct the Healey administration to revoke its declared capacity limit of 7,500 families “until said overflow site or sites are secured and operational.”

The bill also calls for the administration to provide a 60-day notice if officials want to cap how long a family could stay in emergency assistance shelter, a step Healey said last week is under consideration.

Most of the spending in the bill — about $2.1 billion, with a net state cost of $800 million — would cover “MassHealth caseload adjustments,” according to a committee summary. The legislation also features nearly $300 million for collective bargaining agreements with public employees, $100 million for pension obligations, $75 million to support schools facing additional special education costs, $60 million for a Department of Transitional Assistance caseworker reserve and $10 million in flood relief for municipalities.

Representatives on the House Ways and Means Committee were given until 10:45 a.m. to register their position on the proposal. House Speaker Ron Mariano said Monday he plans to call a vote on the supplemental budget Wednesday.

In the state of Massachusetts, a biological male is allowed to play in female high school sports due to the “equal play act”. This past week we saw this in action when a male student was participating in girls field hockey in a match between Swampscott and Dighton-Rehoboth.

In a frightening scene the Swampscott male athlete is seen taking a shot and hitting the Dighton-Rehoboth female athlete square in the face. This resulted in several broken teeth and other “significant facial and dental injuries”.

It's reported that male player (#2 for Swampscott) knocked the teeth out of female player. Males are allowed to play on female teams in MA because of the "equal play act"

This is the town where NCAA president and past gov, Charlie baker lives. Care to comment, @CharlieBakerMA ? pic.twitter.com/ahyGrzA2Ox

— Riley Gaines (@Riley_Gaines_) November 3, 2023

Kelsey Bain, who is one of the captains of the Dighton-Rehoboth field hockey team released a three page statement pleading for change of this “equal play act”. She states, “There will always be significant numbers of boys and men who would beat the best girls and woman in head-to-head competition. Claims to the contrary are simply a denial of science”.

Her full statement regarding the situation is embed below.

This is a letter I sent to the MIAA in response to the recent Swampscott vs. Dighton-Rehoboth field hockey incident.@FoxNews @Riley_Gaines_ @MIAA033 @MAGovArchive @grossmanhannah @Nicoletta0602@DRHighSchool pic.twitter.com/WuvjxY5Vnq

— Kelsey Bain (@KelseyBain13) November 5, 2023

On Friday, October 27th, the members of the New Bedford Police Union brought forth a vote of no confidence in Chief Paul Oliveira.

A “vote of no confidence” is a vote about whether a person in a position of responsibility like in government or management is still deemed fit to hold that position. Such as because they are inadequate in some aspect, fail to carry out their obligations, or make decisions that other members feel to be detrimental.

135 union members voted and the results of the “No confidence vote” were as followed:

• 121 (89%) voted “No Confidence”
• 12 (89%) voted that they did NOT support the vote of no confidence
• 1 ballot was blank
• 1 ballot marked both choices

The New Bedford Police Union release a statement following the results.

“We do not celebrate the results of this vote, nor do we celebrate the vote itself. The results, however stark, unfortunately represent the feelings of a clear majority of our membership and are indicative of serious problems with the appointed leader of the New Bedford Police Department.

We hope the city leaders and stakeholders take this information to heart. The members of the New Bedford Police Union remain committed to the safety of our community and the safety of our officers.”

Chris Lisinski
State House News Service

Lawmakers were cool last session to Gov. Charlie Baker’s idea to allow red-light cameras in any interested city or town, but supporters are hopeful that a more narrow version that would limit the idea to a handful of communities will get a more favorable reception.

A bill filed by Rep. Steven Owens (H 3393) would launch a pilot program allowing up to 10 municipalities to install a limited number of cameras to monitor for certain traffic violations, such as failing to stop at a right light or blocking an intersection.

Cities and towns would need to present crash data at proposed locations and consider the social and racial equity impacts of the cameras before launching the system. The bill would also require pictures of the back of a car, not the front, which Owens said would prevent drivers from being racially profiled.

Owens, a Watertown Democrat, told his colleagues that “the time has really come for Massachusetts to join the 26 other states that allow some sort of automated traffic enforcement.”

“You guys know that the traffic is back post-pandemic. Drivers are as aggressive as ever. Lately, I talk to people, and when I asked them, ‘Do you think drivers have gotten worse since we’ve gotten back from the pandemic?’, everybody seems to agree,” Owens said at a Transportation Committee hearing.

Baker included a local-option red light camera system — with no cap on the number of participating communities — in a road safety bill he filed in April 2021. The bill itself died without a vote in the Transportation Committee, though some pieces such as a minimum passing distance between motorists and cyclists or pedestrians made it into a law Baker signed just before leaving office.

Stacy Thompson, executive director of the LivableStreets Alliance, praised several components of Owens’s bill, including its maximum fine of $25 and language preventing fine revenue from being used to pay for operating the cameras, which she said could “create a cycle of revenue generation.”

She spoke on behalf of a coalition that also includes WalkMassachusetts, the Sierra Club, Safe Roads Alliance, Transportation for Massachusetts and the Boston Cyclists Union.

“Generally, we feel that the bill that you have before you is designed to ensure that this type of camera enforcement is first and foremost used as a tool to reduce dangerous driving behavior and has several good provisions to reduce any potential harms or abuses that we have seen in other communities that use cameras,” Thompson said.

Sam Drysdale
State House News Service

Gov. Maura Healey’s administration is facing a lawsuit after the governor announced last week that the state would no longer guarantee housing for those protected under the state’s right-to-shelter law.

Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston filed the class action lawsuit Friday on behalf of three families the organization said are “on the brink of homelessness.”

The lawsuit seeks an emergency court hearing and a temporary restraining order to stop the state from “undermining” the right-to-shelter law, a release from the organization said.

Healey announced on Oct. 16 that the state’s emergency assistance shelter system was reaching capacity, and that the state may not be able to guarantee housing starting Nov. 1.

Under a 1983 law, Massachusetts is the only state in the country that has a legal obligation to shelter unhoused families and pregnant women.

The shelter system has been strained over the past year, as an influx of new immigrants has streamed into the state. As of Healey’s announcement last week, she said there are close to 7,000 families enrolled in the system and that they were expecting to hit 7,500 families by November. That number is more than double the number of individuals enrolled at this time last year.

Healey did not explicitly say that the state would turn people away, but said that starting on Nov. 1 the state will not add any new shelter units, and that families who come to seek housing will be assessed and those with higher needs will be prioritized for placement.

Those who do not immediately get placed in housing will be added to a waitlist, she said.

Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston alleges that these are “proposed changes to the Right-to-Shelter law,” by” imposing an artificial ‘cap’ on the total number of shelter spaces and units the State will provide to homeless families” and by “creating a ‘waiting list’ for families eligible for emergency shelter.”

“As the Complaint outlines, the unprecedented changes proposed for the emergency shelter program are being rushed into place, without any public process or required notice to the Legislature,” a release from the organization says. “When the Legislature funded the program, it specifically required the State agency in charge (Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities) to give the Legislature 90 days notice of any changes—time for the Legislature to evaluate and potentially prevent the changes.”

The complaint was filed against the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities and Secretary Ed Augustus.

“The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities is reviewing the filing and will be offering no further comment at this time,” a spokesperson said Friday night.

The complaint says the plaintiffs, Gloria Alcarraz, Soronx de la Cruz, and Dieula Alectine, and their families are “currently homeless and eligible for emergency shelter.” It was filed in Suffolk Superior Court.

“The announcement raised a number of red flags,” LCR Litigation Director Oren Sellstrom said in an interview with the News Service. “First of all, community members and affected families were terrified of what this would mean, particularly as winter is approaching. The idea that the state is going to be denying emergency shelter to homeless families and pregnant women is appalling.”

Two of the plaintiffs, the de la Cruz’s and the Alectines, are both currently without a place to stay and hoping to be placed in the state’s Emergency Assistance system, Sellstrom said. All three of the families have young children.

He added that there are “a number of legal problems” with Healey’s plan.

“The state has not followed the orderly process that is supposed to occur for changes of this magnitude,” Sellstrom said. “There is a state law that applies to all agencies that requires changes to programs such as this to allow input from the public from affected individuals. And then there is also, for the emergency shelter program, a specific requirement that the Legislature placed into the appropriation that requires the state agency to notify the Legislature 90 days in advance of any changes.”

LCR is asking the court for an emergency hearing to place a temporary restraining order on the action until EOHLC and the Legislature can go through that process, he said.

Sellstrom particularly took issue with the idea of “putting needy families on to a waitlist for emergency shelter,” which he called “a denial of services in an emergency situation.”

When Healey announced the change in the state’s approach to the Emergency Assistance system last week, she said she did not plan to end the right-to-shelter law.

“We are not ending the right-to-shelter law,” Healey said on Oct. 16. “We are being very clear though that we are not going to be able to guarantee placement for folks who are sent here after the end of this month.”

She said that the state does not “have enough space, service providers or funds to safely expand beyond 7,500 families.”

In addition to her announcement that shelters are reaching capacity, the governor also presented a shifting strategy in her administration’s approach to the crisis.

She said the state will focus on trying to rotate out those who are currently living in shelters into permanent housing, via housing programs and creating more workforce initiatives, in order to make more space for new families.

This includes a new job training initiative through the Commonwealth Corporation Foundation, spurring the MassHire State Workforce Board to work with shelters and employers to match new immigrants who are eligible to work with jobs, and expanding the HomeBASE rehousing program, which helps eligible homeless families pay their first and last month’s rent and security deposits.

It looks like the iconic Faneuil Hall may be getting a new name after Boston City Council voted in favor of a change. They passed a resolution on October 25th to change the name of Faneuil Hall, in a 10-3 vote.

The city council does not possess the power itself to change the name, but they hope to “begin a process of addressing anti-Black racist symbols prevalent in Boston”.

In the resolution they noted, “Changing the name of Faneuil Hall to the name of a true freedom fighter such as Crispus Attucks, Elizabeth Freeman, or Frederick Douglas, facilitates the flourishing of democracy and educates the local and national public about how we should best use our public spaces and memorials”.

The Boston City Council is considering this a “public apology” process that is acknowledging the City of Boston’s role in the trans-Atlantic slave trade.

Gov. Maura Healey thinks changes need to be made to the Mass Save program that conducts home energy assessments and offers rebates to help Bay State residents save money on energy bills.

Climate Chief Melissa Hoffer wrote in a report released Tuesday that the program “continues to support fossil-fuel heating systems” and that “there are inefficiencies in the collaborative decision making, staffing, and leadership structure,” and recommended major reform.

Healey told the News Service on Thursday that “from what I’ve read” Hoffer “is really onto something in terms of reforms that need to be put in place.”

Mass Save is a collaborative of Massachusetts’ natural gas and electric utility providers meant to increase energy efficiency in residents’ homes.

“The Mass Save program currently is administered by electric and gas utilities,” Hoffer wrote in her report. “It has become increasingly clear, particularly in light of the successes of sister-state entities Efficiency Maine and Efficiency Vermont, that, under the current statutory framework, the Mass Save program is failing to take the steps necessary to achieve the transformative levels of building decarbonization required.”

Vermont and Maine, which Hoffer references as examples of success, run their energy efficiency programs with an independent program administrator, acting separately from electric distribution utilities.

Asked Thursday if she believes utility companies should be removed from the helm of Mass Save, Healey said “I think it involves a host of measures, and I think it’s something we’re going to look at.”

The governor said she saw Hoffer’s recommendations as a way to improve Mass Save and save money for consumers.

On its website, Mass Save says Massachusetts is one of the most energy efficient states in the country and that its programs “empower residents, businesses, and communities to make energy efficient upgrades by offering a wide range of services, rebates, incentives, trainings, and information.”

Hoffer’s report says program administrators “are not directly subject to” the state’s building decarbonization goals, the program operates with a “short term” three-year planning and operations horizon, and Mass Save suffers from “inefficiencies in the collaborative decision making, staffing, and leadership structure.”

“Any reform of Mass Save will need a transition period to ensure that existing markets for energy efficiency services are not disrupted; that said, there is an urgent need to transform Mass Save and that work should occur on a parallel track with more incremental measures to be implemented in the three-year planning cycle,” the report said.

Labor is a part of any major effort and the governor also singled out some of the recommendations around workforce development and engaging young people.

“We know that when it comes to this clean energy transition, and climate tech and climate in particular, there are so many workforce opportunities, so I’m excited about the conversations we can have with our Secretary of Education and others about how to grow that much needed workforce pipeline,” Healey said.

The Massachusetts Clean Energy Center estimates the state’s clean energy workforce will need to grow by an additional 29,700 full-time workers to meet the state’s statutorily-mandated greenhouse gas emissions reduction goals by 2030. The offshore wind industry alone is projected to grow by 724 percent in Massachusetts by 2030.

Hoffer suggested a May 2024 deadline for the state to develop “a comprehensive, cross-agency plan to build the clean energy, climate, and resilience workforce that includes measurable targets and goals” as she said current efforts “remain insufficient to prepare the Commonwealth workforce for the unprecedented energy system changes that are taking place and will continue over the next several decades.”

“When you think about the number of electricians, for example, who we’re going to need to employ in the coming years. It’s an exciting opportunity to work with our community colleges, to work with their vocational programs, to work with the trades, for example, to grow the number of electricians,” Healey said.

The governor said she was excited about the idea of a Youth Climate Corps. The Climate Office suggested creating a corps to provide volunteer opportunities and youth-focused programs to prepare young people “for good-paying jobs in clean energy and climate resilience.”

“I’m excited about what that means for engaging our young people who have made really clear that they need action now on climate,” Healey said.

A last minute meeting from the New Bedford licensing board resulted in a change of mind in ruling on the nip ban in New Bedford. Prior to the Tuesday night meeting, the nip ban was planned to be in effect on November 1st.

The November 1st date would have been the quickest implementation of a nip bottle ban in the state of Massachusetts, which would of resulted in massive amounts of money lost by small business owners in the city. The profit margin on the sale of nip bottles is razor thin which requires liquor stores to purchase nip bottles in mass quantities.

Giving liquor store owners only a couple months to sell through their stock of nip bottles seemed like an unreasonable request which would of ultimately left small businesses hurting severely financially.

This last minute meeting of the licensing board resulted in a change of heart and granted business owners 9 extra months until the nip ban takes effect. The new date is set for August 1st, 2024.

Local liquor store owners will continue to fight the ban in hopes to completely reverse the ruling. Wednesday’s 9 month extension was most definetly a small win and a step in the right direction for those who oppose the ban.

Watch the meeting in its entirety below:

A recent poll published by the University of Massachusetts Amherst shows Donald Trump with a significant lead over his competition in the GOP presidential race in Massachusetts.

They interviewed 788 respondents from Massachusetts who were then matched down to a sample of 700 to produce the final dataset. The respondents were asked to rank their top three candidates for the Republican Party’s presidential candidate in 2024.

54% listed Donald Trump as their 1st choice, while Florida Governor Ron DeSantis was the second most popular receiving 15%.

Respondents were then asked, , “If President Joe Biden was running against Republican Donald Trump and Independent Robert F. Kennedy Jr. in the general election, who would you be most likely to vote for?”

Joe Biden received 43% of votes, Donald Trump received 21% of votes, and Robert Kennedy Jr. received 17% of votes.