Pubdate: Wed, 28 Dec 2016
Source: Boston Globe (MA)
Copyright: 2016 Globe Newspaper Company
Contact: http://services.bostonglobe.com/news/opeds/letter.aspx?id=6340
Website: http://bostonglobe.com/
Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/52
Author: Matt Rocheleau

A CLOSER LOOK AT THE RARE MOVE MASS. LAWMAKERS USED TO DELAY POT SHOPS

Just a half-dozen Massachusetts legislators passed a controversial measure
on Wednesday delaying the opening date for recreational marijuana stores
in Massachusetts by six months.

How could so few legislators decide such an important issue?

The move, which took less than an hour, was extraordinary, but technically
allowed.

Here's how it works.

First, keep in mind that legislative cycles in Massachusetts run on
two-year calendars, beginning in odd-numbered years. So currently, we are
at the end of a two-year cycle that began in 2015.

There are two types of meetings lawmakers can hold: formal and informal.

Formal sessions are normally reserved for discussion, debate, and voting
on major issues. But there are restrictions as to when they can be held.

During the first year of a legislative cycle, formal business must be
wrapped up by the third Wednesday in November.

During the second year of a cycle - such as this year - formal session can
be held through the last day in July.

During periods when formal sessions are barred, lawmakers can resort to
informal "informals" to get things done.

Informals tend to have sparse attendance and are generally reserved for
voting on measures that are noncontroversial, of relatively minor
importance, or both. Think bridge names and liquor licenses.

A key reason for that: In an informal session, a measure is not allowed to
pass if even a single legislator present voices an objection.

But all that is required for lawmakers to enter informals and pass a
measure is to have at least one Republican and at least one Democrat
present.

Passing a controversial measure via an informal session has happened
before, but it is challenging because it typically requires a lot of
behind-the-scenes lobbying and jockeying by lawmakers.

In one example in late 2002, lawmakers passed a bill that shielded
outgoing Governor Jane Swift from personal liability in a lawsuit filed by
a member of the Massachusetts Turnpike Authority. That provision was
passed as an amendment to an unrelated bill during an informal session
that was not televised - two days after Christmas, when only a few
lawmakers were in the chamber.

It's not uncommon for informal sessions to be fairly busy at this time of
year, as lawmakers scurry to pass measures before the close of the
legislative cycle. But again, the business transactedis generally
relatively small potatoes or has broad consensus.

That said, seemingly straightforward measures passed during informal
sessions have caused headaches later on.

For example, in December 2014, lawmakers during an informal session
quietly passed a law requiring drivers to turn their headlights on in the
daytime when the weather impaired visibility.

The measure wasn't controversial until after it took effect and people
noticed that a violation came with a costly insurance surcharge on top of
a $5 ticket. The surcharge was later removed during a formal session.
- ---
MAP posted-by: