Councilor Ricardo Arroyo put forward a hearing request at the body’s Wednesday meeting, where he discussed the potential for a pilot district in Roslindale Village, a shopping and dining area where parking meters will soon be added by the city.

“If we are going to create meters, which I think help move traffic along and do help, they should also take that money that comes from those meters — that are coming from folks frequenting that area or those businesses, and reinvest them into beautification projects within those areas,” Arroyo said.

If a pilot program were to be established, it could then be implemented in other districts, according to Arroyo, who represents Roslindale on the City Council and learned of the concept from Roslindale Village Main Streets representatives.

While the state authorized the use of parking benefit districts through the Municipal Modernization Act in 2016, the City of Boston has chosen not to move forward with the concept, which advocates describe as a type of parking reform that frees up high-demand curb space and benefits people paying the meter fees.

The districts have been “effectively utilized” by three other Massachusetts communities, Arlington, Brookline and Reading, “to manage parking supply and generate resources for commercial area improvements,” Arroyo said.

The bodies typically designated to manage the parking districts include main streets organizations, community planning groups and business improvement districts, he said.

“Folks in the neighborhoods who put more money into these meters should see that money directly benefit the areas in which they are placed,” Arroyo said. “The goal for this hearing is to figure out how we go about setting this up around the city, so it’s not just thrown into the … general fund and sent in different directions.”

The hearing request was largely supported by the rest of the City Council, and referred to the Committee on City Services and Innovation Technology after a brief discussion.

Councilor Gabriela Coletta, who represents East Boston, Charlestown and the North End, said her constituents often talk to her about the concept when mentioning ways to solve the “perennial issue of parking in the city.”

Councilor Liz Breadon said the districts have already been discussed as a possible parking solution in the two neighborhoods she represents, Allston and Brighton.

The matter “merits a discussion” around ways to maintain, upgrade and revitalize city streets, Breadon said, and free up curb space to ensure “someone doesn’t park their car in the main street district and leave it for the whole day.”

The ruling sides with the state’s housing department, which argued through lawyers Tuesday that it had no more funds — and is on track to run into the red — to continue expanding shelter capacity in the face of surging demand partly fueled by the number of migrant arrivals this year and suffocating housing costs.

Suffolk County Superior Court Judge Debra Squires-Lee handed down her ruling a day after the Healey administration issued emergency regulations that call for a waitlist once capacity is reached and potentially limit the amount of time families can stay in shelters.

In her ruling, Squires-Lee said the Healey administration did not violate a provision included in the state’s fiscal 2024 budget that calls for a 90-day notice to the Legislature before making any changes to emergency shelter eligibility requirements.

The notice, Squires-Lee wrote in court documents, is intended to afford the Legislature the opportunity to appropriate funding for the shelter program.

“The evidence before me, however, is clear — more than a month ago, the governor specifically requested additional appropriations for the emergency assistance program and the Legislature has failed to act,” the judge wrote. “In these circumstances, the predicate purpose of the 90-day proviso has been fulfilled; and, in all events, it is for the Legislature and not clients of the program to enforce any claimed non-compliance.”

The ruling all but guarantees uncertainty for families who apply for emergency shelter after the 7,500-family shelter cap is reached, something the administration has said could happen within days. There were 7,388 families in the system as of Tuesday, according to state data.

Lawyers for Civil Rights, the group behind the lawsuit, laid out a grim picture of what would happen if a temporary pause on the capacity plan was not put in place — migrants and homeless families could end up sleeping outside as cold weather sets in.

“Without an injunction, families, children, and pregnant women who are entitled to emergency shelter under the law will be denied a roof over their heads — forced to sleep on the streets, in cars, and in other unsafe situations. There is no other way to put it. That is the grim reality,” Attorney Oren Sellstrom wrote in court documents. “The harms that will befall them are harsh and irreparable.”

A spokesperson for the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities said the department believes “an appropriate outcome was reached.”

“The state does not have enough space, service providers or funding to safely expand shelter capacity,” the spokesperson said in a statement.

Attorneys on both sides of the issue spent much of the court hearing Tuesday focused on the 90-day requirement, which says the executive branch must provide notice to the Legislature that they are making any regulatory, administrative practice, or policy changes that would “alter the eligibility” of emergency shelter benefits.

Sellstrom said emergency regulations partially outlining what happens when the shelter cap is reached were “rushed” at the eleventh hour only after the Healey administration was sued to challenge their compliance.

“Defendants are rushing drastic and material changes to the state’s long standing emergency assistance program into place, disregarding well-established laws that require an orderly process — in particular, a mandate that requires defendants to give the Legislature a 90-day period to weigh in and potentially forestall the changes altogether,” Sellstrom wrote in court documents.

But Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s office argued that provision “is not privately enforceable” into a 90-day delay of emergency measures to address budget shortfalls.

Squires-Lee sided with state lawyers, writing in her ruling that Lawyers for Civil Rights provided “no case in which a court has ever held that an agency that fails to comply with such a proviso may be barred from taking action within the ambit of its statutory and regulatory authority.”

Healey has requested additional funding for emergency shelters beyond the $325 million allocated to the program in the fiscal 2024 state budget. In a separate bill closing out the books on fiscal 2023, Healey asked lawmakers to approve $250 million in additional funding.

Squires-Lee points to that request in her ruling, and notes the Legislature has not moved forward the extra dollars.

“The failure to give notice has not injured plaintiffs where notice is intended to permit the Legislature to act or not act, and the Legislature, having actual notice of the fiscal crisis, has failed to act,” Squires-Lee wrote.

Squires-Lee also agreed with a state-backed argument that she does not have the power to force the Healey administration to spend money the Legislature has not appropriated.

“As much as I wish that I possessed the power to ensure that all families who need housing have it, and that all families who require safe emergency shelter are given it, I am persuaded that it would be inappropriate to order EOHLC to continue providing emergency shelter it does not have the resources appropriated by the Legislature to fund,” the judge wrote.

When Florida Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis announced his presidential campaign in May, he proudly told the nation that Florida’s crime rate in 2021 had reached a 50-year low.

But really, DeSantis couldn’t say for sure.

That’s because fewer than 1 in 10 law enforcement agencies in his state had reported their crime statistics to the FBI. In fact, more than 40% of the Sunshine State’s population was unaccounted for in the data used by the Florida Department of Law Enforcement in its 2021 statewide crime report.

In Wichita, Kansas, Democratic Mayor Brandon Whipple claimed in May that violent crime had decreased by half during his term. But Whipple’s source, the FBI’s Crime Data Explorer, missed half the violent crimes recorded by the Wichita Police Department, possibly because the agency couldn’t mesh its system with the FBI’s recently revamped system.

Across the country, law enforcement agencies’ inability — or refusal — to send their annual crime data to the FBI has resulted in a distorted picture of the United States’ crime trends, according to a new Stateline analysis of the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting program participation data.

“We have policymakers making policy based on completely incomplete data. We have political elections being determined based on vibes rather than actual data. It’s a mess,” said Jeff Asher, a data analyst and co-founder of AH Datalytics, a data consulting firm.

Experts warn that some policymakers, knowingly or unknowingly, use those flawed statistics to tout promising crime trends — misleading voters. The inaccurate data also can affect efforts to improve public safety and criminal justice, potentially leading policymakers to miss the mark in addressing real community issues.

“The problem for voters is that they don’t have very good information about what levels of safety actually are,” said Anna Harvey, a politics, data science and law professor at New York University. Harvey also is the director of the university’s Public Safety Lab and the president of the Social Science Research Council.

“They’re a little bit vulnerable to politicians who are kind of throwing around allegations and claims about crime that may or may not be accurate,” she told Stateline.

DeSantis faced criticism for repeating the incomplete numbers, and NBC News this summer reported that law enforcement rank-and-file had warned that the statistics weren’t correct.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement defended the numbers to NBC News, saying, in part, that “criticism about FDLE’s robust data collection methods is unfounded.”

FBI’s switch to a new system

A year ago, when the FBI initially released its 2021 national crime data, there wasn’t enough information to tell whether crime went up, went down or stayed the same. The FBI had estimated results for areas that declined to submit data or were unable to do so.

That’s partly because the FBI had rolled out a new reporting system. The data collection system, called the National Incident-Based Reporting System, or NIBRS, gathered more detail on individual incidents but also required training and tech upgrades by state and local policing agencies.

For the first time in two decades, the national law enforcement reporting rate fell below 70% in 2021, primarily due to the FBI’s transition. In 2022, many law enforcement agencies across the country were not NIBRS-certified in time to submit their 2021 crime data, which contributed to lower reporting rates.

Even before the new system launched, there was a gap in reporting nationwide. Prior to 2021, 23% of U.S. law enforcement agencies on average did not report any crime data to the FBI. In 2020, 24% of agencies did not report, and in 2021, it surged to 40%.

Inconsistent reporting not only hampers the ability to draw comparisons over time and across state lines, but also injects uncertainty into discussions about crime, said Ames Grawert, senior counsel for the Brennan Center for Justice’s justice program. The Brennan Center is a left-leaning law and policy group.

“Issues like that are invariably going to lead to some people having a misunderstanding of crime data — makes it harder to talk about crime in some states, especially given the low participation rate in Florida, for example,” Grawert said in an interview with Stateline.

The FBI’s latest crime report, released earlier this month, offers a glimmer of progress toward transparency: Seventy-one percent of law enforcement agencies nationwide submitted data through NIBRS or the FBI’s previous reporting system, up 11 percentage points from last year. About 60% of participating law enforcement agencies submitted their data exclusively through NIBRS this year. The FBI accepted data through both NIBRS and the older system this year, a change from last year’s NIBRS-only approach.

According to the incomplete numbers, violent crime in the U.S. dropped last year, returning to pre-pandemic levels, while property crimes saw a significant increase.

While crime data reporting to the FBI is optional, some states, such as Illinois and Minnesota, have laws requiring their local law enforcement agencies to report crime data to their state law enforcement agencies. State law enforcement agencies often serve as clearinghouses for local crime data, and in some states, they are responsible for sharing this data with the feds. Some local agencies also may send their data directly to the FBI.

But some states lag.

Florida, Illinois, Louisiana and West Virginia, for example, all remain below the 50% reporting mark, which means less than half of the police departments in their states submitted 2022 crime data to the FBI. Despite these reporting rates, the data shows that greater shares of these state’s populations were represented in last year’s data than in 2021.

Florida has had the lowest reporting rate two years in a row — 6% in 2021 and 44% in 2022 — partly because of the state’s ongoing transition to NIBRS. For 2021, the FBI did not accept Florida’s data through the previous data collection system, which would have represented about 58% of the state’s population, according to the Florida Department of Law Enforcement’s Public Information Office.

“It’s a problem in both red and blue states, it’s also a local issue,” Kylie Murdock, a policy adviser with Third Way, a left-leaning national think tank, said in an interview with Stateline.

“When people use this data to back up tough-on-crime approaches, and say, ‘Our approach in this state is working’ — when in reality, that’s not necessarily the truth because you don’t know the full scope of the problem,” said Murdock.

Roughly a quarter of the U.S. population was not represented in the 2022 federal crime data, according to a Stateline analysis. More than 6,000 of 22,116 law enforcement agencies did not submit data.

Major police departments, including those in big cities such as Los Angeles and New York, did not submit any data in 2021. NYPD said it couldn’t submit summary statistics in 2021 as it had previously because of the FBI’s change in requirements, but was NIBRS-certified this year. Both cities’ departments did submit summary data to the FBI in 2022 through the old reporting system.

The FBI’s 2021 agency participation data shows that the 10 states with the lowest reporting rates included a balanced mix of both blue and red states, while last year’s data shows more red states among the 10 states with the lowest reporting rates.

Political and social consequences

The gaps in the FBI’s crime data create significant challenges for researchers and policymakers attempting to make sense of crime trends. As elections draw near and crime has reclaimed the spotlight, these challenges become increasingly pressing.

During last year’s congressional elections, 61% of registered voters said violent crime would be very important when making their decision about whom to vote for, according to a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center.

While the overall violent crime rate has steadily declined on average over the past 20 years, the Pew Research Center suggested that voters might be reacting to specific types of violent crime, such as homicide, which saw a 30% increase between 2019 and 2020 — one of the largest year-over-year increases on record.

A lack of accurate, real-time crime data leaves voters vulnerable to political manipulation, said Harvey, the New York University professor.

“Voters tend to not have that kind of access. Politicians then try to play on voters’ concerns about crime, but without giving voters the information that will actually be useful for them,” Harvey said.

Experts expect that the challenge of incomplete national crime data — and the incomplete picture it presents — will persist for years because many law enforcement agencies still are working to adopt the new reporting system.

That could affect how policymakers allocate money for law enforcement, crime prevention programs and other public safety initiatives. With crime data, it’s important to know what types of crimes are included and to avoid narrow timeframes when describing trends, said Ernesto Lopez, a research specialist for the Council on Criminal Justice, a nonpartisan research think tank.

“Oftentimes relying on the FBI data, which tends to be outdated, really allows politicians to sensationalize a few news stories. Without having more up-to-date data, it may not be accurate,” Lopez told Stateline.

“Politician or otherwise, when we talk about crime, it’s really important to have a larger context.”

Federal assistance

Law enforcement agencies nationwide have received over$180 million in federal funding to help with the transition since the FBI’s switch to its new NIBRS reporting system was announced in 2015. Many law enforcement agencies are still working to fully transition to the new system.

For example, in Louisiana, the agencies serving some of the state’s most populous cities, including Lafayette, New Orleans and Shreveport, did not report any data to the FBI last year because they were implementing new records management systems, according to Jim Craft, the executive director of the Louisiana Commission on Law Enforcement.

Louisiana’s low reporting rate may be due to smaller law enforcement agencies reporting crime statistics through their local sheriff’s office, which makes it look like fewer agencies are reporting, Craft wrote in an email.

In Hawaii, the police departments serving Maui and Hawaii counties were not certified in time to submit data through NIBRS to the FBI last year, according to Paul Perrone, the director of the Hawaii Uniform Crime Reporting program. Last month, Hawaii became one of the few states where all law enforcement agencies are NIBRS-certified, Perrone wrote in an email.

Meanwhile, even as more law enforcement agencies submit data in coming years, experts warn that the FBI’s database accounts only for crimes reported to the police. And according to the federal Bureau of Justice Statistics, over 50% of violent crimes and about 70% of property crimes are never reported.

Stateline is part of States Newsroom, a national nonprofit news organization focused on state policy.

©2023 States Newsroom. Visit at stateline.org. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

In a signed affidavit filed in Suffolk County Superior Court, Administration and Finance Assistant Secretary Aditya Basheer laid out the projected cost as a judge weighed whether to put a hold on a plan to cap the number of families in emergency shelter, which has swelled this year partly because of a surge in migrant arrivals.

“If family shelter net caseload continues to expand at a rate consistent with the activity of the last several months, the state projects a shelter caseload of approximately 13,500 families by the end of (fiscal year 2024),” Basheer wrote. “This would represent a 187% increase over the caseload contemplated in the FY24 budget. This projected caseload would result in family shelter and associated programs costs of approximately $1.1 billion in FY24.”

Lawmakers on Beacon Hill shuttled $325 million to the emergency shelter program in the fiscal 2024 state budget to support 4,100 families, and Gov. Maura Healey has asked the Legislature for $250 million more in a budget that closes the books on the previous fiscal year.

But state lawyers have said the emergency shelter program has $535 million “in contract commitments” to shelter and other service providers through the end of fiscal 2024. The program is expected to quickly run out of money, and even into the red.

The state’s housing department is attempting to limit the number of families in emergency shelter to 7,500, a move that has drawn a legal challenge from Lawyers for Civil Rights, which argues the Healey administration did not follow proper procedures laid out in state law.

There were 7,388 families in emergency shelters as of Tuesday, according to state data, with 3,687 in hotels and motels, 3,683 in traditional sites, and 63 in temporary shelters like Joint Base Cape Cod and a Quincy college dorm building.

Graphs included in Basheer’s affidavit also show the state expects about 1,000 families to enter emergency shelter each month through the end of fiscal 2024 — assuming the system was constantly expanded.

“Along with the explosive growth in shelter demand over the past year, there has been a widening gap between ‘entries’ (the number of families entering shelter each month) and ‘exits’ (the number of families exiting each month,” Basheer said. “This means that the current levels of pressure on the emergency assistance program are trending to be long-term in nature, with the families entering shelter today expected to remain until at least FY25.”

The Healey administration informed state lawmakers of that projection earlier this year in a series of meetings on migrant arrivals and the emergency shelter system.

Lawyers argued in court Tuesday over whether the state has enough money to continue funding shelter expansion — often through the use of hotels and motels — if a pause was put in place, with state attorneys pointing to the likelihood of a deficit.

“What they ask is not a preservation of the status quo, but, instead, the continued procurement of EA shelter placements to meet new entrants numbering between 20 and 50 additional families per day, despite insufficient appropriations to do so,” Attorney General Andrea Campbell’s office wrote in court documents.

Lawyers for Civil Rights laid out a grim picture of what would happen if a temporary pause on the capacity plan was not put in place — migrants and homeless families sleeping outside as cold weather sets in.

“Without an injunction, families, children, and pregnant women who are entitled to emergency shelter under the law will be denied a roof over their heads — forced to sleep on the streets, in cars, and in other unsafe situations. There is no other way to put it. That is the grim reality,” the group wrote in court documents. “The harms that will befall them are harsh and irreparable.”

If, on the other hand, you are somewhat less than ecstatic about outrageous taxes, hordes of illegal aliens on welfare, the Legislature’s impending gun grab, the fifth or sixth highest utility rates in the US, the utter breakdown of law and order and not just in Boston either….

If any of this concerns you, you might want to… send them a message, as they used to say.

Next Tuesday, you can do just that by voting for a Republican in the special election to replace a Democrat who resigned to grab a $117,000-a-year hack job from Gov. Maura Healey.

Only three of the 39 current members of the state Senate are Republicans. The GOP could literally caucus in a telephone booth. That’s how far the party has fallen, and it’s why a Republican victory might actually mean something.

Rep. Peter Durant is running in a semi-rural central Massachusetts district that includes one city (Gardner), a couple of Worcester wards, and 19 towns, all but one of them in Worcester County.

A Durant victory would be the first Republican takeaway of a Democrat seat since 2018. That’s how long the party’s tailspin has been going on.

Despite their iron grip on power, the Democrats are pulling out all the stops to defeat Durant. They want Massachusetts to be even more of a one-party state than it already is.

The Democrat candidate is another state rep, a 33-year-old named Jonathan Zlotnik. He seems to be rather a nonentity, but all that matters is that “D” after his name.

By his campaign contributors, ye shall know him, and you should see the collection of hacks who’ve ponied up big time for Mr. Z.

First, Marty Meehan, the career coat holder who is now the $697,076-a-year president of hack-infested UMass. Ya think Marty could afford that $200 he sent the Democrat?

Marty has an “assistant to the president” named David McDermott. He makes a mere $350,000 a year. At ZooMass this is called a starting wage. McDermott gave $250.

More interesting, though, is the $200 contribution Zlotnik pocketed even before this current election, from one Ken Halloran. Does that name ring a bell? Probably not, but keep your eyes on this payroll patriot.

Halloran is the “partner” of Tara Healey, the younger sister of Maura Healey. Partner – that’s how Tara is described in the obituary for Halloran’s mom, and in the pages of a local state-run media outlet, the Globe.

He was basically a state-paid lobbyist for the State Police during the very ethical era of Leigha Genduso, Troop E organized racketeering, tubby corrupt union boss Dana Pullman and a cast of dozens of other unspeakably corrupt troopers.

Halloran retired in January 2022, after it became clear that the sister of his “partner” was going to be the next governor. He pocketed his $90,451-a-year pension.

Now he’s in a new lobbying firm with, among others, ex-Sen. Henri Rauschenbach, age 76. Republican Rauschenbach has a nickname – Kickenbach – from his corruption trial in 1995 on conflict-of-interest and conspiracy charges. He beat the rap. It always helps to be tried by a Suffolk County jury.

Like all the other ancient lobbyists I wrote about on Sunday, Kickenbach last won an election in the 20th century – in 1996.

But now Kickenbach is living large, partnered up with the governor’s almost brother-in-law. Ya think that connection helps when you’re soliciting business on Beacon Hill?

It’s only natural that Halloran would be funneling cash to Rep. Peter Durant’s opponent. Democrats, you know.

Many of the ancient lobbyists I wrote about in my Sunday column want to keep the party going. The state is imploding, but they’re getting filthy rich on their way out the door.

Zlotnik’s lobbyist contributors include all the old Boston glad-handers, with names like Joyce, Delaney, Malloy and Hickey. From the Worcester forgotten-but-not-gone brigade, he’s grabbed cash from Joe Ricca and Paul Giorgio.

He’s also collected from most of the furthest-left state senators in the far, far left state Senate: Pat Jehlen, William Brownsberger, Susan Moran, Jason Lewis et al.

But the lobbyists’ showering of cash to Zlotnik is the most telling. These slugs run everything on Beacon Hill. As a group, they’re not terribly swift, but in the kingdom of the blind, the one-eyed man shall lead.

When they write another billion-dollar blank check for their bundlers and advocates and brothers-in-law, all the lobbyists do is scrawl a few words at the top of the legislation:

“Notwithstanding any general or special order to the contrary….”

And that is exactly the reason there should be at least a handful of Republicans up there to yell: “Stop thief!”

Perusing the list of greed-crazed hacks who are spending thousands to defeat Rep. Peter Durant, I keep asking myself one question.

Is there a single ex-legislator over the age of 75 — indicted, convicted or otherwise — who isn’t riding off into the sunset pocketing hundreds of thousands of dollars a year from “lobbying” at the State House?

I just came across two more of the erstwhile solons approaching the checkout counter yesterday.

One was an ex-state rep named Steve Karol. He last won an election in 1992. Now, at age 75, he has a lobbying firm with a 78-year-old ex-state senator named W. Paul White. White’s name most recently appeared on the ballot in 1996.

But when the Democrats blew the hack dog whistle, these two old-timers raised their snouts from the trough and came hobbling back to the crime scene. Because they want to keep the dumpster fire that is Massachusetts state government going.

It’s good for business – monkey business.

If you agree with all the above tax-fattened Democrat millionaires that happy days are here again in Massachusetts, you should definitely not vote for Peter Durant in the special state Senate election next Tuesday.

Durant wants to be that guy yelling, “Stop thief!”

(Order Howie’s new book, “Paper Boy: Read All About It!” at howiecarrshow.com or amazon.com.)

The Herald has learned that enforcement will begin at 8 a.m., a police crackdown that follows a week’s worth of city efforts to connect the area’s homeless and drug-addicted individuals with a pathway off the streets.

Boston police officers will begin taking down tents and tarps, and moving people out of the area, an effort that city officials expect will result in a “very significant reduction” in the number of tents by the end of the day, and last through Nov. 30.

“It’s about time,” said Larry Calderone, president of the Boston Police Patrolmen’s Association, the city’s largest police union. “This was long overdue.”

The union supported the mayor’s ordinance and understood the police commissioner’s point of view on the matter, he said, but he emphasized that the department has “always had the power to move the tents.”

“I understand the need for the ordinance,” Calderone said. “Maybe this gives us some type of superpower or better protection, but we’ve always had the ability to move the tents. So, we’re happy this day has finally come.”

City officials have stated efforts were taken to ensure the new ordinance complies with constitutional requirements, providing more protection against a potential legal challenge than what was already on the books for clearing encampments.

Police are able to take down tents and tarps, provided that individuals are offered shelter, transportation to services and storage for their belongings.

Ricardo Patrón, a spokesperson for Mayor Michelle Wu, said outreach workers and provider partners have been at Mass and Cass since the City Council passed the ordinance last Wednesday, alerting individuals about the pending enforcement and connecting the ones who live there with shelter and treatment options.

As of Tuesday afternoon, 56 people have agreed to leave the Atkinson Street encampments, out of the 80 to 90 who have been sleeping there on a daily basis, Patrón said.

Thirty-five people have moved on to their next destination, whether it be relocation to a shelter, treatment center or low-threshold housing, or reunification with their families. Another 21 have accepted placement at one of those destinations, but are waiting on transportation and storage of their belongings, he said.

For the homeless individuals who refuse those options, or the people who come to the area to engage in criminal activity, law enforcement will begin Wednesday.

A memo was sent out to Boston Police officers Tuesday evening, detailing that enforcement, which begins at 8 a.m.

Four police officers and one supervisor from each police district in the city will be  deployed to Newmarket Square to start the day. Officers will then be staged at different locations, with deployments to Atkinson Street taking place at 8 a.m., 4:30 p.m. and 12:15 a.m. each day, through Nov. 30, per the memo.

While some of those officers will be tasked with taking down tents and working with city officials on enforcement of the ordinance, other response squads will be available, should there be resistance that gets out of hand, according to the memo.

City Council President Ed Flynn told the Herald last week that he expects some people may keep coming to Mass and Cass once enforcement begins, to test how serious city officials and police are about eliminating the area’s open-air drug market and violence.

Patrón said Tuesday, however, that the Wu administration isn’t expecting any resistance, physical or otherwise, on the first day of enforcement. He noted that there were no arrests the last time the mayor tried to clear out tents, shortly after taking office in January 2022.

Calderone said police are cautiously optimistic as well, stating, “We’re hopeful that there will be no resistance and that it will be peaceful compliance.”

In making the announcement, Gov. Maura Healey also said she would recommend two more people for pardons on top of the 11 people she has already caused to be granted clemency with the consent of the Advisory Board of Pardons.

“Clemency is an important executive tool that can be used to soften the harsher edges of our criminal justice system. I am proud to release these new clemency guidelines that will center fairness and equity by taking into consideration the unique circumstances of each individual petitioner and the role of systemic biases,” Healey said along with the announcement.

According to the governor’s office, for the first time in state history, the governor’s clemency guidelines for petitioners will include her explicit language acknowledging “unfairness and systemic bias in the criminal justice system.”

Going forward, when reviewing a petition for clemency, the governor will consider “factors such as the petitioner’s age at the time of the offense, health, post-offense behavior, race, ethnicity, gender and sexual identity, as well as whether they are a survivor of sexual assault, domestic violence or human trafficking,” according to her staff.

The guidelines are meant to help petitioners who are considering applying understand what will be reviewed and assist the Advisory Board of Pardons with review of petitions.

Though it is not unheard of, it is unusual for a governor to consider, let alone recommend, as many pardons as Healey has in the first year of her administration. According to Healey’s staff, it has been 30 years since a governor issued pardons in the first year of their first term, and none in 40 years have issued as many so soon as Healey.

“We’re grateful that Governor Healey sees clemency as a means to address injustices in the criminal legal system. Pardons and commutations are an important tool to not just improve individual lives but also to right historic wrongs, remedy racial inequities, and fix systemic failures,” ACLU of Massachusetts Executive Director Carol Rose said in a statement.

Former President Donald Trump is still the dominant force in conservative politics and it shows in national polling, where he continuously demonstrates majority support among Republican voters. Haley, however, has been steadily gaining ground on her ex-boss where others are flagging.

“With Nikki Haley in second place in Iowa, New Hampshire, and South Carolina, the presidential race is now a two-person race between one man and one woman,” her campaign said Tuesday morning.

In most national surveys, Trump leads the full field of Republicans by 46 points while Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis still holds second place. Haley has occasionally tied the Sunshine State’s governor in those polls, but averages under 9% to DeSantis’ about 12.5%.

However when you boil it down to the states which will first hold their primaries — and where the majority of media attention will shift for a few short weeks — voters pick the former South Carolina Governor over DeSantis, if still not as often as Trump.

In Iowa, where the first caucusing will occur, Trump’s polling average stands at just 48% — less than a majority — with Haley in second at 17.3% and DeSantis at 11.5%. That’s an improvement for both Trump and Haley since the start of summer, when she polled just over 5% and he just over 40%, but a huge loss for DeSantis, who is down from 28%.

New Hampshire will hold the first official Republican Primary and Trump’s polling majority again slips away when surveys are limited to just Granite Staters. Voters in New Hampshire, on average, would choose him 46.5% of the time to Haley’s almost 15%. DeSantis polls under 11% in New Hampshire, losing half his support since the summer.

Haley has been endorsed by former New Hampshire Governor and U.S. Senator Judd Gregg.

South Carolina, which Democrats tried to push to the front of the primary schedule, will hold their primary after New Hampshire. Trump has a near majority of support among Republicans in the Palmetto State, polling at an average of 49%. Haley, who spent six years as the state’s governor, polls behind him at just under 19%. DeSantis again draws less than 11%, down from about 20% to start the summer.

DeSantis said the cause of his decline is spending on the part of other candidates.

“Donald Trump is spending a million dollars attacking me in Iowa. Haley’s Super PAC is spending big money to attack me in Iowa. You don’t do that unless you view me as the threat, so I think it’s fine,” he said during a recent radio interview.

Housing and Livable Communities Secretary Ed Augustus said the system’s expansion rate is “unsustainable” just as a judge was weighing whether to temporarily pause a Healey administration plan to cap the number of families in shelters at 7,500.

Low turnover rates and the push to find enough units to accommodate everyone is behind the high estimate, he added.

“At current rates of entries into and exits from emergency assistance shelter, the number of eligible families in shelter would continue to increase to more than 13,000 households in shelter by fiscal year end (if sufficient shelter units could be found to accommodate that many households),” Augustus wrote.

He added: “With the average length of stay growing each month (averaging 13.6 months as of the first quarter of fiscal year 2024), the pressure on the emergency assistance program will be long-term in nature, with the families entering shelter today expected to remain through fiscal year 2025.”

Demand for emergency assistance shelter is primarily driven by a surge in newly arrived migrant families, high cost and limited availability of housing, and reduced exists of families in long-term emergency shelters stays, Augustus wrote.

The situation has become so dire, the Healey administration has argued, that not only is funding drying up, but the emergency shelter system is projected to run into the red by roughly $210 million by the end of fiscal year 2024.

“This projected deficiency does not include additional resources needed for wraparound services, school supports, and community supports,” Augustus wrote.

Lawmakers and Healey allocated $325 million for the system in the fiscal 2024 state budget, which was expected to support 4,100 families and 4,700 housing units.

There were 7,389 families in the system as of Tuesday, with 3,671 in hotels and motels, 3,641 in traditional shelters, and 77 in temporary sites like Joint Base Cape Cod and a Quincy college dorm building.

“It is no longer possible to secure additional space that is suitable and safe for use as shelter beyond a capacity of 7,500 families,” Augustus wrote. “The commonwealth does not have enough space, service providers, or funds to safely expand shelter capacity any longer.”

Administration officials previously projected that 1,000 families could enter the emergency shelter system each month.

Suffolk County Judge Debra Squires-Lee did not make an immediate ruling on a request to temporarily halt Gov. Maura Healey’s shelter capacity plan, and is now weighing whether those seeking housing should be placed on a waitlist or if the state should temporarily be forced to spend money it argues it does not have to expand the system.

Squires-Lee said she expected to issue a decision Wednesday on Lawyers on the call for a preliminary injunction just as the state inched closer to Healey’s 7,500-family-limit. More than 7,330 migrant and homeless families were in the system as of Monday, according to state data.

Lawyers for Civil Rights filed a lawsuit last week asking for the preliminary injunction as housing and homeless advocates rallied against the governor’s threshold and the administration moved to make the matter permanent through emergency regulations.

In court Tuesday, lawyers largely focused on a 90-day notice requirement in the fiscal 2024 state budget that directs the executive branch to produce a report for the Legislature before making any regulatory, administrative practice, or policy changes that would “alter the eligibility” of emergency shelter benefits.

The report needs to justify any changes, including with any determination that available funding “will be insufficient to meet projected expenses,” attorneys argued.

Lawyers for Civil Rights Attorney Jacob Love said the administration did not meet that requirement as it moved forward with the shelter capacity plan or when it issued emergency regulations only hours before the court hearing.

“In the absence of immediate intervention by this court in the form of a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction, homeless families with children will be denied immediate shelter placement and left out in the cold,” Love said. “At a minimum, we’re asking for a temporary restraining order to preserve the status quo until the court can schedule a full preliminary injunction hearing.”

But Healey and the state’s housing department argued Massachusetts has neither the funds, capacity, nor personnel to keep expanding the emergency shelter system with migrant arrivals still surging and housing costs pressuring local residents.

Assistant Attorney General Kimberly Parr said “there is no money” to expand the system and there is debate “about whether or not the notice provision applies in these circumstances.”

“To start with the facts on the ground, this is no surprise to the Legislature or the people in Massachusetts. The executive branch has emphasized the financial constraints and the acute spike in shelter demand many times in recent months and weeks,” Parr said.

Squires-Lee questioned Parr on how long it would take for the administration to fully run out of money for emergency shelters “if we were to put a short stay in place, for example, to allow the plaintiffs to deal with this … emergency regulation” and bring forward other arguments.

Parr said she could not estimate the timeline but “what we can say is, any delay in implementing these measures will drive the line item further into deficiency.”

“It may seem as though, put a pause on this, wait another week or two,” Parr said. “But given the number of people who are entering the shelter system each day, which seems to be between 20 or 50 families each day, that’ll add up very quickly. And it’s very expensive to find these units, and to shelter these families.”

The fiscal 2024 budget allocated $325 million for the emergency shelter system, and Healey asked earlier this fall for an additional $250 million to help maintain services. But lawmakers have so far sat idle on the spending bill that includes those shelter dollars.

In their lawsuit, Lawyers for Civil Rights argued the Healey administration planned to “artificially cap” the emergency shelter system, place families on a waitlist rather than find them accommodations, and prioritize families with “certain yet-to-be-defined ‘health and safety risks,’” the lawsuit said.

“These changes will necessarily delay the provision of benefits to shelter-eligible families, such as plaintiffs and those similarly situated, thereby denying them shelter and perpetuating the myriad harms caused by homelessness,” the lawsuit said.

The court hearing concluded what had become a busy afternoon by the time lawyers filed into the Suffolk County Superior Courthouse. Only hours before, the Healey administration released emergency regulations that outlined the process for implementing an emergency shelter cap.

The regulations called for a written declaration that identifies the maximum capacity for the emergency shelter system, which Housing and Livable Communities Secretary Ed Augustus released shortly after the rules were on file with the secretary of state’s office.

Augustus said the emergency shelter system had $535 million in “commitments” to pay through the end of the fiscal year, which would bring it into the red by about $210 million if it did not receive a cash infusion.

“The current rate of expansion in the emergency assistance program is unsustainable,” Augustus wrote.

The regulations were filed with Secretary of State William Galvin’s office by the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, according to a Galvin spokesperson.

The proposed update adds a new section to emergency shelter regulations that details what would happen if the “shelter system is unable to serve all eligible families,” according to a copy provided to the Herald.

The suggested rules change call for a “written declaration” that “in light of legislative appropriations, the shelter system is no longer able to meet all current and projected demand for shelter from eligible families considering the facts and circumstances then existing in the commonwealth.”

The declaration would need to identify a maximum program emergency shelter system capacity “which the director (the secretary) determines the shelter system can attain and that the shelter system shall not be required to exceed during the term of the declaration.”

“The declaration shall have an initial time limit of 120 days after it is issued but may be extended for additional periods of up to 120 days if the Director (the Secretary) determines that the shelter system is still unable to meet all current and projected demand for shelter from eligible families in light of legislative appropriations,” the proposed regulations said.

The regulations also outline the process of administering and maintaining a waitlist for families looking to access emergency shelter.

The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities filed the regulations only hours before lawyers were scheduled to attend a court hearing where a judge could rule on a request to temporarily pause a plan to limit capacity in the emergency shelter system.

Lawyers for Civil Rights filed a lawsuit last week and requested a preliminary injunction on the self-imposed emergency shelter capacity limit, a move that riled homeless and housing advocates who say it will force some families to live outside as colder weather sets in.

But Gov. Maura Healey and the state’s housing department argue Massachusetts has neither the funds, capacity, nor personnel to keep expanding the emergency shelter system through a sweeping network of hotels and motels. State officials projected capacity could be reached as early as Wednesday.

During a radio interview, Healey said her administration filed emergency regulations Wednesday pertaining to the waitlist and emergency shelter operations, an apparent move to combat arguments from Lawyers for Civil Rights who said the state did not follow proper procedures to change emergency shelter rules.

“I continue to call for relief from the federal government. We need help with staffing. We need help with funding. And again, it’s a federal problem that we’re having to deal with as states,” Healey said on WBUR.

Some shelter providers have backed the emergency shelter cap, saying a system designed to handle about 3,000 families each year has been pushed to its limits by a surge of migrant arrivals from other counties.

Healey said earlier this month the shelter system can handle no more than 7,500 families, and those who apply for temporary housing after the cap is reached will be placed on a waitlist. She has petitioned the Legislature for an extra $250 million for the emergency shelter system, a request House lawmakers have put on hold as they seek more data.

This is a developing story…

Business is the backbone of our democracy, and neglecting the engine that drives our freedom is irresponsible. Every warning light is blinking, governor, so erase your calendar, roll up your sleeves, and get out your toolbox.

The Tax Foundation ranks Massachusetts as the 5th worst state in its Business Tax Climate Index. New Jersey, New York, California, and Connecticut rank lower — but New Hampshire is in the Top 10. That alone should worry Gov. Healey. Last time when drove north it was a quick trip.

The sad part is Healey doesn’t seem to care. Neither does Speaker Ron Mariano and state Senate President Karen Spilka. Our Democratic-run government is more adept at knocking down entrepreneurs than helping them out.

This Tax Foundation report — showing the Bay State dropping 12 spots in just the past year — should be a wake-up call. Businesses and citizens vote with their feet, and we risk losing both if the status quo remains.

A driver behind the state’s nosedive in tax competitiveness, the Tax Foundation found, is the state’s new Fair Share Amendment – or Millionaire’s Tax – which taxes incomes over $1 million an extra 4%.

“While the $1 million threshold at which the surtax kicks in is indexed to inflation, the surtax imposes a sizable marriage penalty that the Commonwealth lacked previously,” authors wrote in the report which came out last week. “This policy change represents a stark contrast from the recent reforms to reduce rates while consolidating brackets in many other states.”

Paul Craney, a spokesman for Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance and a staunch opponent of the Millionaire’s Tax, called out proponents who pledged that the surtax would strictly apply to individuals with an income of over $1 million.

“With a flip of a switch, the Legislature lowered that threshold to $500,000 for married people and the Tax Foundation is predicting a clear negative outcome from this,” Craney added.

Why should you care?

Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts, told the Herald this weekend that people and businesses alike are continuing to leave Massachusetts due to taxation.

His organization represents 4,000 businesses in the state so it’s not wise to ignore his comment.

The Tax Foundation also called out a payroll tax that went into effect this year in Massachusetts’ poor ranking. The organization also found that the state dropped 33 spots from the 11th-best state for individual taxes to the sixth-worst.

Hurst said high unemployment and health insurance costs, both of which are the worst in the nation, according to the Tax Foundation, need to be fixed.

The Healey administration and Beacon Hill lawmakers can not be allowed to go unchallenged. It’s embarrassing to be near last on any list. It’s unacceptable and reflects how out of touch our lawmakers have become.

U.S. District Court Judge Tanya Chutkan, late Sunday, ordered Trump not to attack federal prosecutors, court staff and potential witnesses involved in the legal proceedings over his alleged efforts to interfere with the 2020 election.

It’s fair to say the real-estate mogul was not pleased by the order.

“The Obama appointed Federal Judge in D.C, a TRUE TRUMP HATER, is incapable of giving me a fair trial. Her Hatred of President DONALD J. TRUMP is so great that she has been diagnosed with a major, and incurable, case of TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME,” the former president said Monday via his Truth Social platform.

Trump was indicted by a grand jury on four charges after an investigation by Special Counsel Jack Smith’s team allegedly showed he was at the center of efforts to subvert the will of the voters following his defeat by President Biden.

Chutkan had previously issued the gag order, but issued a temporary stay while she considered a motion by Trump’s legal team to dismiss it pending an appeal and on grounds it would violate the First Amendment’s free speech clause.

In a nine-page order denying Trump’s motion, the judge didn’t necessarily disagree, but said those concerns were not valid in this circumstance.

“First Amendment rights of participants in criminal proceedings must yield, when necessary, to the orderly administration of justice,” she wrote.

“This court has found that even amidst his political campaign, Defendant’s statements pose sufficiently grave threats to the integrity of these proceedings that cannot be addressed by alternative means, and it has tailored its order to meet the force of those threats,” she wrote, citing the original gag order.

According to the former president, the charges and subsequent gag order come about at the direction of the man he will most likely face in another general election and in an attempt to prevent Trump from conducting a campaign. Trump warned the sitting president over the precedent he sets.

“The Corrupt Biden Administration just took away my First Amendment Right To Free Speech. NOT CONSTITUTIONAL! MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN,” he wrote.

“You’re setting a BAD precedent for yourself, Joe,” Trump declared.

Within hours of Chutkan declaring Trump is subject to her limited gag order, he took aim at a potential witness, former Attorney General Bill Barr.

“I called Bill Barr Dumb, Weak, Slow Moving, Lethargic, Gutless, and Lazy, a RINO WHO COULDN’T DO THE JOB. He just didn’t want to be Impeached, which the Radical Left Lunatics were preparing to do. I was tough on him in the White House, for good reason, so now this Moron says about me, to get even, “his verbal skills are limited.” Well, that’s one I haven’t heard before. Tell that to the biggest political crowds in the history of politics, by far. Bill Barr is a LOSER,” he wrote.

This, and posts that were still on Trump’s social media pages about his former chief of staff, Mark Meadows, violate the order, according to legal experts.

Trump still has posts about Meadows & Bill Barr on Truth Social–a continuing violation of the reimposed gag order. https://t.co/NSq2KriaRJ

— Joyce Alene (@JoyceWhiteVance) October 30, 2023

“Trump still has posts about Meadows & Bill Barr on Truth Social — a continuing violation of the re-imposed gag order,” former U.S. Attorney Joyce Vance wrote.

Council President Ed Flynn and Councilor-at-Large Erin Murphy filed a resolution ahead of the body’s Wednesday meeting, to commemorate Veterans Day. The measure “honoring all those who served our country” is aimed at helping to mend a relationship that remains strained by last June’s budget vote.

Flynn said residents, veterans and military families across the city and country were “shocked and extremely disappointed” at the “disrespect” shown by many members of the City Council, who voted to cut $900,000 from a budget that broadly supports low-income veterans and their families.

“The sacred oath that we have made to veterans has been negatively impacted by the vote of the City Council to cut $1 million,” Flynn, a U.S. Navy veteran, told the Herald. “But I am confident that we learned from this terrible mistake and we’re not going to make that mistake again.”

The cut was included as part of a 7-5 vote to approve a $4.2 billion operating budget for this fiscal year. Flynn and Murphy were among the five councilors who voted against the cut, which was quickly vetoed by Mayor Michelle Wu.

Ricardo Arroyo, Liz Breadon, Tania Fernandes Anderson, Kendra Lara, Ruthzee Louijeune, Julia Mejia and Brian Worrell voted to pass a budget with the $900,000 cut. Frank Baker, Gabriela Coletta and Michael Flaherty voted against it.

Tony Molina, president of the Puerto Rican Monument Square Association and a Purple Heart veteran, said he was “very upset” that city councilors who have never served the country were “trying to harm veterans” with their budget vote.

“I’m happy that it didn’t happen, but I’m still upset, and my relationship with some of the city councilors who voted against (the veterans) is no longer a relationship,” Molina told the Herald Monday.

“I viewed it as a slap in the face,” added Tom Lyons, who chairs the South Boston Vietnam Memorial Committee.

Lyons, a Marine veteran who served in Vietnam, said several months have gone by and veterans are moving on from the budget vote as they look forward to a “celebration of their service and sacrifice of the men and women who have worn the uniform for this country,” on the Nov. 11 holiday.

“Hopefully, moving forward the City Council will take care of veterans versus going there for the first place to cut,” he said.

While Lyons said he would have been furious that a city official would have to put forward a resolution that celebrates veterans in his younger years, the “older, mature” version of himself appreciates the gesture made by the council president.

“At the same time, it’s kind of sad that he has to do that,” Lyons said.

Going forward, Molina said he thinks the relationship between the Council and city veterans is repairable, but urged councilors to contact veterans’ services before making “ignorant decisions” about cutting from their budget.

“The cuts never should have been made in the first place, and frankly, I think the city owes our veterans an apology,” Murphy told the Herald. “They stood up for us, and the least we can do as a community is support them.”

Harvard President Claudine Gay has assembled a group of advisors to help eradicate antisemitism from the campus community, she recently told hundreds of Jewish students, parents, staff, alumni and faculty at Harvard Hillel.

This step from Gay comes in the wake of the bombshell student group letter that blamed Israel for Hamas’ terrorist attacks earlier this month. Gay had told the campus community that she wouldn’t discipline students for their views on Israel.

The divided campus has been embroiled in controversy for weeks, while Jewish students have reported being threatened and targeted.

“I want to acknowledge the profound toll this has taken, especially on our Jewish students, faculty, and staff,” Gay said at Harvard Hillel’s Shabbat Dinner on Friday. “Your grief, fear, and anger are heard and felt deeply.

“As we grapple with this resurgence of bigotry, I want to make one thing absolutely clear: Antisemitism has no place at Harvard,” she added. “As President, I am committed to tackling this pernicious hatred with the urgency it demands. Antisemitism has a very long and shameful history at Harvard. For years, this University has done too little to confront its continuing presence. No longer.”

Her group of advisors to combat antisemitism includes faculty, staff, alumni and religious leaders from the Jewish community.

The advisors will work on creating an agenda and strategy for tackling antisemitism on campus, she said.

“They will help us to think expansively and concretely about all the ways that antisemitism shows up on our campus and in our campus culture,” Gay said.

“They will help us to identify all the places — from our orientations and trainings to how we teach — where we can intervene to disrupt and dismantle this ideology, and where we can educate our community so that they can recognize and confront antisemitism wherever they see it,” she added.

Meanwhile, Harvard has created a task force to support students who have been “doxxed” following the anti-Israel letter.

Following Gay’s remarks on Friday, Harvard Hillel applauded the president — calling her speech “a promising first step in a process that will undoubtedly take significant effort and a united front from our Harvard community, and we look forward to working with President Gay and the university administration with a common resolve to tackle Harvard’s antisemitism problem.”

During the week of Nov. 13, officials from the Department of Homeland Security and the Bay State will host a “work authorization clinic” for migrant families currently living in state-provided housing. The state will arrange appointments and transportation to the clinic, to be held in an as-yet-unnamed location in Middlesex County, while DHS staff help eligible families with paperwork.

“We are glad that the Biden-Harris Administration is hosting this clinic with us, which will help process work authorizations as efficiently as possible. Many shelter residents want to work but face significant barriers to getting their work authorizations,” Gov. Maura Healey said in a Monday morning statement.

According to the Healey Administration, as of Monday there are 7,319 families temporarily housed in the state’s shelter system, which can handle as many as 7,500.

So many have arrived that in August Healey declared a state of emergency existed in the state. The governor has warned that as of Nov. 1, the commonwealth will have to turn additional families seeking shelter away, a declaration that prompted a lawsuit against her administration for allegedly undermining the state’s right to shelter law.

Many of the sheltered residents are newly arrived to the state and the country, and some are barred by federal law from legally working for months after their cases enter the immigration court system. The governor has been pleading with the federal government to help new arrivals get through the system and to work.

“This clinic will be critical for building on the work that our administration has already been leading to connect more migrants with work opportunities, which will help them support their families and move out of emergency shelter into more stable housing options,” she said.

Immigration advocates praised the partnership announcement, but also called on both levels of government to do more.

“It’s time to slash the red tape and make it easier for new arrivals to obtain work permits so they can provide for themselves and their families in the long term,” Elizabeth Sweet, the executive director of the Massachusetts Immigrant and Refugee Advocacy Coalition, said in a statement.

“Beyond this clinic, we urge Healey and Biden administrations to partner so we may ease work access for the thousands of arrivals in Massachusetts eager to utilize their knowledge and skills to contribute to the state’s economy,” she continued.

Healey is planning to stop admitting migrants and the homeless to motels and shelters on Wednesday but faces a legal challenge from a civil rights group.

Liberal-on-liberal crime can get especially ugly.

Healey is staring down a lawsuit from the Boston-based group Lawyers for Civil Rights, which argues that the state must give the Legislature 90 days’ notice before changing the state’s shelter system of handling migrants and homeless.

“The idea that the state would want to turn its back on children in desperate situations, forcing them to live in the streets, in cars, and in unsafe situations is appalling to many in the state,” Lawyers for Civil Rights litigation director Oren Sellstrom told WBUR.

Pretty tough words for a Democratic governor to hear – that you’re forcing homeless and migrant children to live on the streets.

Healey is so desperate not to appear tone-deaf to the migrant crisis that her office on Sunday night put out an “embargoed” press release announcing that the administration was partnering with the Office of Homeland Security to host a work authorization clinic for migrants in two weeks.

The non-news announcement was withheld from public release until 6:30 a.m. Monday so as to get a better bounce from the morning media. But Healey was nowhere to be seen on Monday because she had no public schedule. That way she could avoid pesky questions about the lawsuit or swelling numbers of migrants who are about to be turned away from shelter.

“We are glad that the Biden-Harris administration is hosting this clinic with us, which will help process work authorizations as efficiently as possible. Many shelter residents want to work but face significant barriers to getting their work authorizations,” Healey said in the statement. “This clinic will be critical for building on the work that our administration has already been leading to connect more migrants with work opportunities.”

You get it. A lot of self-congratulating.

Wu faces similar backlash from some liberals for passing an ordinance clearing out the encampments from the drug-ravaged Mass and Cass zone. Her administration will be sending in police on Wednesday to remove tents and clean up the open drug dealing that has been going on – hopefully to arrest a few criminals as well.

The city has reserved extra beds to house the homeless living at Mass and Cass but won’t let them build any new tents.

Several progressives on the council voted against the ordinance but not enough to block it.

But civil rights advocates will be watching closely to see that police don’t go over the line or simply push people out onto the streets. Wu will face stiff blowback from her progressive friends if that happens so she’s hoping for a smooth transition.

If you or someone you know may be experiencing a mental health crisis, contact the 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline by dialing “988,” or the Crisis Text Line by texting “HOME” to 741741.

HELENA, Mont. — Mike Hossfeld unlocked a heavy black steel door to his home’s gun safe, unveiling both modern and antique firearms, some dating from the early 1900s.

“Most of this is mine. There are a few weapons in here that belong to other folks,” he said.

Hossfeld regularly stores firearms for others who are going through a mental health crisis or a rough period. That puts time and space between them and their guns, which can significantly reduce suicide risk.

Hossfeld first stored a firearm, for his National Guard commander, in the 1980s, after the commander talked about suicide.

“We carried our sidearms in a shoulder holster. So I just walked over and took the strap off and said I was going to store his weapon for him in my toolbox,” Hossfeld recalled.

His commander recovered and was very happy to get his weapon back, Hossfeld said. And that’s the whole premise, Hossfeld said, of a Montana law passed earlier this year: to make it easier to help a friend get through a mental health crisis and alleviate the immediate risk of suicide until they get better.

The law protects people who store firearms for others from legal liability if someone self-harms after picking up their gun.

Public health officials hope that will encourage more people like Hossfeld to store firearms for family and friends. They also want to encourage gun shops and shooting ranges to offer storage for the public.

Montana public health officials are creating a map of locations that store firearms, similar to other states’ so-called safe storage maps.

Montana has the second-highest suicide rate across the country, after Wyoming, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. About 85% of Montana’s gun deaths are suicides, according to state data. That’s much higher than the national average of 60%.

Tough conversations

At a local gun show this spring, Lewis and Clark County Suicide Prevention Coordinator Jess Hegstrom set up a booth amid a sea of camo and pro-gun T-shirts.

“I have, like, little guns on my earrings. I’m cool, I’m friendly. I’m not here to waggle my finger at you,” she said.

Instead, Hegstrom talks to people about how to bring up a tough topic like suicide, and safe storage of firearms for anyone at risk, with friends and family.

Sometimes her message is well received, but in other cases people shy away, which Hegstrom said is a sign there’s still a lot of work to do to normalize conversations about firearms and suicide.

Hegstrom is working on a local “safe storage map” identifying gun shops and other locations willing to store guns for the public. She hopes it will become a statewide resource and a tool for suicide hotline operators.

Colorado, Washington, Louisiana and other states have implemented some version of a safe firearm storage map or public messaging campaign encouraging people to store firearms outside the home while at increased risk for suicide.

Legal barriers

Background check requirements and variation in state and federal gun laws give some gun shop owners pause when it comes to storing firearms for at-risk people or having their stores on a public safe storage map.

“I’m not really sure that firearms dealers doing hold agreements is really the best idea,” said Ed Beal, owner of Capital Sports in Helena.

Hegstrom asked Beal to participate in the safe storage map for Lewis and Clark County, but Beal said he has a lot of questions about what is legally required under federal law when it comes to storing firearms temporarily, particularly about what background checks his shop would have to do to return a person’s gun to them after they participate in the safe storage program.

Some gun shop owners participating in safe storage programs in other states say federal background check laws can also deter people from using the storage program in the first place.

Hammer Down Firearms, a gun shop outside Denver, is on the safe storage map for Colorado.

The idea of storing guns for the public is fine in theory, said co-owner Chris Jandro. However, he said, only two people have used the shop’s service.

Many customers back out once they hear that they’ll need to pass a background check when they come back to get their gun, Jandro said.

That background check includes questions about mental health treatment.

Having gotten treatment doesn’t necessarily disqualify someone from getting a gun back, but the questions can be confusing, especially for someone in crisis.

NPR and KFF Health News requested an interview with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, which regulates gun shops, but did not receive a response.

Federal law doesn’t prohibit a person from storing guns for another person.

But in some places, like New York and Massachusetts, state laws can make doing so legally almost impossible, according to Harvard public health researcher Cathy Barber.

“In New York state, you might be a licensed gun owner, but you’re still not supposed to hold on to somebody’s guns, because you’re supposed to register each individual gun,” she explained.

The only workaround is to formally transfer ownership of a weapon at a gun shop. Ownership would have to be transferred again before the gun could be returned, Barber said.

In New York, that includes filing paperwork with the state for each gun.

Other states allow immediate family members to hold on to a relative’s guns without transfer paperwork, but they prohibit extended family members or friends from doing so.

These legal hurdles just take too long to navigate during a crisis, said emergency room physician and University of Colorado professor Emmy Betz, who helped set up Colorado’s safe storage map.

Betz suggested that gun transfer and background check laws include exceptions for suicide prevention. “It would make it easier to give your gun to your cousin, for example,” she said.

That’s what lawmakers did in Washington state. A recent law change now allows friends and extended family members, rather than just immediate family, to store a gun — if suicide is a risk.

Support from public health officials and gun enthusiasts

It will take time to address the legal barriers and patchwork regulatory landscape, but that shouldn’t deter health officials in the face of a growing crisis, said Betz. The number of suicides involving firearms pushed the national suicide rate to an all-time high in 2022, according to a KFF analysis of preliminary mortality data.

Betz said there is still a place for red flag or extreme risk laws that allow courts to legally seize firearms from someone who poses a risk to themselves or others.

But that should be a last resort, she said.

Gun rights advocates are coming around to the idea of voluntary safe storage. Jason Swant was chairman of the board of Prickly Pear Sportsmen’s Association for 13 years. The association operates a shooting range in Helena.

Swant said he overcame his initial reluctance and started working with Lewis and Clark County health officials after hearing the stories of people who loaned their guns or held someone else’s guns to avert a crisis. “That made a difference,” he said.

There isn’t a lot of data on how often people use public safe storage options or ask friends or family to hold on to their guns to reduce suicide risk.

According to a survey of Colorado and Washington state gun owners, a little over a quarter of respondents had stored a firearm away from home in the last five years. However, they could have been storing guns for reasons beyond suicide risk, like during a long vacation or visit from grandchildren.

Researchers in Colorado are planning a study to gather more information on how often people store guns outside their homes to prevent suicide.

Making it normal to ask for help

It’s going to take repeated and widespread messaging campaigns to truly change people’s behavior, said Barber, the Harvard researcher.

“You need the kind of message saturation that we’ve got with designated drivers and ‘friends don’t let friends drive drunk,’ where you’re seeing it in TV shows, on movies, you’re seeing it in PSAs,” she said.

Some gun enthusiasts want to help.

Peter Wakem, a North Carolina-based custom gun case designer, said he has periodically gone into crisis over the years. When that happens, his friends take his firearms and change the code for the safe at his shop.

He started talking about his experiences on various gun-oriented podcasts to promote the idea of safe storage. He has a list of people to call “when things start going dark.” He also keeps a note to himself in his gun safe in case he needs to be pulled back from the brink.

“Time to reach out, things will get better, you’re not weak. You’re doing the right thing. Make the phone call. Signed, Future Pete,” the note reads.

____

This article is from a partnership that includes MTPR , NPR and KFF Health News.

___

(KFF Health News, formerly known as Kaiser Health News (KHN), is a national newsroom that produces in-depth journalism about health issues and is one of the core operating programs of KFF — the independent source for health policy research, polling and journalism.)

©2023 KFF Health News. Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC.

In a partnership with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Gov. Maura Healey’s administration plans to host the work authorization clinic for migrants during the week of Nov. 13.

The administration announced Monday morning that the state plans to organize appointments and provide transportation from shelter sites to the clinic, which will take place somewhere in Middlesex County.

“We are glad that the Biden-Harris Administration is hosting this clinic with us, which will help process work authorizations as efficiently as possible. Many shelter residents want to work but face significant barriers to getting their work authorizations,” Gov. Healey said in a statement.

“This clinic will be critical for building on the work that our administration has already been leading to connect more migrants with work opportunities, which will help them support their families and move out of emergency shelter into more stable housing options.”

A spokesperson for the White House, Angelo Fernández Hernández, said, “The Biden-Harris Administration is committed to supporting local jurisdictions hosting recently arrived migrants and we will continue working with our partners in Massachusetts in the coming weeks and months.”

The effort is part of a multi-pronged initiative to move more families out of shelters. On Friday, Lawyers for Civil Rights Boston filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of three families the organization said are “on the brink of homelessness.” The suit seeks an emergency court hearing and a temporary restraining order to stop the state from “undermining” the right-to-shelter law, the group 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.

Healey has also on several occasions pressed the Biden Administration for financial support in the state’s effort to shelter migrants.

Fernández Hernández said Biden earlier this month, “submitted supplemental funding requests to Congress which address a series of national priorities, including grant funding for jurisdictions hosting migrants and funding for accelerating the processing of work permits for eligible migrants.”

More than 1,500 families have entered the emergency shelter system since Healey declared a state of emergency at the start of August. The Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities reported 7,268 families in the system, accroding to an update on the state’s shelter dashboard this morning.

— Michael P. Norton / State House News Service

It is also Gov. Maura Healey’s deadline for taking in new immigrant families who are flocking to Massachusetts seeking free housing and support under the state’s “right to shelter” law.

So, if a family with children comes trick or treating at your door looking for shelter, they are liable to be immigrants from Haiti or Afghanistan or Ecuador looking for a place to crash.

Massachusetts is an internationally known sanctuary or handout state.

That may be an exaggeration, but you get the point.

The state is so overflowing with migrants that there are no longer the means to care for them.

There is no more room at the inn, Healey said in so many words– as if that will stop them from coming. Massachusetts is overflowing with immigrant families from around the world with few places to house them.

“If there is no place for them, where do they go?” House Speaker Ron Mariano sensibly asked.

It is a good question.

But Healey does not seem to have a good answer. She said that even though the state does not have “enough space, service providers or funds” to expand shelters, “Families with high need, including health and safety risks, will be prioritized for shelter placement.”

If the shelters are full, newly arrived immigrant families will be placed on a waitlist if they are not “immediately connected with shelter.”

Since no immigrants, let alone illegal immigrants, are sent back to where they came from, where do they stay while waiting to be housed?  In tents on the Boston Common? Not likely.

Healey’s remarks translated mean that the state will somehow continue to house and feed incoming immigrant families despite their immigrant status and despite Healey’ Halloween deadline that goes into effect Tuesday.

Winter is coming and no one should be left out in the cold. Everybody agrees on that.

The challenge is coming up with a solution.

While the state has the capacity to accommodate 7,500 immigrant families, or 24,000 individuals, there are currently some 7,200 families in the system, 3,489 families with children living in hotels and motels and 3,629 in traditional shelters.

They get taxpayer-funded free housing, free food, free medical care, security, free schooling for the children and so on. The taxpayers get the bill without even a thank you.

They are still coming, and the problem is still growing.

Unless Healey gets a handle on it, it will consume her administration just the way the COVID pandemic consumed Gov. Charlie Baker, her predecessor, limiting the time and energy he could have spent on other issues, like the MBTA, for instance.

But just as COVID was not Baker’s fault, Healey, although a welcoming progressive, had nothing to do with the immigrant invasion. It was Joe Biden who opened the borders and let millions of foreigners into the country with no questions asked.

It is also Biden who has refused to deal with the problem or provide Healey with the federal funds she needs to pay for Biden’s reckless and wrongheaded open door immigration policy.

And all the big talkers of the Massachusetts Congressional delegation, from Sens. Elizabeth Warren and Eddie Markey on down, have been unable to extract a dime from Biden to deal with the problem.

Healey was rightly proud to have signed into law the recent tax cut bill.

But at the rate the state is spending money on the immigrants, and with no help from Biden, she soon may have to raise taxes to pay for it all.

It is costing Massachusetts taxpayers $45 million a month to house and care for the immigrants already here. Healey has already burned through $350 million previously appropriated for the immigrants. She is now asking the Legislature for $250 million more.

If the additional $250 million is approved by the Legislature—which it has not yet taken up—Speaker Mariano said it would not even be enough “to get us to the end of this month.”

The end of the month is here.

Happy Halloween.

Peter Lucas is a veteran Massachusetts political reporter and columnist.

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.

Residents there now have been notified of the new rule in several languages, according to the Mayor Michelle Wu. Any newcomers will be met by a coordinated team of social workers and law enforcement who will inform them new tents “won’t be able to go up.”

“And if it is up, it will be asked to be taken down,” Wu told WCVB.

The tent and tarp shelters now set at the intersection of Massachusetts Avenue and Melnea Cass Boulevard, also known as Methadone Mile, will be struck starting November 1, when an amended version of Wu’s anti-camping ordinance takes effect.

The plan is not to leave the dozens of people living there now, many of whom are struggling with drug or alcohol addictions or mental health conditions, with nowhere to go, Wu said. With city staff on the ground at Mass and Cass for 24-hours a day for months now, they know precisely who needs help, she said.

“There is no magic wand in a very complex, long-standing challenge that cities around the country are facing with the opiate crisis, homelessness, mental health, but we know that in Boston we have a very good sense of, not only who it is that needs services, but also how to most effectively connect people with those services,” Wu said.

The rampant drug use, violence and homelessness plaguing the intersection has been a blight on Wu’s administration that she inherited from former Mayor Marty Walsh. The problem persisted despite efforts to connect people living there — between 80 and 90 on any given day, down from close to 200 — with social services.

Wu’s plan to solve the problem is three-pronged. The ordinance allowing police to remove tents and tarps is the first step, followed by connection them with housing and other services.

The last is what Police Commissioner Michael Cox described as a “heavy” police presence.

“We want to make it clear to the people who come to the city with a different intent, whether it’s to sell drugs or criminality, or to victimize the people that are in these areas, we’re not going to allow that,” Cox said.

People at Mass and Cass will be offered a ride to temporary housing, but will not be allowed to camp there any longer. The tents and tarps they use for shelter, Wu’s team said when announcing the ordinance, are also used to hide drug use and other crime.

City Council President Ed Flynn told the Herald he has communicated with the Mayor over his desire to see a “zero tolerance” approach at Mass and Cass.

“We have rules in place, and people need to follow the rules,” Flynn told the Herald Friday. “If they break criminal laws, they need to be arrested and prosecuted.”

Brian Kane, the executive director of the T’s advisory board, said problems popping up across the system aren’t the kind of news he wants to hear, but at least MBTA General Manager Phil Eng seems to know what he’s doing.

“Eng has been here six months,” he told WBZ. “I think folks are really starting to see a sea change. I mean, I, as someone who was inside the T, and plays very close attention to it, am starting to see things that I just haven’t seen in the last decade.”

In the wake of revelations that the multi-billion dollar Green Line extension was opened despite previous MBTA officials knowing the tracks were too narrow for trains to move at full speed, Kane said that Eng has been the silver lining. The former New York transportation executive has made some high level leadership changes that speak to how seriously he takes the problems he faces, Kane said.

“He’s brought in serious experts from outside the state and outside the MBTA — industry professionals — to begin to run things, and you are starting to see changes happen internally because of that,” Kane said.

“It’s the adults in charge,” Kane said later.

A fix to the Green Line’s tracks to widen them to industry standard could begin as soon as November and will require about two weeks of overnight closures.

The fact the public even knows about the problem, which previous MBTA officials apparently discovered in the spring of 2021, well before the extension project opened to riders, is because of Eng’s disclosures about the issue. Larger concerns with the system — ridership, employment, revenue — these will take time to address, Kane said.

“It’s only been six months, this stuff will take time. We had decades of underinvestment in the T and it’s not going to be fixed in six months,” he said.

Eng, the former President of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Long Island Rail Road and interim president of New York City Transit system, joined the MBTA in April. He makes $470,000 per year.

Massachusetts had the steepest fall from last year in the nation, dropping 12 spots to 46th for overall taxation in the 2023 State Business Tax Climate Index, a ranking published by the Tax Foundation that compares state tax systems.

“That means we are overtaxing our employers and our residents, both,” said Jon Hurst, president of the Retailers Association of Massachusetts. “To be in the bottom five states, it’s not a good sign to either our tax-paying families or to employers, current or prospective. We’ve got to work on this.”

A driver behind the nosedive in tax competitiveness, the Tax Foundation found, is the state’s new Fair Share Amendment – or Millionaire’s Tax – which taxes incomes over $1 million an extra 4%.

“While the $1 million threshold at which the surtax kicks in is indexed to inflation, the surtax imposes a sizable marriage penalty that the Commonwealth lacked previously,” authors wrote in the report which came out last week. “This policy change represents a stark contrast from the recent reforms to reduce rates while consolidating brackets in many other states.”

The crumbling tax system should not be a surprise, said Paul Craney, a spokesman for Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance, a staunch opponent of the Millionaire’s Tax. He called out proponents who pledged that the surtax would strictly apply to individuals with an income of over $1 million.

“With a flip of a switch, the legislature lowered that threshold to $500,000 for married people and the Tax Foundation is predicting a clear negative outcome from this,” Craney said in a statement.

Hurst, whose organization represents 4,000 businesses in the state, told the Herald on Friday that people and businesses alike are continuing to leave Massachusetts due to taxation.

Massachusetts is the fourth worst state in the country when it comes to out-migration, behind only California, New York and Illinois, according to data gathered earlier this year by Pioneer Institute, an economic policy think tank.

The Millionaire’s Tax has exacerbated the years-long problem, and former Celtics player Grant Williams used it as motivation to sign a four-year, $54-million contract with the Dallas Mavericks over the summer. If he stayed in Boston, the surtax would’ve reduced that amount to $48 million over the four years, he told The Athletic.

The Tax Foundation also called out a payroll tax that went into effect this year in Massachusetts’ poor ranking. The organization also found that the state dropped 33 spots from the 11th best state for individual taxes to the sixth worst.

Two glaring challenges facing small businesses across the Bay State, Hurst said, are its high unemployment and health insurance costs, both of which are the worst in the nation, according to the Tax Foundation.

Hurst is calling on state lawmakers to create more flexibility for small businesses on health insurance instead of imposing mandates and restrictions so they can be competitive with “big, self-insured businesses.”

Gov. Maura Healey signed a $1 billion-a-year tax relief bill earlier this month that Hurst believes will only go so far.

The package cuts the short-term capital gains tax from 12% to 8.5%, a business-backed move that has riled progressives who argue it gives a break to the wealthy. The compromise will cost the state $561 million in fiscal year 2023 and $1 billion a year starting in fiscal year 2027.

It also includes boosts to the rental deduction cap, a tax credit for a dependent child, disabled adult, or senior, and the statewide cap for a housing production program. The bill excludes estates valued up to $2 million from the estate tax by allowing for a uniform credit of $99,600.

“It’s going to help,” Hurst said, “but frankly, I think it’s a down payment on more action that has to come to make Massachusetts welcoming to investment, welcoming to entrepreneurs and to make sure that small businesses and consumers alike can be prosperous in the Commonwealth.”

That’s how ex-pols are often described at the State House after they leave elective office. But after checking out the latest Beacon Hill lobbying reports, that old saw needs to be updated.

Forgotten, but not gone – and filthy rich!

It is astonishing to see how much some of these ancient shiftless hacks are grabbing, especially when you consider how long it’s been since any of them ever won an election.

Let’s start with 79-year-old ex-Lt. Gov. Tommy O’Neill – “Thomas P. O’Neill da Turd” as the sergeant-at-arms used to describe him when he entered the House chambers for the annual State of the State address.

Da Turd is the son of ex-House speaker Tip O’Neill, and he was dragged into office twice on the bottom of the Democrat gubernatorial ticket. But on his own Tipleet won just a single election – as a state rep in Cambridge, in 1972.

No problem, though. For the first six months of the year, his firm, O’Neill and Associates, collected $1.89 million from 59 clients. And here I was wondering how he was paying for that swell new waterside mansion in Harwich Port, with the smart Mercedes sports coupe parked outside. Hi Tommy – see ya next summer, pal!

State House hacks usually make their millions the old-fashioned way – with the kiss in the mail. Like Billy Bulger, the Corrupt Midget. Now 89, the CM has been pocketing a pension that is now $273,759 a year for more than 20 years.

At the State House, one of Bulger’s stooges was Chester Greenough Atkins – “Billy Bulger’s butler,” as he was known. Fat and entitled (he was born in Switzerland) Chet served briefly in Congress until he retired due to ill health – the voters got sick of him.

A four-term incumbent, he lost the Democrat primary in 1992, with a miserable 35 percent of the vote. It may have been the worst Congressional primary drubbing ever until Liz Cheney last year in Wyoming.

But no problem – at age 75, Billy Bulger’s butler is now a “partner” in something called Tremont Strategies. According to the State House News Service, Atkins’ crew took in $2.04 million in the first six months of the year.

Another lobbyist in that outfit is one Jason Aluia. He used to be a coat holder for Sal DiMasi, the former House speaker, convicted felon and jailbird.

Given the fact that Sal can list his Bureau of Prisons number – 27371-038 – as a resume enhancer, you’d think he too would be making the big bucks in his post-prison career as a lobbyist. But Sal, at age 78, is not rolling in the dough, maybe because his former street soldiers are cutting in on the take.

Not just Aluia, but Aaron Michlewitz, who went from skipper of Sal’s staff to being current Speaker Ron Mariano’s elected consigliere as Ways and Means chairman. Poor Sal – his payroll Charlies are putting him to shame in the lobbying grift.

Speaking of the Boston boys, how about the East Boston crew? Bobby Travaglini, who’s a young whippersnapper in this mob at a mere 71 years old, made his bones in the 1970s as a precinct captain working for guys named Dee Dee Coviello and Sonny Buttiglieri.

Now Trav, who became Senate president, paid himself $445,000 in the first six months of the year. Trav, you’ve come a long way from Junior’s Trolley!

According to Secretary of State Bill Galvin’s records, Trav is tied for highest-paid lobbyist with another Ward 1 ward heeler – Carlo Basile, the ex-state rep who went to work for then-Gov. Charlie Parker as patronage boss. Now Carlo made just under half a million a year in the first six months of the year.

It’s amazing how well these Eastie guys are doing, especially considering the ruination of Ward 1. In the old days, Eastie pols were strictly small timers, like Pixie Palladino, who definitely wasn’t a pixie, or James Coffey, who was known as “I’ll Take a Buck.” The name said it all.

Carlo is in the same firm with ex-Rep. Mike Costello. Costello is a second-generation State House hack. His father was another Bulger stooge in the Senate – Nick Costello. Now the son has figured out the racket, and their firm raked in $2.72 million in the first six months of the year. Costello pocketed $335,000 in the first six months of the year.

Another erstwhile Eastie pol living large in his golden years is Dennis Kearney. He last won an election in 1982, and is now 74 years old. Kearney’s lobbying firm collected $1.42 million in the first six months of 2023.

Obviously, even a dunce can make big bucks in the lobbying racket. Consider ex-Rep. Brian Dempsey. He got his B.A. from UMass – Lowell – at age 32.

Like Sal DiMasi, he has what you would consider a stellar State House curriculum vitae. Not only has he been lugged for drunk driving, but Dempsey was also taken into protective custody by the local cops for getting into a brawl with his brother in his mom’s parlor – on Mother’s Day.

Dempsey now has the third highest-grossing lobbying firm in the hackerama. He personally made $300,000 in the first six months of the year.

Then there’s Phil Johnston – talk about forgotten but not gone. He was first elected to the legislature back in the days of the old 240-member House, which was abolished in 1978. Mike Dukakis gave him a hack job in 1984, and Bill Delahunt stole a US House seat from him in a primary recount – in 1996.

But living well is the best revenge, and now, at the ripe old age of 79, Phil Johnston just pocketed $269,600 from his lobbying firm. That is what his old boss Mike Dukakis used to call a “good job at a good wage.”

How ecstatic do you think all the above were last week when Ron Mariano announced he’d run for yet another term as Speaker next year?

He’s from Quincy, which so many of these glad-handers have ties as well. So the gravy train will keep on trucking for a while longer.

And why can’t Mr. Speaker just keep running and running and running? After all, he’s still a young man. Ron doesn’t turn 77 until Tuesday – Halloween.

No wonder he gets along so splendidly with all his fellow ancient hacks.

They’ve all spent a lifetime together – slurping happily at the public trough.

Trick or treat, taxpayers!

(Order Howie’s new book, “Paper Boy: Read All About It!” at howiecarrshow.com or amazon.com.)

“It’s become clear to me: This is not my time,” Pence said at the Republican Jewish Coalition’s annual gathering in Las Vegas. “So after much prayer and deliberation, I have decided to suspend my campaign for president effective today.”

“We always knew this would be an uphill battle, but I have no regrets,” Pence went on to tell the friendly audience, which reacted with audible surprise to the announcement and gave him multiple standing ovations.

Pence is the first major candidate to leave a race that has been dominated by his former boss-turned-rival, Donald Trump, and his struggles underscore just how much Trump has transformed the party. A former vice president would typically be seen as a formidable challenger in any primary, but Pence has struggled to find a base of support.

Pence did not immediately endorse any of his rivals, but continued to echo language he has used to criticize Trump.

“I urge all my fellow Republicans here, give our country a Republican standard-bearer that will, as Lincoln said, appeal to the better angels of our nature, and not only lead us to victory, but lead our nation with civility,” he said.

Pence’s decision, more than two months before the Iowa caucuses that he had staked his campaign on, saves him from accumulating additional debt, as well as the embarrassment of potentially failing to qualify for the third Republican primary debate, on Nov. 8 in Miami.

But his withdrawal is a huge blow for a politician who spent years biding his time as Trump’s most loyal lieutenant, only to be scapegoated during their final days in office when Trump became convinced that Pence somehow had the power to overturn the results of the 2020 election and keep both men in office — a power Pence did not possess.

While Pence averted a constitutional crisis by rejecting the scheme, he drew Trump’s fury, as well as the wrath of many of Trump’s supporters, who still believed his lies about the election and see Pence as a traitor.

Among Trump critics, meanwhile, Pence was seen as an enabler who defended the former president at every turn and refused to criticize even Trump’s most indefensible actions time and again.

As a result, an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research from August found that the majority of U.S. adults, 57%, viewed Pence negatively, with only 28% having a positive view.

Throughout his campaign, the former Indiana governor and congressman had insisted that while he was well-known by voters, he was not “known well” and set out to change that with an aggressive schedule that included numerous stops at diners and Pizza Ranch restaurants.

Pence had been betting on Iowa, a state with a large white Evangelical population that has a long history of elevating religious and socially conservative candidates such as former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee and former Pennsylvania Rick Santorum.

Pence often campaigned with his wife, Karen, a Christian school teacher, and emphasized his hard-line views on issues such as abortion, which he opposes even in cases when a pregnancy is unviable. He repeatedly called on his fellow candidates to support a minimum 15-week national ban and he pushed to ban drugs used as alternatives to surgical procedures.

He tried to confront head-on his actions on Jan. 6, 2021, explaining to voters over and over that he had done his constitutional duty that day, knowing full well the political consequences. It was a strategy that aides believed would help defuse the issue and earn Pence the respect of a majority of Republicans, whom they were were convinced did not agree with Trump’s actions.

But even in Iowa, Pence struggled to gain traction.

He had an equally uphill climb raising money, despite yearslong relationships with donors. Pence ended September with just $1.18 million in the bank and $621,000 in debt, according to his most recent campaign filing. That debt had grown in the weeks since and adding to it would have taken Pence, who is not independently wealthy, years pay off.

The Associated Press first reported earlier this month that people close to Pence had begun to feel that remaining a candidate risked diminishing his long-term standing in the party, given Trump’s dominating lead in the race for the 2024 nomination. While they said Pence could stick it out until the Jan. 15 Iowa caucuses if he wanted — campaigning on a shoestring budget and accumulating debt — he would have to consider how that might affect his ability to remain a leading voice in the conservative movement, as he hopes.

Some said that Hamas’ attack on Israel in October, which pushed foreign policy to the forefront of the campaign, had given Pence a renewed sense of purpose given his warnings throughout the campaign against the growing tide of isolationism in the Republican Party.

Pence had argued that he was the race’s most experienced candidate and decried “voices of appeasement” among Republican, arguing they had emboldened groups such as Hamas.

But ultimately, Pence concluded that he could continue to speak out on the issue without continuing the campaign. He chose the Las Vegas event to announce his decision, in part, so he could address the topic one last time before formally leaving the race.

He is expected to remain engaged, in part through Advancing American Freedom, the conservative think tank he founded after leaving the vice presidency and that he envisions it as an alternative to the The Heritage Foundation.

Pence’s group is expected to continued to advocate for policies that he supported in his run, including pushing for more U.S. support for Ukraine’s defense against the Russian invasion and proposed cuts to Social Security and Medicare to rein in the debt. Such ideas were once the bread-and-butter of Republican establishment orthodoxy but have fallen out of a favor as the party has embraced Trump’s isolationist and populist views.

“This has been a tragic two days – not just for Lewiston, Maine, but for our entire country.

Once again, an American community and American families have been devastated by gun violence. In all, at least eighteen souls brutally slain, more injured, some critically, and scores of family and friends praying and experiencing trauma no one ever wants to imagine.

Numerous brave law enforcement officers have worked around the clock to find this suspect and prevent the loss of more innocent life – all while risking their own. They are the best of us.

Tonight we’re grateful that Lewiston and surrounding communities are safe after spending excruciating days hiding in their homes. I thank Governor Janet Mills for her steady leadership during this time of crisis, and continue to direct my administration to provide everything that is needed to support the people of Maine.

Americans should not have to live like this. I once again call on Republicans in Congress to fulfill their obligation to keep the American people safe. Until that day comes, I will continue to do everything in my power to end this gun violence epidemic. The Lewiston community – and all Americans – deserve nothing less.”

Flynn said he met with the city’s mayor, police commissioner and district attorney this week to advocate for a “zero-tolerance” approach toward the drug dealing and violent crime occurring at Mass and Cass, and throughout Boston.

“We have rules in place, and people need to follow the rules,” Flynn told the Herald Friday. “If they break criminal laws, they need to be arrested and prosecuted.”

The city’s promise to change its permissive attitude toward the crime occurring regularly on Methadone Mile marks a “new era” of responding to residents who are “demanding that we address public safety and quality of life issues,” he said.

Police will start taking down tents and tarps at the troubled intersection next Wednesday, per a new city ordinance passed by the Council this week.

The measure, put forward by Mayor Michelle Wu, dictates that individuals must be offered shelter, transportation to services and storage for their belongings before camp materials are removed.

While addicts and homeless individuals may take advantage of the shelter and treatment options offered by the city, Flynn said he doesn’t anticipate others who come to partake in the area’s criminal activity will heed a warning from the police commissioner to stay away, once enforcement begins.

People coming to Atkinson Street to deal drugs and commit crime will no longer encounter an “area of permissiveness,” Commissioner Michael Cox said Thursday, and there will be a heavy police presence moving forward.

“I think they’ll try to test the city to see if the city of Boston is serious about dealing with this issue,” Flynn said. “We’re going to make tough decisions and not allow anyone to pitch a tent or sleep in a public park or wherever they want to. This city has rules and regulations, and people must follow them.”

Flynn urged inter-departmental collaboration in implementing the new ordinance, but emphasized that there needs to be a “zero-tolerance” approach for enforcement. The tents are a public safety concern, he said, and need to come down immediately.

The president’s campaign has made a calculated risk that Granite State voters will forget Biden’s snub of refusing to put his name on the primary ballot.

Chances are they won’t forget. New Hampshire has four electoral votes and in a close election losing them could be a major blow to Democrats’ hopes of holding on to the White House.

But Biden has chosen South Carolina over New Hampshire and Iowa by endorsing the Palmetto State primary first in line – rewarding the place that rescued his 2020 campaign.

South Carolina is now the leadoff voting state in the selection process under Democratic National Committee rules, but New Hampshire is ignoring that DNC list, vowing to hold its primary first under its own state law. Iowa Democrats are also working to preserve their early January caucus.

“While the president wishes to participate in the primary, he is obligated as a Democratic candidate for president to comply with the Delegate Selection Rules for the 2024 Democratic National Convention promulgated by the Democratic National Committee,” Biden campaign manager Julie Chavez Rodriguez said in a letter advising New Hampshire officials he won’t be on the ballot.

Baloney. Biden is picking South Carolina over New Hampshire for strictly political reasons and for payback for embarrassing him four years ago.

Biden finished fifth in the New Hampshire primary and wants to punish the state that kicked his butt.

His campaign is likely instead to mount a write-in campaign and finish first that way – the same strategy President Lyndon Johnson used in 1968.

“The reality is that Joe Biden will win the NH FITN (first-in-the-nation) primary in January, win renomination in Chicago and will be re-elected in November. NH voters know and trust Joe Biden that’s why he is leading Trump in NH by double digits,” NH Democratic chair Ray Buckley said in a blustery statement.

The only problem is Johnson dropped out of the race after Democrat Eugene McCarthy finished a closer-than-expected second. So, if Biden doesn’t earn a resounding write-in victory, it could be viewed as a loss.

The move by Robert F. Kennedy Jr. to abandon the Democratic race and run for president as an independent makes it easier for Biden to slide by. But the president could now face Democratic opposition from U.S. Rep. Dean Phillips, who decided Friday to launch a primary challenge. The moderate Minnesota Democrat has argued that Biden is too old to run again and filed papers on Friday to get on the ballot in New Hampshire.

Phillips’s surprise decision could complicate Biden’s plan for a write-in win in the Granite State.

“I think it’s a mistake that he’s not putting his name on the ballot,” New Hampshire Secretary of State David Scanlan said.

Consider that a warning.

She is the state auditor who wants to take down the Massachusetts Legislature, and she is on her way to doing it.

DiZoglio, a former legislator herself, is seeking clear authority from the voters to audit — or, as some fear, oversee — the workings of the House and Senate the way the auditor does other state agencies.

Toward that end, she is halfway to gathering the 75,000 signatures of Massachusetts voters needed to get the issue on the 2024 ballot for voter ratification as she awaits a decision from Attorney General Andrea Campbell paving the way for her to sue the Legislature to comply.

Either way it is all but certain that the question will not only be on the ballot, but, given the public’s general negative attitude toward the Legislature, it will surely pass.

While most in Massachusetts speak well of their representative or senator, the same voters look much less kindly on the Legislature as a whole.

Both House Speaker Ron Mariano and Senate President Karen Spilka oppose the move on the grounds that the Legislature is a separate branch of government that makes its own rules and governs and audits itself.

Others on Beacon Hill, where DiZoglio has gotten little support, believe it is a vengeful political power grab by DiZoglio who had a controversial and rocky road with the Democrat leadership in both the House and Senate when she served in both branches before being elected auditor in 2022.

DiZoglio, of course, denies the charges, saying that she is fulfilling a campaign promise to bring accountability and transparency to the Legislature.

DiZoglio seems unperturbed by the little support she has gathered from her colleagues at the State House, from Gov. Maura Healey on down, all of whom are fellow Democrats, as is just about everyone else on Beacon Hill.

Massachusetts is a one-party Democrat state and, since the few Republicans at the State House don’t count, the Democrats end up fighting among themselves.

Merits of DiZoglio’s issue aside — and there are questions of tampering with the legislative process — she continues to gather momentum, attracting support outside the State House from Republicans, Democrats, conservatives and liberals.

Last week, the conservative Massachusetts Fiscal Alliance joined the left-wing Our Revolution in support of DiZoglio’s cause and offered volunteers to gather signatures.

“The more the merrier,” DiZoglio said, adding that she now has 530 volunteers out gathering signatures that are all due to be filed with the secretary of state Nov. 22.

If DiZoglio succeeds, she could shake up the Legislature the way it was rocked a generation ago when the move to reduce the size of the House from 240 to 160 members was approved.

Back then, after a long struggle in the 1970s, the Massachusetts League of Women Voters, then an important public interest lobby group, was successful through signature drives, media campaigns and lobbying, to win the battle to reduce the House by 80 members.

It was an idea that seemed good at the time. It was supposed to make the House more efficient and transparent, which is a joke. Democracy is designed to be messy.

What it did, however, was to make the Speaker of the House more powerful since the smaller House, with fewer dissidents, was easier to control. Many important issues, once hatched out in open House debate, are now decided behind closed doors and rubber-stamped by the House.

In that way the House is indeed more efficient, but the quality of the legislation approved and the way it is passed depends on the nature of the speaker and the leadership team he has around him, not the rank-and-file members.

Also, in a smaller House, members who were once approachable by average citizens became distant once they were stashed away in their new offices protected by staff and press secretaries. Minority representation also took a hit.

Speaker Mariano, a moderate Democrat with a steady hand amidst the growing progressive crowd at the State House, has by all accounts been a good, fair and common-sense leader. Whack job progressives do not rule the House as they do the Senate.

So, at age 77, it was generally greeted as good news when Mariano said he will run for re-election and remain as speaker, at least for a while. He just might be the last moderate Democrat to hold the job. After him comes le deluge.

But no matter his skill and experience, it will be tough going to stem DiZoglio’s voter drive to bring the Legislature to heel.

But be careful what you vote for. You just might get it.

Peter Lucas is a veteran Massachusetts political reporter and columnist.