WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

H 4218

Chesnee High School cheerleading champs

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Terry Alexander and 121 co-sponsors

Mass. H 4218 reshapes the Parole Board by creating an executive director, separating policy from administration, enabling remote hearings, and giving life-sentence votes a majority.

Introduced and adopted
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · H 4218

Summary — H 4218: "An Act to reform the parole board"

Note on content discrepancy
- The file provided contains two different texts appended together: (1) a Massachusetts bill titled “An Act to reform the parole board” (House No. 4218, Rep. Russell E. Holmes), and (2) a duplicated South Carolina House resolution honoring Chesnee High School’s 2024 cheer championship. The substantive legislative text for H 4218 in this package is the Massachusetts parole-board reform; the Chesnee resolution is unrelated and appears to be included in error.

Purpose / intent
- To restructure the administrative organization and decision-making procedures of the Massachusetts Parole Board by (a) creating an executive director position to manage administrative, operational and financial functions, (b) clarifying and separating the chairperson’s policy/decision authority, (c) permitting remote parole hearings under conditions, and (d) changing certain voting/quorum requirements for parole decisions (including life-sentenced inmates).

Key provisions (by section)
- Section 1: Chair designation and member salaries
- Governor designates one member as chair (serves at governor’s will).
- Board members’ salary set equal to 80% of the salary of the chief justice of the trial court.
- Members required to serve full-time and prohibited from holding other salaried public office or activities that conflict with full-time service.

  • Section 2: New Section 4A — Executive Director

    • Parole Board must employ an executive director who serves at the board’s pleasure and reports through the chair.
    • Executive director’s salary set equal to the chief justice of the trial court.
    • Executive director responsible for administration: hiring (subject to appropriation and civil service/retirement chapters), day-to-day operations, budget, HR, IT, facilities, compliance, and other administrative duties.

  • Section 3–5: Reallocation of duties

    • Removes administrative hiring/employee conduct language from the chair’s statutory duties and transfers these administrative duties to the executive director.

  • Section 6: Remote hearings (new Section 5A)

    • Authorizes parole hearings and board meetings to be conducted remotely (phone/video) provided: participant access to technology; identity verification; public access to public portions per chapter 30A §20; adequate audio/visual quality; and procedures to preserve meaningful participation by prisoners, parolees and victims.
    • Requires board regulations for notice, confidentiality, recordkeeping, and addressing technical problems.
    • Executive director must ensure necessary technical resources.

  • Section 7: Voting/quorum changes

    • Amends a statutory reference so that certain actions require “a majority of the board” rather than “the full membership.”

  • Section 8–10: Transition plan, timeline, and reporting

    • Board must develop a transition plan to separate chairperson and executive director roles (position descriptions, selection process, timelines, communication protocols, statutory/regulatory amendments).
    • Plan completed within 90 days of the act’s effective date and implemented within 180 days.
    • Board must file an implementation report to legislative committees and clerks within 1 year of the effective date.

Who is affected
- Parole Board members and staff (salary and role changes; addition of executive director).
- Incarcerated persons, particularly life-sentenced inmates (changes in voting requirement for parole hearings).
- Victims and families (remote hearing rules and procedures affecting participation).
- State budget / comptrollers (potential salary increases and administrative costs tied to compensation benchmarks and additional administrative staffing and technology).
- Other criminal justice agencies that coordinate with the Parole Board.

Procedural / timeline status (from provided record)
- Filed/introduced in Massachusetts General Court (House Docket No. 1751) — filed 1/15/2025; presented in the 194th General Court (2025–2026).
- Listed as “Introduced and adopted” 03/25/2025 in the packet.
- Referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 06/12/2025.
- Senate concurred 06/16/2025 (two entries listed).
- Hearings were scheduled and later rescheduled for 11/18/2025 (committee hearing details provided).
- Related bill: HD 1751 (replaces) — docket appears linked to same file number.

Potential impacts and considerations
- Administrative centralization: Separating policy (chair) and administration (executive director) aims to professionalize operations but creates a new high-salary executive post (salary pegged to chief justice).
- Fiscal: Salaries tied to the chief justice’s pay likely increase board compensation costs; additional staff and IT for remote hearings add budgetary needs (subject to appropriation).
- Decision-making and transparency: Moving from unanimity requirement for some life-sentence parole decisions to a lower threshold (majority/quorum) could change outcomes for those inmates; remote hearings expand accessibility but raise concerns about meaningful participation, victim access, and technical fairness.
- Implementation deadlines (90/180 days) and required report (1 year) create short statutory timelines for transition and oversight.

If you want, I can: (1) draft a short fiscal checklist estimating likely budget implications, (2) extract the specific statutory text changes against current M.G.L. chapter 27 for side‑by‑side comparison, or (3) prepare talking points for stakeholders (victims’ advocates, corrections staff, legislators).

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.