WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 27

Reproductive Rights

2025-2026 Regular Session Introduced by Brad Hutto

This bill grants a one-person waiver to the Boston PD, enabling Antonio Pires to be certified for original appointment despite the age cap, if all other requirements are met.

Referred to Committee on Medical Affairs
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 27

Summary — S.27 (Senate Docket No. 2644)

Note: the bill header provided initially referenced tuition assistance for students experiencing homelessness, but the actual bill text and docket attached to S.27 (Senate Docket No. 2644) address a different matter. This summary is based on the bill text filed 02/05/2025 (Senate No. 27 / SD 2644), which directs the City of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum‑age requirement for one named individual.

Main purpose

To create a one‑person, statutory exception allowing Antonio Pires to be eligible for certification for original appointment as a Boston police officer despite exceeding the department’s maximum age limit for original appointment.

Key provisions

  • Directs the City of Boston Police Department to waive the maximum age requirement for original appointment of police officers for Antonio Pires.
  • States that waiver applies “notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary,” explicitly referencing Chapter 43 of the Acts of 2007 (which governs certain civil service/age provisions).
  • Conditions the waiver on Antonio Pires meeting “all other requirements set forth by the Boston Police Department” — i.e., he must satisfy all non‑age hiring qualifications.
  • Includes a severability clause: if any part is held invalid, remaining provisions remain in effect.
  • Effective date: the act takes effect upon its passage.

Who is affected

  • Primary beneficiary: Antonio Pires — the bill enables his eligibility for certification for original appointment as a Boston police officer despite being over the department’s maximum age limit.
  • City of Boston Police Department: required to apply the waiver for this individual if all other requirements are met.
  • No general change to age rules for other applicants; this is a local/individual exemption rather than a broad policy change.

Legislative status and timeline (from document)

  • Introduced in Senate: 2025‑01‑07 (presented by Liz Miranda).
  • Referred to committees: initially to Homeland Security & Governmental Affairs and/or Higher Education (records show multiple referrals).
  • Advanced to third reading and passed by the Senate: recorded 2025‑02‑05 (advanced) and 2025‑02‑11 (passed Senate, delivered to House).
  • Referred in the House to committee(s): Public Service and/or Higher Education (records show referrals 2025‑03‑06 and 2025‑02‑11).
  • House action: recorded “House concurred” on 2025‑03‑10.
  • Other entries: hearing scheduled 2025‑05‑07; later committee report favorable and placed on Orders of the Day (2025‑09‑29); additional reading noted 2025‑10‑20. (The legislative action log contains duplicate and out‑of‑sequence entries; the core recorded actions are introduction, Senate passage, House concurrence, and committee activity.)

Context and implications

  • This is a private/local relief-style bill (a named-person exemption) commonly used to grant an exception to civil service or other statutory requirements for an individual.
  • It does not change statewide hiring age rules generally; its effect is limited to enabling one named person to be certified for appointment if other qualifications are satisfied.
  • Because it explicitly overrides conflicting general or special laws, it would authorize the city department to proceed with certification despite statutory age limits if enacted.

Sponsors and related measures are listed in the docket (sponsors include Bill Cassidy, Robert Jackson, Patricia Fahy, John Liu, Lea Webb, Kristen Gonzalez; related bills/companion measures also noted).

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

Sign in to ask a question.