$1B Life Science Bill Under the Microscope

By Catherine WilliamsPrint Story | Email Story
and Kyle Cheney State House News Service BOSTON - Gov. Deval Patrick said the Bay State stands to lose business expansion projects if his $1 billion life sciences bill fails to pass. During a hearing on his bill Tuesday, the governor said Cambridge-based Novartis AG recently abandoned plans to grow its business in Massachusetts by 400 jobs because the life sciences bill had yet to pass. But the bill – designed to pump $1 billion in grants, tax breaks and capital investments into life sciences businesses and research institutions over the next decade – is facing a tough review through six hearings before the Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies, which is co-chaired by Rep. Daniel E. Bosley, D-North Adams. Legislators questioned the bill's tax breaks and overall cost during the first of those hearings Tuesday. Three of Patrick's Cabinet secretaries, former secretary of economic development Ranch Kimball and New England Patriots President Jonathan Kraft testified in support of the bill, which Patrick said could spur as many as 250,000 new jobs over 10 years. "Life sciences is a powerful force in the commonwealth," said Patrick. "For the sake our economy and for the sake of our competitive future I urge you to take swift and favorable action on this bill." If passed, the bill would create life sciences research grants for research institutions, tax incentives for businesses and $65 million to construct a stem cell research center at University of Massachusetts Medical School in Worcester. The bill invests $500 million over 10 years in life science research, laboratories and equipment. The bill also features business incentives – including credits for Federal Drug Administration user fees, research and development tax credits and grants for life sciences companies that grow their businesses and add jobs in Massachusetts. Patrick's bill also includes administrative changes to the board of directors that governs the Massachusetts Life Sciences Center, the quasi-state agency dedicated to making the state's life sciences investment decisions. Daniel O'Connell, secretary of the Executive Office of Housing and Economic Development, faced questions from committee members about the structure of the tax incentives in the bill. Critics of the bill say promising industries, such as alternative energy technology, would suffer if lawmakers decide to throw so much state funding toward one industry. John Regan, executive vice president of government affairs at Associated Industries of Massachusetts, said he opposes the targeted industry investments made in Patrick's life sciences bill. "We believe the far more effective thing for state government to do is to work on broad-based economic climate change," said Regan. "Highly targeted activity is to be avoided." Sen. Susan Tucker, D-Andover, said she is "skeptical" about the ability of state government to pick industry winner and losers. She also said the committee is concerned with the structure of tax incentives and the bill's high price tag. "All of us are struggling with the issue of a cost-benefit analysis," said Tucker. "This is a very expensive proposal." But supporters of the bill, including Nobel Prize-winning UMass professor Craig Mello, call it a great investment opportunity for Massachusetts to stay ahead of other states. "The time is now," said Mello, who is an expert in RNAi research. Suzanne Bump, secretary of labor and work-force development, and JudyAnn Bigby, secretary of health and human services, joined Patrick and O'Connell at the hearing to testify in favor of the bill. It is unclear which parts of Patrick's bill will survive the legislative process or if the total price tag would be reduced. Sen. Jack Hart, co-chairman of the committee, said lawmakers would work together with administration officials to find the right combination of incentives "within the resources available to us." According to Senate President Therese Murray, the hearing process is just beginning. "We were informed that there were going to be six hearings on the bill – more than we do on the budget," Murray told the News Service Tuesday, adding that all six would be held by the Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies. Murray didn't specify any expected changes to the bill, but she said "the administration's been meeting with the [committee] chairs to talk about some concerns they had and some things they would like to see changed." Both Hart and Bosley said they supported finding ways to grow the Bay State life sciences industry and Bosley added that the committee is focusing most of its time on reviewing Patrick's life sciences bill. "We will eventually pass a life sciences bill," said Bosley.
If you would like to contribute information on this article, contact us at info@iberkshires.com.

Letter: Berkshire Community Action Council Rumors Hurt Fundraising Efforts

Letter to the Editor

To the Editor:

Most of you are familiar with BCAC. We are the federally designated anti-poverty agency for Berkshire County, serving nearly 12,000 families each year. We work hard to maintain the trust and respect of the communities we serve.

Overseen by the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities, we are required to comply each year with a rigorous 78 performance standards which govern all aspects of our organization. Proudly, we can boast that we are consistently 100 percent compliant with these standards which range from our community involvement, our transparency in reporting, our administration of programs, our financial accountability and much more. This positions us as one of the best run agencies in the commonwealth. Furthermore, as part of these standards, we are required to survey the community each year to assess satisfaction with our services.

This year, as in years past, we received an overwhelmingly positive response from our community. We just closed our online survey. With 436 individuals responding, 96.7 percent of those surveyed reported that they were either satisfied or very satisfied with the services they received and for how families were treated. We pride ourselves on our accountability using less than 10 percent of our revenues each year to pay for administration.

Given this, we were shocked to hear that there are members of our community who are spreading untruthful accusations about our programs. We pride ourselves on the collaborative way we work with our partners in the community. We have always recognized that we can accomplish more when we work together. We have shared our resources with the community, not looking for recognition but for the sheer satisfaction of knowing that we are able to help close service gaps and serve more families in need of help. So, these rumors are not only hurtful but very damaging to our programming and reputation.

This year, donors have reported that they have heard these damaging rumors, and it is impacting our ability to raise funds to purchase the coats and boots for our Children's Warm Clothing program. I want to assure you that we administer our programs under the highest standards and always with the utmost respect for our families and their well-being. I am asking if anyone is concerned about rumors you have heard, to please contact me directly so that I can address these issues personally.

I can be reached at dleonczyk@bcacinc.org or call the office at 413-445-4503.

Deborah Leonczyk
Pittsfield, Mass. 

 

 

 

View Full Story

More Stories