MA Legislation

Please see the why page for some reasons to support these bills, resources for more, and the home page for the latest action updates.

You can sign in support of some of the bills -- this is a private account (Kirstin's) so information is not shared. Signing allows legislative staff to save time and serves as proof of support, but calling is more personal.

Links to testimony and relevant committee contact info is below -- however, if you can get your own legislator to support these bills that is also important. Find your state legislators here.


  1. End state school screen time mandate (begins in preK)
  2. Safer Tech: Hard-wire broadband for safety, and regulate electricity for the same reason -- also includes limits on screen time
    • Bills H. 105-114 are in the same committee listed in #1, Advanced IT etc.
  3. Protect privacy
    • H. 107 limits and regulates school and university technology use based on privacy considerations -- the bill is currently in the same committee listed in #1, Advanced IT etc.
  4. End water fluoridation
  5. Protect trees & kids (please scroll down to Eco-Health for bill explanations)
    • H. 912, S. 1323, H. 2195, H. 905, S. 504, H. 856, S. 557, S. 556, H. 937, H. 939 are all currently in the same committee listed in #4, the Joint Committee on the Environment etc.


We would like to receive copies of written testimony for our starred bills as evidence [mail to: LTL, c/o K. Beatty, 149 Central Pk Dr, Holyoke, MA 01040 or email testimony at (followed by our .com domain)].

Here is a list of the below legislation: ma-legislation-PDF

For the starred bills, please mail a copy of your testimony to us as well, as proof of submission since some were not counted towards all bills last year. Guidance will be forthcoming. Mail to: LTL, c/o K. Beatty, 149 Central Pk Dr, Holyoke, MA 01040.

Unless attending a public hearing, testimony should be submitted by mail or email to your legislators and the committee currently assigned to study and report on the bills. All testimony can be submitted to the committee up until and during the public hearing.

Comments for all except utility bills & S. 186 go to Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity

    • Senate Chair Senator Barry Finegold:
      • (617) 722-1612
    • House Chair Representative Linda Dean Campbell:
      • (617) 722-2380
    • Copy your legislator whose email address can be found online here.
    • Please copy the starred bills to testimony@ our domain (lasttreelaws. . .)

The 3 utility bills, listed last in green, are now assigned to the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy.

    • Electronic testimony to:
    • Senate Chair Senator Michael J. Barrett
      • (617) 722-1572
    • House Chair Representative Jeffrey N. Roy
      • (617) 722-2030
    • Copy your legislator whose email address can be found online here.
    • Please copy the starred bills to testimony@ our domain (lasttreelaws. . .)

Comments for S. 186 go to Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure:

Contact information and upcoming hearings are listed at the committee links above, as well as links for the individual members of each committee.

H. 114 An Act studying technology impacts on police, firefighters, and emergency and security personnel

Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty

Summary: Invites police and firefighters to examine how to address health impacts of technology with a few experts and 1 black lives matter representative.
History: The IAFF, which represents many MA firefighter unions, is officially against antennas on fire stations. Emergency personnel use great deal of wireless & electric equipment, more so than your average person. There are health concerns, so the people using or exposed to the equipment should have a say in those exposures.

H.108 An Act supporting patients and residents suffering from environmental pollutants and modern technologies, e.g. wireless.
Sponsor: Rep. Patricia Duffy and citizen Kirstin Beatty
Summary: Doctors, nurses, and practical nurses are trained regarding health impacts of wireless & certain kinds of electricity, and insurance covers patient education on the same. Patients with leukemia & lymphoma are given extra help. Nursing homes and medical providers are to work towards reducing such exposures. Nutritional therapy is to adopted.
History: Kirstin put forward several bills to request attention from medical providers to electromagnetic health in previous sessions, but this bill attaches the changes to specific existing laws as education.

H. 105 An Act reducing non-ionizing radiation such as wireless from early to higher education.
Sponsor: Rep. Pat Duffy & citizen Kirstin Beatty
Summary: The bill requires hard-wiring broadband services and reducing non-ionizng radiation in higher education and public schools. Departments or boards from early to higher education are to create guidelines and require those easy and cheap to do, setting reasonable deadlines for all other recommendations. Section 1, pasted further below, provides general reasons for the bill.
History: Previous iterations of a bill to restrict school exposures have been put forward by resident and co-chair Kirstin Beatty and by Rep. Carolyn Dykema. Rep. Dykema's bills have proposed the education departments to examine how to best use wireless, while Kirstin's have sought to eliminate wireless. Questions remain as to whether wireless can be used safely, and we think enacting a variety of practices to reduce existing wireless exposure is difficult and misguided in contrast to simply hard-wiring the internet, so we are not supporting Rep. Dykema’s bill.


Whereas, FCC wireless guidelines fail to recognize harm from wireless, despite evidence from credible institutions including the U.S. National Toxicological Program and the Ramazzini Institute.

Whereas, high fields and poor power quality from electricity can injure electronics and human health, the latter acknowledged in part by the International Agency for Research on Cancer in 2010.

Whereas, problematic exposures of wireless and electricity are tied not just to cancer, but to ADHD, miscarriage, asthma, Alzheimer’s Disease, learning disabilities, obesity, multiple sclerosis, congenital heart disease, etc.

Whereas, legal challenges have been filed or are in process with regards to non-ionizing radiation worker’s compensation, personal injury, international treaties, agency obligations, consumer product warnings, and the American with Disabilities Act and Fair Housing Amendments Act. Worker’s compensation cases have already been won.

Whereas, many countries have set non-ionizing exposures very far below the limit set by the U.S. Federal Communications Commission; several countries prohibit wireless in public schools; California and several countries limit high fields from electricity - yet Massachusetts has done nothing.

Whereas, the federal government forces wireless into public schools by subsidizing only wireless connectivity through its federal E-rate program.

Whereas, schools should have clearly set objectives and support from the department and board of elementary and secondary education to reduce non-ionizing radiation exposures.

Whereas, reducing non-ionizing radiation is feasible and recommended by many experts.

Whereas, the mission of the department and board of elementary and secondary education fails to acknowledge any role in fostering environmental health and a positive school culture in public schools.

H.112 An Act hard-wiring state offices and investing in hard-wired communications
Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty
Summary: Massworks, Massachusetts Broadband Institute, the executive office of info tech, the director of wireless & telecommunications -- all are to use or invest in wired, not wireless tech. The MBI board constitution is slightly changed to bring in public health and privacy advocates. The Ed. commissioner is to develop a plan to hard-wire public educational institutions. Also, requires an annual, public audit report from telecommunication companies and utilities, and sets penalties for lack of compliance, changing from an optional audit.
Background: (1) Wireless is harmful. (2) Telecommunications monopolies have allowed deterioration of underground phone lines and service and have concealed cross subsidies to avoid taxes -- auditing is necessary. Still, we'd like to add a few more improvements to tighten the auditing section.

H. 113 An Act requiring wireless insurance.

Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty

Why? Insurance companies will provide oversight and incentive to limit the most dangerous exposures, and the insurance provides protections. Summary: Providers of antennas for telecommunication, video, and television providers are required to carry insurance, including commercial liability without an exclusion for health impacts. Personal devices and appliances are exempted.

H. 109 An Act improving non-ionizing radiation regulation and monitoring.
Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty
Summary: Supports reporting to the state of all cellular infrastructure with names of owners, etc., public mapping of sites, qui tam exposure monitoring, state exposure monitoring, a public listing of consultants, dedicated monitoring employees, and allows for state fines -- adaptation of original statutes.

Reasoning from section 1 of the proposed law:

Whereas, the radiation regulation and licensing authority should be separate from the authority for civil penalties to prevent corruption.

Whereas, the FCC fails to regulate many different non-ionizing radiation frequencies, nor does any there federal agency do so.

Whereas, consumers should know if an appliance or device is wireless, the type of exposure, and have a choice to make safer purchases.

Whereas, a registry of cell towers is necessary for study of non-ionizing radiation health effects.

Whereas, residents should have the right to be informed and ability to sue if legal radiation limits are exceeded.

Whereas, other countries have recognized hazards of wireless by adopting more stringent limits and by limiting use in sensitive locations such as schools and hospitals.

H.110 An Act halting 5G high frequencies and close proximity antennas
Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty
Why? Hard-wiring alone will not stop residential 5G or more cell towers. Because the FCC makes saying no tough and for some new technologies it bypasses local permitting, the state must act.
Summary: This bill requires a timeline for removal of wireless facilities with a focus on 6 GHz frequencies and higher as well as for microcell removal. A typo needs fixing and obscures the requirement for identification of detailed information on ownership of facilities, with fines required if not shared. Certification may be provided for non-wireless products, etc., and education shall be provided. The last section allows a lessee renting property and a mobile services customer to cancel the contract with service providers.

History: Please see current lawsuits on this topic. Also, the bill includes some background as follows.
SECTION 1. The legislature finds and confirms all of the following:-
Whereas, federal telecommunications law recognizes the right of states to “impose, on a competitively neutral basis” requirements to protect public safety and welfare (47 U.S. Code § 253).
Whereas, “promoting safety of life and property” is one purpose of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) in supporting wire and radio communication service, the other being national defense (47 U.S. Code § 151).
Whereas, the FCC is not a medical agency and has failed to consult with proper authorities on the safety of wire and radio communication services.
Whereas, based on responses of the ruling judges, the FCC is likely to lose a procedural case highlighting its failures in pronouncing current wire and radio communication service safe despite substantive research and docket commentary to the contrary (Environmental Health Trust, et al. v. Federal Communications Commission, Nos. 20-1025 and 20-1138).
Whereas, non-ionizing radiation exposures have exponentially increased since 2010 from FCC new frequency band auctions, fast-track approval of tens of thousands of 5G satellites, regulations designed to bypass municipal zoning, outdated exposure guidelines, and allowances for cell tower antennas on street lights and other nearby installations.
Whereas, NASA, the Department of Defense, scientists, and other stakeholders have warned that the use of new frequency bands risks destroying functionality of weather forecasting, GPS, railroads scheduling, critical astronomy, aviation, cybersecurity, and utility infrastructure communications.
Whereas, scientific experts warn and some have confirmed that extremely high exposures, potentially exceeding outdated FCC guidelines, result from either or both (a) the use of new millimeter wave frequencies and (b) the density and proximity of cell tower transmitters for 5G, 6G, and the Internet of Things.
Whereas, heating of bees and other insects rises alongside higher frequencies from 6 GHz – hence, the use of millimeter waves and other high frequencies for 5G is harmful to pollination, soil, and life (Thielens et al., Exposure of Insects to Radio-Frequency Electromagnetic Fields from 2 to 120 GHz, Scientific Reports, 2018).
Whereas, scientists have confirmed millimeter waves and other high frequencies can heat and damage skin even at levels within FCC guidelines (Neufeld and Kuster, 2018; Betzalel et al., 2017, 2018).
Whereas, the U.S. and other countries have used millimeter waves at high power to painfully disable opposition – hacking software systems could turn residential 5G antennas into weapons targeted at individuals or groups.
Even without the concerns of 5G and 6G, our exposures from personal devices and ambient radiation are problematic as peer-reviewed research indicates effects of increased cancer, dementia, learning disability, depression, infertility, autoimmune disease, pain, et cetera, that is most harmful to vulnerable populations such as youth, the elderly, and infants.
Whereas, all have certain inalienable rights, among them life and the pursuit of happiness, and the Commonwealth is charged with securing these rights even if the United States fails.
Resolved, that the policy goals of this act shall be to halt especially dangerous non-ionizing radiation exposures, in particular new exposures approved by the FCC in the last decade.

H.111 An Act requiring better power quality and reduced radiation from utility infrastructure.
Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty
Summary: Requires utilities protect privacy and insure electromagnetic public exposures fall within ranges of 'slight concern' based on Building Biology guidelines.

S. 2204 An Act relative to smart meters

Sponsor: Senator Michael Moore

Summary: This bill is meant to allow individuals to opt out of a wireless smart meter at no cost. This is a very good bill, although it does not address apartment dwellers who may have 20 or more smart meters on one wall.
History: This bill was written by concerned Worcester residents together with Senator Michael Moore - this bill has been presented in several sessions, each time gathering more support and cosponsors.

S. 2195 - Senator John Keenan is putting forward a bill to require railroad antennas have local zoning approval BUT ONLY for Quincy, Braintree, Abington, and Rockland.
Before telecommunications & utilities joint committee.
History - it did not pass last year, a sign of an intractable legislature.

H. 143 An Act internet access on private ways
Requires internet service in public rights of way – problematic due to internet service equating to powerful antennas potentially just a block or two apart in residential areas.
Sponsors: Representatives David T. Vieira , Dylan A. Fernandes

HD.2898 An Act relative to a 5G technology task forces

Bill problematic due to 5G equating to powerful antennas likely just a block or two apart in residential areas. This bill allows industry to work with legislators on crafting 5G laws under the auspices of 'equity' for providers in rolling out 5G. Main Sponsor: Rep. Bradley Jones Other Sponsors: Rep. Susan Williams Gifford, Maria Duaime Robinson

S. 186 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications
Last session we worked to oppose this bill – we tried to get in contact with the sponsor without real success. The biggest issue is all these nominations are by the governor directly or indirectly and his conduct so far has not been supportive. Another issue is that the first objective is to look at how this impacts industry, when the first objective should be to look at how to rescue public health. Kirstin has written a post that discusses issues with such commissions, and this bill. Sponsor: Senator Julian Cyr

H. 2351 An Act relative to a special commission to study electric and magnetic fields
This utility infrastructure investigation lacks full independence. The American Cancer Society has licensing agreements and donations from utilities and the Environmental League of Massachusetts may also be questionable as it works closely with a corporate council, at one time included a smart meter expert in its administration, and has industries like electric cars as top priorities, rather than environmental health. The board also includes a lawyer who has provided big wins for utilities. Sponsor: Rep. David Paul Linsky

H. 115 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education

This bill mistakenly suggests wireless is safe because it is to continue wireless with modifications for safety. Supporting this bill gives an illusion wireless is fine. Rep. Dykema does not seem to understand how terrible wireless exposures can be. Supporting the other bills above to hard wire schools is more useful. Sponsor: Rep. Carolyn Dykema

These bills go to different committees.

Comments for H. 136 & H. 130 go to Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity

    • Senate Chair Senator Barry Finegold:
      • (617) 722-1612
    • House Chair Representative Linda Dean Campbell:
      • (617) 722-2380
    • Copy your legislator whose email address can be found online here.

Comments for S. 220 & H. 341 go to Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure:

All testimony can be submitted to the current committee up until and during the public hearing.

Unless attending a public hearing, testimony should be submitted by mail or email to your legislators and the committee currently assigned to study and report on the bills.
Contact information and upcoming hearings are listed at the links in bold above, as well as links for the individual members of each committee. If we have more time we will post email addresses here, even if email isn't foolproof or always read!

H.130 An Act relative to a streaming entertainment operator’s use of the public rights-of-way
Sponsors: Joan Meschino , Paul F. Tucker
Summary: Taxes at 5% use of public rights-of-way by streaming providers. Gives state right to audit profits.
S.2200 - Summary: Similar, but in senate. Sponsors: Jason Lewis, Kenneth L. Gordon

An Act to protect personal biometric data - S.220 Summary: As title states, sets some limits. Sponsor: Mark C. Montigny

An Act relative to data privacy - H. 136 - Creates executive agency of privacy with head approved by multiple parties. Sponsors: Representatives David M. Rogers , Andres X. Vargas

An Act relative to the digital right to repair H. 341

Allows digital repair by technicians independent of the brand name company, promoting competition to existing monopoly on repair services.

For the starred bills, please mail a copy of your testimony to us as well, as proof of submission since some were not counted towards all bills last year. Mail to: LTL, c/o K. Beatty, 149 Central Pk Dr, Holyoke, MA 01040.

Comments to: Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture

    • Senate Chair, Senator Rebecca Rausch:
    • House Chair, Representative Carolyn C. Dykema:
    • Copy your State Senator and Representative. Find your legislator online here.
    • For the fluoride bill, please copy Last Tree Laws using the testimony@ address with our domain name.

All testimony can be submitted to the current committee up until and during the public hearing. Additional email addresses can be attached of any of the members of the Joint Committee on Environment, Natural Resources and Agriculture.

Unless attending a public hearing, testimony should be submitted by mail or email to your legislators and the committee currently assigned to study and report on the bills.

H. 895 An Act ending water fluoridation
Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty
Summary: Ends water fluoridation, advises to restrict such exposures to infants and pregnant women.
Why? There is a current federal court case where the EPA appears to be losing because of the judicial statements and EPA's acknowledgements, yet ending water fluoridation is hard under the current statute. More information on the trial is available at Food & Water Watch or at Fluoride Action. Note fluoridated water also has detrimental effects on fish fertility.

Reasoning provided in section 1 of the bill:

Whereas, fluoride’s purported benefits are topical, and therefore no reason exists for water fluoridation and ingestion.

Whereas, in an ongoing trial in the 9th Circuit, Judge Chen has indicated the Environmental Protection Agency has lost in disputing that water fluoridation poses a substantive risk under the Toxic Substances Control Act (Food & Water Action, Inc. et al. vs. Environmental Protection Agency).

Whereas, the Environmental Protection Agency has claimed to Judge Chen that the Toxic Substances Control Act requires an impossible burden of proof to allow ending water fluoridation.

Whereas, a 2019 National Institutes of Health funded study in Canada found that babies fed formula mixed with fluoridated water averaged 4 IQ points less than those mixed with non-fluoridated water – losses of non-verbal IQ averaged 9 IQ points, reinforcing earlier studies (Till et al, 2019).

Whereas, a Canadian study found a nearly 300% higher risk of ADHD for children living in fluoridated areas, reinforcing earlier studies (Riddel et al, 2019).

Whereas, fluoride is the only chemical added to water for the purpose of medical treatment, despite a lack of full public consent, lack of dose control, and lack of consideration for vulnerable individuals such as those with impaired kidney function.

Bill H.912 An Act relative to forest protection

Sponsor: Rep. Michael Finn

Helps to preserve and provide safe habitat to protect native biodiversity; acknowledges natural carbon sequestration as a benefit; prohibits sale or removal of timber from state parks; prohibits new commercial industrial infrastructure development on state lands and parks.

An Act to update the public shade tree law

Sponsors: Cindy Creem (S. 1323) Rep. Steven Owens (H.895)
Summary: No one may trim or cut down a municipal tree without municipal tree warden permission. Tree wardens may make regulations to be approved by town authorities. Why? Well, trees along sidewalks are being cut down to allow better 5G transmissions or to install close proximity antennas or for other construction.

An Act Establishing the Municipal Reforestation Program
Sponsors: Senator Creem (S.504) and Representatives Lewis, Ehrlich, and Owens (H. 905)
Summary: Each municipality creates a reforestation plan the state financially & technically supports, prioritizing needy.

H. 856 & S. 557 An Act Authorizing the Establishment of Old Growth Forest Reserves

Sponsor: Rep. Natalie Blais, Senator Adam Hinds

Summary: This protects state-owned old-growth forests in Massachusetts from timber cutting.
Why? Old-growth forests are rare and can't be replaced, providing vital biodiversity, forest genetics, carbon sinks, and more.


These bills replace the Commonwealth’s expensive mosquito management system using highly toxic pesticides with one that is more ecologically responsible as well as effective, affordable, and scientifically based.

For more information about the harmful nature of pesticides please see

Primary Sponsors: Representative Gouveia of Acton and Senator Hinds and Senator Adam G. Hinds

H.939 & S. 207 An Act for Massachusetts Toxic Free Kids
Sponsors: Representatives James Hawkins and Tami Gouveia; Senators Cindy F. Friedman & Joanne M. Comerford
Summary: Requires Department of Environmental Protection, working with Toxics Use Institute, to publish a list of toxics in children's toys, update every 4 years, and begin to set limits on sale.

For the starred bills, please mail a copy of your testimony to us as well, as proof of submission since some were not counted towards all bills last year. Mail to: LTL, c/o K. Beatty, 149 Central Pk Dr, Holyoke, MA 01040.

Comments for the privacy and screen time bills go to Joint Committee on Advanced Information Technology, the Internet and Cybersecurity:

    • Senate Chair Senator Barry Finegold:
      • (617) 722-1612
    • House Chair Representative Linda Dean Campbell:
      • (617) 722-2380
    • Copy your legislator whose email address can be found online here.

The school recess bill is currently assigned the Joint Committee of Education.

  • Senate Chair Senator Jason M. Lewis:
  • House Chair Representative Alice Hanlon Peisch:
    • (617) 722-2070
  • Copy your legislator whose email address can be found online here

Unless attending a public hearing, testimony should be submitted by mail or email to your legislators and the committee currently assigned to study and report on the bills. All testimony can be submitted to the committee up until and during the public hearing.

Contact information and upcoming hearings are listed at the links in bold above, as well as links for the individual members of each committee.

H. 106 An Act regulating screen time in early and K-12 education.

Sponsor: Citizen Kirstin Beatty

Summary: This bill allows school communities to set screen time limits, and sets limits on screen time in early education. The bill requires that Massachusetts state standards remove mandates for screen time from PreK on up, unless specific to the subject.

Reasoning provided in section 1 of the bill:

Whereas, insuring schools or school districts set a school screen time and cellphone limit requires that the community engages and agrees upon what those limits should be.

Whereas, the Journal of the American Medical Association published a 2019 study that found high levels of screen time reduces structural integrity in key brain areas responsible for literacy and language.

Whereas, the Massachusetts education standards mandate screen time: writing standards require students “use [digital tools (e.g. computers, mobile phones, cameras)] to convey messages in pictures and in words” in PreK; “explore a variety of digital tools” to write in Grade 1; and gather information from digital sources by Grade 3.

Whereas, information technology captures data for profiling, predictive analytics, and crime, and addictive persuasive design influences thoughts and behavior.

Whereas, the content of corporate programs has often been found to reflect corporate interests, be generic, and lack currency or individualization, yet EdTech is outside teacher and local control.

Whereas, integrating software learning into every subject takes time away from other subjects – software requires far too much time and energy to evaluate, regulate, learn, fix and maintain.

Whereas, an hour of videoconferencing or streaming emits 150 – 1,000 grams of carbon dioxide (a gallon of gasoline car exhaust emits about 8,887 grams), requires 2 – 12 liters of water, and demands a land area about the size of an iPad Mini (Obringer et al, 2021).

Whereas, mandates for screen time prevent alternative learning models that may be locally preferred, such as Montessori, Waldorf, or outdoor learning models.

Whereas, extended screen time is widely acknowledged as harmful to health due to time sitting, staring, blue light exposure, magnetic and electric fields, and lack of movement.

Reasons provided in section 1 of the bill:

H. 107 An Act regulating privacy and technology in education

Sponsor: Rep. Patricia Duffy and citizen Kirstin Beatty

Summary: This bill focuses on privacy protections in PreK-12 and higher education. Institutions are take steps to protect privacy, such as by setting data processing agreements with providers and, a key difference with other bills, using less tech when not necessary.
History: Many legislators have put forward various bills to protect privacy. This particular bill is written by resident and co-chair Kirstin Beatty. There was no template for the bill, but suggestions were included from a report by the Dutch Data Protection Authority regarding online voice and video calls and proctoring. Lawsuits are not discussed in this bill, as legal action could be a dealbreaker for passage.

H. 127 An Act relative to student and educator data privacy

Sponsors: Representatives Kate Lipper-Garabedian & Jeffrey N. Roy

Summary: Requires that K-12 educational data processors do not use data for ads or sales, secure data, and allows suits for violations. Could accompany school privacy bill H. 107 as well. Lawsuits were not included in H.107, since that could be a deal breaker preventing passage of the bill and since last session a privacy bill including lawsuits failed. Both bills have different elements for privacy, and if both passed that would be terrific.

An Act relative to recess for elementary school children

Numerous Sponsors: Rep. Decker, etc. (H.566)Sen. Rush, etc. (S.383)

Summary: Provide at least 20 minutes of recess a day to grade 5, no reduction in recess time.





H.383 An Act relative to a 5G technology task force

Some advocates thought the bill, to streamline 5G, had hope. This allowed the bill to advance as some legislators said they were confused by the lobbying of anti-5G activists for the bill. Here is a short article critiquing the bill. This bill needed to be stopped despite advancing to House Ways and Means.

    • Summary: This is an industry-led commission to study and propose “fair” 5G laws for 5G development - in other words, to streamline 5G. See testimony: Critique of 5G Technology Task Force H 383.
    • Sponsors: Rep. Bradley Jones, B. Hill, E. Poirer, Rep. S. Gifford, etc.
    • Favorable Report by: Joint Committee on Economic Development and Emerging Technologies.


Summary: Because advocates mistakenly pushed H. 383 and other bills without caveat, action was taken to halt these bills. A">landing page petition was ready 26 May 2020 and an amendment ready in early 2020 around this time. Scroll down to the section on investigations to see one of the drafts developed.


S. 1988 An Act Relative to Utilities, Smart Meters, & Ratepayers Rights

All legislators need to be educated and persuaded to support this bill, which will be resubmitted! This bill was developed by and for Worcester residents with Senator Michael Moore's support. Here are recent, relevant docket submissions on smart meters from state Senator Moore, several organizations & professionals, Massachusetts Association for the Chemically Injured, and a very detailed account by advocate Patricia Burke. There is also a summary article here. An economic costs presentation was also prepared by Kirstin Beatty.

    • Summary: Allows opt out of wireless meters and does so without a fee.
    • Sponsors: Sen.s Michael Moore, D. DiZoglio, Rep. K. Hogan, Sen. D. Tran, Rep. C. Gonzalez, etc.
    • Favorable Report By: Favorable report given by the Joint Committee on Telecommunications, Utilities and Energy (Chairs Sen. Barrett, Rep. Golden, Vice-Chairs Sen. Pacheco, Rep. Dykema). See link (click bill no.) for progress and new committee).

S. 1982 An Act relative to wifi and cellular infrastructure along rail lines

    • Summary: Requires approval of locally elected bodies for railway antennas, but sadly only for Quincy, Braintree, Holbrook, Abington, & Rockland
    • Sponsor: Sen. JF Keenan

S. 207 An Act ensuring safer technology investment by the Massachusetts Broadband Institute

    • Summary: Adds accountability, safety & security to MBI mandate; requires use of funds for maintaining reliable, hard-wired grid & for hard-wiring public spaces including State House
    • Co-Sponsor Rep. Carlos Gonzalez
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

H. 587 An Act Reducing Public School Non-Ionizing Radiation and Wireless Exposures

    • Summary: For school policy to limit wireless exposures and hard-wire connections where possible – funding needed!
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 1271 An Act Educating Patients on Environmental Health Risks such as Wireless Exposures

    • Summary: Patient education and health care quality control measures
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S 1867 An Act Reducing Library Non-Ionizing Radiation Exposures from Wireless and Electricity

    • Allows state library grants to be given to hard-wire libraries
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

Bill S. 155 (2009), etc., S. 125 (2019) An Act to regulate the sale and use of microwave ovens

    • Summary: To prevent leakage, sale of dysfunctional ovens, ovens sized to allow pets inside, and ownership of more than one. This is bill designed by constituent Donald Kusser.
    • Sponsor Constituent Donald Kusser via Sen. John Keenan and Rep. Michael Morrissey

S 1273 An Act banning especially dangerous wireless facilities, emissions, and products

    • Summary: To stop 5G and ban small cell towers in front of homes and allow banning other items deemed dangerous – note the state has this right based on Constitutional and federal law.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S 1272 An Act registering wireless facilities to allow for monitoring and to ease access to contact information

    • Registers wireless facilities with state radiation department, which is to work with MA Broadband Institute to create a map. Registration is crucial for towns & citizen knowledge.
    • Co-sponsor: Rep. Carlos Gonzalez
    • Sponsor: Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 1271 An Act Educating patients on environmental risks such as wireless exposures

    • Summary: Encourages doctors to educate patients on wireless, mold, digital addiction, and other pollutants as relevant.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

H. 2011 An Act Providing for environmental risk fact sheets from the Department of Public Health

    • Dept. of Public Health will prepare & publish fact sheets on environmental health risks (incl. wireless)and respond to citizen concerns—accountability measures to DPH
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S. 130">30 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications – NOT ACTIVE

    • Warns to read product manual and keep appropriate distance from cell phone
    • Editing: Best to remove suggestion that recommended distance equals safety.
    • Sponsor: Rep. J. Cyr

BILLS TO REDUCE SCREEN TIME EXPOSURES (Blue light, wireless risks, etc.)

S 294 An Act Limiting school screen time – NOT ACTIVE

    • Removes state mandate requiring students to use technology (this begins in Pre-K) and allows schools to set school screen time limits. See screentimetestimony2020
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

H 588 An Act Requiring privacy protections and supporting safer technology in schools – NOT ACTIVE

    • Allows opt outs of technology by students/parents for privacy/safety/clout; recommends hard-wiring; makes school data use for political ID, marketing, & abuse unlawful; restricts data retention to that necessary for education
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

S 295 An Act Accounting for technological privacy and safety in schools with local and state committees – NOT ACTIVE

    • Local council monitors school privacy and safety policies & creates curriculum on safer technology use. State committee provides helpful template.
    • Sponsor K. Beatty


H 2888 National Grid Worcester smart meter pilot program – NOT ACTIVE

    • Seeks to correct false financial reporting being misused to assert cost-savings of wireless utility infrastructure.
    • H. 2888 Pamela Steinberg via Rep. Mahoney

H 2840 An Emergency Act to Investigate the Results Reporting of the National Grid Worcester smart meter pilot program . . .

    • Same as H. 2888 above.
    • Patricia Burke via Rep. S. Dooley

H 2885 An Act establishing a commission to study the environmental and health effects of evolving 5G technology

    • A study of health risks—however, initial sentence ought to include all wireless, not just 5G; representation of others like parents, sensitives, etc., and the latter may need to be financially supported—see critique of 5G Task Force for more ideas.
    • Sponsor Rep. J. Lewis

The amendment below is to insure independence and a wide range of stakeholders in an investigation of wireless and other electromagnetic radiation -- this was later worked on and revised such as seen in this draft. Excepting the American Environmental Academy of Medicine and the American Academy of Pediatrics, none of the organizations has made a public statement on this issue. Notes:

    • This bill provides greater independence from politics than the New Hampshire bill would be a poor choice and S. 129 and is better than H. 383 which promotes 5G.

An Amendment of H. 383 or S. 129 - initial drafts in early 2020

  • Summary: Because of concerns that S. 129 would be a political football and H. 383 streamline 5G, the following amendment was developed. Attached is one of the drafts, designed to bring in big stakeholders and provide a appointees originated from a diversity of stakeholders to support independence. Initially, when asked, Cece Doucette was not interested, hoping both bills would just move forward in committees. A draft was sent to Helen Walker who suggested reaching out to different groups for feedback. Kirstin joined one strategy session with Ruth Rin, Cece, and God knows who else, for positive feedback and ideas from strangers but Cece was proposing that the bills be replaced with language from the New Hampshire state commission. Kirstin felt that commission also lacked controls to prevent the bill from being a political football in Massachusetts, where the administration and legislature and heavily lobbied by the technology industry. Kirstin has continued to work on revising the bill, getting feedback, and reaching out to stakeholders without much luck making contact.
  • Author: Kirstin Beatty, co-chair of ballot committee, director of Last Tree Laws
    • A Wireless or Electromagnetic Investigation
    • Resolved, Notwithstanding any general or special law to the contrary, there shall be a special commission to research the impact of electromagnetic (EMR) and radiofrequency (RFR) radiation on consumer protection, public health, and and the environment, and determine, if detrimental, how to allay health and financial repercussions, the former having primacy.
    • The commission shall be composed of the following 21 members, as follows:
    • (a) The Attorney General or designee;
    • (b) A nominee of the Massachusetts Teachers Association;
    • (c) One union member nominated by the Massachusetts AFL-CIO;
    • (d) One telecommunications worker representative nominated by the Communications Workers of America;
    • (e) One doctor nominated by the American Environmental Academy of Medicine;
    • (f) One scientist nominated by the Silent Spring Institute;
    • (g) One doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Medical Society, ideally with expertise in either cancer, neuroscience, or infertility;
    • (h) One scientist nominated by Community Action Works;
    • (i) One pediatric doctor nominated by the Massachusetts Chapter of the American Academy of Pediatrics;
    • (j) One representative or lawyer nominated by the Massachusetts Jewish Alliance for Law and Social Action;
    • (k) 2 representatives nominated by the Massachusetts American Civil Liberties Union;
    • (l) A representative of the State House selected by the Speaker of the House;
    • (m) A senator of the State Senate selected by the President of the Senate;
    • (n) A representative of small business appointed by the governor;
    • (o) 3 non-voting members appointed by governor:
    • -Telecommunications representative;
    • -Medical system representative;
    • -Engineer in wireless networks;
    • (p) 4 non-voting commissioners, directors, or their designees for the following departments:
    • Public Health;
    • -Telecommunications and Cable;
    • -Technical Assistance and Technology Office;
    • -Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation.
    • Chairmanship, legislative and policy decisions for reports to the Commonwealth shall be decided by vote of all members with voting status. Commission members shall elect a chair by majority vote, who may be replaced at any time upon majority vote.
    • No voting member or spouse of voting member of the commission shall have a history of or current telecommunication, energy, IT, or utility industry clients or job dependency; nor shall any voting member have current telecommunications, energy, IT, or utility direct financial investments exceeding the sum of $5,000. No voting member or spouse of a voting member of the commission shall receive funding or a job from telecommunication, energy, IT, or utilities in the two years following the commission’s final report. All commission members must file a statement of any relevant conflicts of interest as specified above, including in relation to immediate family members, i.e. parents, children, siblings, uncles, aunts, with the Secretary of State during the commission period and continuing through each year until two years after the commission ends. These statements must be made public by the Secretary of State.
    • The meetings and communications shall be subject to the Massachusetts open meeting laws so as to be transparent. The commission shall be assisted by and have access to the resources available to the legislature and the executive branch in its investigations. The commission shall file a report of its recommendations and proposed legislation or regulatory changes, if any, with the clerks of the House and Senate and with the chairs of the Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure not later than December 31st 2022, and may file a series of reports.


S. 129 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications

Please see criticism and appointee problems below. Here is a short article critiquing the bill.

      • Summary: Establishes a commission to investigate wireless but as written has significant risks of politicization.
      • Status: Click bill no. above and scroll down – presently in Senate Ways and Means
      • Favorable report by Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure [Members: Paul Feeney, Bill Welch, Tackey Chan, Jay Livingstone, Diana DiZiglio, Joseph O. Boncore, Ryan Fattman, Jonathan D. Zlotnick, Adrian C. Madaro, William J. Driscoll, Jr., Mindy Domb, Tami Goveia, David H.A. Lebouef, Jack Patrick Lewis, Steven S. Howitt, Joseph D. McKenna]
      • Criticism:
        • Most appointment descriptions are ideal for filling with industry representatives or dependents;
        • Lacks specificlanguage to prevent appointment of compromised individuals – no limit on industry clients, no limits on voting by industry reps or dependents, no limits on financial interests, no limits on career dependence – nothing;
        • Industry has influence not just from the vote of an industry rep, but from people whose jobs depend on industry;
        • Why give industry, a non-person, a vote? Industry, a non-person, has a seat but the people who have been harmed lack a seat. The point is protect the people and even the economy for the people, not industry;
        • Lacks full breadth of representation. Here is a relevant copy of a May 2, 2020, request for a changes by Kirstin Beatty naming some groups that could be included – but these would still be too few to be a counterweight.
      • More Appointee Problems: The governor has in the past appointed industry insiders and lobbyists to fill his cabinet and commissions. Highlighted in red below are individuals who could easily favor or be chosen to represent industry rather than the people:
      • Dept. Commissioners, Director, or designees:
        1. Public Health
        2. Telecommunications and Cable
        3. Technical Assistance and Technology Office (Dir.)
        4. Consumer Affairs & Business Regulation (Dir.)
      • Other appointees:
        1. Telecommunications Representative – beholden to industry
        2. Engineer in wireless networks – career dependent upon industry
        3. Attorney in environmental law – easily filled by MA-based industry lawyer in environmental law who represents the industry and is involved in “environmental” nonprofit focused on corporations
        4. Scientist in environmental medicine knowledgeable of electromagnetic and radiofrequency radiation and research methodseasily filled by industry “scientist” such as Peter Valberg
        5. Massachusetts Medical Society member with background in environmental medicine
        6. Pediatrician knowledgeable of electromagnetic radiation in children – May be a token member, easily overruled


H 1874 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education – NOT ACTIVE

    • Important Edit: Replace “purchase and installation of wireless internet services” with “reducing wireless and electromagnetic exposures.”
    • Improvements:
      • Something concrete, such as requiring removal of wireless from schools, would be better for quick results.
      • Building Biologists and electrical engineers could be brought in for an independent report of how best to cut electromagnetic exposures.
    • Sponsor Rep. C. C. Dykema


H. 2901 (2011) H. 2032 (2013) H. 2007 (2015) H. 1192 (2017) H. 1956 An Act relative to a special commission to study electric and magnetic fields

    • Help Request: Critique was sent to Linsky’s office and the committee by constituent Kirstin Beatty prior to 2019 – 2020, but his resubmission in 2019 was the same. Perhaps the written submission was not reviewed – if someone could pass on the information to him personally that would be helpful.
    • Issue 1: Appointees Environmental League of Massachusetts and American Cancer Society are connected to the utility and/or telecommunications industry.
    • Issue 2: Given that the science is fairly solid that electric and magnetic fields can cause ill health, why not immediately adopt the ALARA principle, “As Low As Reasonably Allowable,” as other states and countries already have in place?
    • Sponsor Rep. D.P. Linsky

This Last Tree Laws ballot measure proposed a committee of environmental advocacy groups to write and propose legislation to the state legislature for vote. Not enough signatures were gathered, however, and the vote requirement disallowed.

Lessons learned from this ballot measure are many, but essentially it is best to simple propose the environmental legislation directly.

Previous Wireless Legislation 2017 – 2018

S.2080 An Act increasing medical awareness and insurance coverage of non-ionizing radiation injury and reliance upon credible independent medical research (Constituent Kirstin Beatty) ~ Detailed bill for quality control for electromagnetic exposures in hospitals; that credible research be defined; and medical insurance coverage be included for electromagnetic harm.

S.2079An Act reducing non-ionizing radiation exposure in schools (Constituent Kirstin Beatty) ~ Idealistic bill demanded removal of school wireless and addition of criminal penalties, yet was passed forward from Education committee.

H. 2030 An Act relative to best management practices for wireless in schools and public institutions of higher education (Rep. Carolyn Dykema)~ Similar to 2019-2020 bill of same name and to a Maryland bill, decent in concept except for an important error - allowed continued wireless installation - and as the Massachusetts education board was not then particularly free of industry influence.

Resolve S.2431 Resolve relative to disclosure of radio frequency notifications (Sponsor Joint Committee on Consumer Protection and Professional Licensure) This bill resembles a bill of the same name submitted in 2019 – 2020.

S.107 An Act relative to disclosure of radiofrequency notifications (Sen. Julian Cyr) ~ A labeling bill.

S.108 An Act relative to the safe use of handheld devices by children (Sen. Julian Cyr) ~ Labeling bill modeled on Berkeley ordinance.

In 2015, a ballot question committee, Citizens for Safer Radiation Technology, was organized for an investigation of wireless together with resident Patricia Burke. The proposal was the first commission proposed to study wireless. The legislative proposal, written by Kirstin Beatty, was quite hopeful or idealistic, as can be seen in the summary below. Time was necessary to realize that such a proposal could not easily go forward without significant public understanding and support.

This proposed law would create a commission to study and address risks posed by electromagnetic radiation. The proposed law would require the commission to complete 16 tasks, including (1) conducting risk analysis and clarification; (2) creating standards; (3) generating guidelines; (4) enacting partial or full bans in emergencies; (5) determining whether to mandate decommissioning or cleaning of nuclear power plants in Massachusetts; (6) ensuring that existing regulations align with the commission’s standards; (7) choosing to require relevant testing and monitoring to ensure compliance; (8) updating medical definitions and requiring that certain illnesses are covered by insurance; (9) updating guidelines for when electromagnetic devices must be covered by insurance; (10) updating guidelines for use of electromagnetic technology in educational and child care settings; (11) creating warning labels and signs; (12) designating areas that are protected or restricted from items of concern; (13) creating recommendations to improve education, workplace, utilities, radiation, emergency management, and building regulations; (14) preparing reports and informational media; (15) generating proposed legislation; (16) accessing the emergency broadcast system to prevent emergencies.
In addition, whenever a commission publication identifies a state agency as requiring revisions in its regulations bearing on public health, the proposed law would give that agency up to six months to revise its regulations in accordance with the commission’s recommendations.
The proposed law would create an eight-member board to nominate and review commission members. Board members would be selected by Kirstin Beatty, the organizer of Healing Earth Refuge, a citizen environmental and public health grassroots advocacy group. The eight board members would be charged with determining the organization of the commission, appointing one or more chairs, and appointing twelve full-time members and one lawyer to the commission. The board members would also have authority to appoint six more temporary commission members.
The proposed law would require that commission members have relevant education and experience across a range of disciplines. Under the proposed law, any person considered for appointment to the commission would be required to disclose financial and personal information and, when necessary, make disclosures about potential conflicts of interest to the Ethics Commission. Under the proposed law, the commission chairs would be responsible for assigning tasks to commission members.
The proposed law would prohibit commission members from taking jobs in industries subject to their investigation for two years following completion of their commission service. It would also authorize commission members to appoint substitutes for themselves, subject to board approval, in the event of continuing absence, illness, or significant responsibilities barring attendance.
The proposed law would provide funding to the commission to complete its tasks, subject to appropriation. In particular, the proposed law would give board members a $600 honorarium and funds for accounting services. It would provide commission members compensation for time and travel expenses. The proposed law would allow for the hiring of administrative, scientific, and secretarial assistants and a media and communications writer. It would give the commission access to medical and scientific journals, office supplies and office space, and a page on the Massachusetts government website.


Bill SD. 2212An Act relative to studying radiation health and safety risks for protective measures

    • This investigative commission was empowered to enact bans, etc.
    • This was not resubmitted.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)

Bill SD.2256<An Act requiring physician training on non-ionizing radiation and electrohypersensitivity

    • Short bill requiring physician training in electromagnetic sensitivity and other harms of electromagnetic radiation.
    • Sponsor Constituent K. Beatty (LTL Director)


H. 2868(2015)S.1864 (2017) An Act relative to utilities, smart meters, and ratepayers’ rights (Sen. Michael Moore) – Similar to 2019 -2020 bill of same name. Critique was made by Director Kirstin Beatty that bill did not apply to town-owned utilities, and changes appear to have been made. This bill was originally submitted on behalf of concerned Worcester residents and Halt Smart Meters Massachusetts, which no longer has a website.

S. 1222(2015) S.1268 (2017) Resolve creating a special commission to examine the health impacts of electromagnetic field (Recommended by constituent Cece Doucette 2015, prepared by Sponsor Sen. Karen Spilka 2017) Initially this bill did not prevent industry influence, and some changes were made in following sessions. Kirstin spoke with Cece about the issue of industry influence needing to be curtailed.