Latest news with #Brownsberger
Yahoo
02-06-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘Takes away rights': Mass. realtors upset with new law meant to help first-time homebuyers
Buying a home is a challenging and sometimes risky endeavor. Every buyer is worried about finding expensive problems after all the paperwork has been signed. A new state law goes into effect regarding the use of home inspectors on Friday. Supporters of the measure believe it will help home buyers, particularly those in the market for the first time. Some real estate professionals feel it will put unworkable limits on both buyers and sellers. The new law comes at a time when it has never been more challenging for first-time homebuyers in eastern Massachusetts. The Greater Boston Association of Realtors says the median price for a single-family home in the region is now $988,000. It's a frustrating situation for people like Tina Shukar. She has unsuccessfully been trying to buy her first house for several years now. She has a good career in sales. 'The problem is that I am competing against companies that do home flips, and they use cash to buy properties, and skip inspections and all that.' The new law will make it against the law to condition the sale of property on a waiver of an inspection, said State Senator Will Brownsberger (D-Suffolk/Middlesex). This law is part of the Affordable Homes Act, which was signed by Governor Maura Healey last August. It's one of about 50 housing initiatives in the $5 billion dollar plus law. Brownsberger was part of the Senate conference as the bill went through the legislature. 'The first-time homebuyers, the people we are trying to help in the housing market, are especially disadvantaged by that market dynamic of private equity... Coming into the local real estate market and snapping up properties.' Brownsberger says those types of buyers are better suited to handle the risks of foregoing an inspection. One reason the senate got involved was because of a wide scale problem with concrete in central Massachusetts. 25 Investigates first reported on how concrete was compromised with pyrrhotite and was susceptible to crumbling. 'We recognize that rules can have unintended consequences, so we left the details of this bill to the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities to put out some regulations.' 'What happened here isn't right,' said Anthony Lamacchia, the CEO and also a broker, at The Lamacchia Companies. 'It takes away rights from buyers and sellers and it's a real problem.' Lamacchia isn't opposed to home inspections. In fact, he often thinks they're a good idea. But it's the part of the new law that really bothers him. It would prohibit the sale of a property, or 'accepting an offer if the seller has been informed in advance that the prospective buyer intends to waive their right to an inspection.' Lamacchia added, 'It is literally going to prohibit realtors from doing things that they are supposed to do. You are supposed to convey what a buyer is trying to achieve. You are supposed to advocate for the advantages of the seller taking your buyer's offer. Now if a seller hears that or a listing agent hears that, they're not supposed to accept that offer. It doesn't make sense.' Brownsberger believes it will help 'remove some of the advantages that those cash buyers have.' Lamacchia said, 'Listen, this is capitalism, and in capitalism, there are highs and lows in all kinds of ways.' The Housing Office will report out their final regulations, and they will become law, on June 6th. Senator Brownsberger said it's common for the legislature to approve of an outline of their intentions and then have the appropriate agency fill in the specifics. This is a developing story. Check back for updates as more information becomes available. Download the FREE Boston 25 News app for breaking news alerts. Follow Boston 25 News on Facebook and Twitter. | Watch Boston 25 News NOW
Boston Globe
16-02-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Should juvenile courts be open to the public?
It's an idea worth examining, potentially through a pilot program, and Brownsberger's bill should be a starting point for the discussion. While protecting the privacy of young people is vital, bringing sunlight into a system can help identify and address problems. Advertisement As Blitzman told the editorial board, 'It's not an either/or proposition. Some people who are invested in the status quo, while they have understandable concerns about stigmatization and embarrassment of youth and parties, they don't realize that states that have presumptively open juvenile court systems do it in a considered fashion, which adequately balances private and public interests.' Get The Gavel A weekly SCOTUS explainer newsletter by columnist Kimberly Atkins Stohr. Enter Email Sign Up Massachusetts' juvenile courts handle delinquency and youthful offender cases, where a young person is accused of criminal behavior. They also hear care and protection cases (when a child is removed from a parent because of abuse or neglect) and cases terminating parental rights. The issue of whether to open these courts to public scrutiny was raised in But Advertisement He notes that the Massachusetts Probate and Family Court is open, and its judges also hear sensitive cases related to minors, like divorce, child custody, and paternity. If Massachusetts opened juvenile court, it wouldn't be an outlier. In 2005, the National Council of Juvenile and Family Court Judges As of 2019, 24 states had opened juvenile delinquency proceedings to the public, according to Ely said states with open hearings usually have guardrails allowing judges to close hearings or limit attendance. Judges may ask attendees to identify themselves so, for example, an abuser cannot attend their victim's hearing. Advertisement At the same time, however, opening juvenile court does raise concerns about private information leaking out — about children's actions or their family or personal circumstances, which can include abuse, domestic violence, or substance use. Chantel Johnson, a former foster youth and consultant to the California-based Youth Law Center, led efforts years ago opposing opening California's dependency courts. Johnson said she worries about bullying if private information about a child's health or family leaks on social media, and about increasing a child's trauma if journalists report on their case. When California was considering the bill, which did not pass, Johnson advocated for an amendment allowing youth to request a closed courtroom. Brownsberger's bill would let a judge close a hearing entirely, exclude a particular person, or restrict document access for a 'compelling reason,' like protecting privacy, a participant's opposition, a disturbance, or protecting someone from harm. The problem is there haven't been many comprehensive studies about whether opening courts improves the juvenile justice and child welfare systems or individual case outcomes. Establishing a pilot program to open some juvenile courts — with protections in place to ensure children's privacy on sensitive topics — could let Massachusetts policy makers collect the data needed to determine if it's an idea worth further pursuing. Editorials represent the views of the Boston Globe Editorial Board. Follow us
