An Act relative to fire safety of state-owned buildings, structures and property
Take action
Take a stance or write a position on this measure.
Create an account to take a stance, submit a written position, or contact your legislator.
Progress
Where this bill stands in the legislative process.
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Overview
This bill aims to improve fire safety standards for buildings, structures, and property owned or operated by the state of Massachusetts. It seeks to ensure that these facilities have adequate fire prevention and protection measures in place. The bill mandates a review of current fire safety protocols and may lead to updates or new requirements for state-owned properties. This legislation prioritizes the safety of occupants and the public.
Key provisions
- Requires a review of fire safety protocols for state-owned buildings.
- May lead to updates or new requirements for fire protection systems.
- Focuses on the safety of occupants and the public within state-owned properties.
- Addresses fire safety of structures and property owned by the state.
- Includes a scheduled hearing to discuss the bill’s potential impact.
Who is affected
- State of Massachusetts government agencies
- Employees of state-owned buildings
- Occupants of state-owned buildings
- Massachusetts Department of Fire Safety
- State property managers
Notable changes
- Likely to result in revisions to existing fire safety regulations for state facilities.
- May necessitate upgrades to fire protection systems in state-owned buildings.
- The bill is part of a series of similar legislative efforts concerning fire safety.
Bill text
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.
Text extraction is in progress. View the official source.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
2 on record
Primary sponsor
Cosponsor
Arguments
Reasons offered for and against this legislation.
Arguments in favor
No arguments in favor have been submitted.
Submit yoursArguments opposed
No arguments opposed have been submitted.
Submit yours