The civic record
Read. Follow. Verify.Petersham authorized to keep police officers Richard D. Cooley Jr. and David A. Shoemaker past maximum age
Last action · August 24, 2026: Referred to the committee on Bills in the Third ReadingSponsor: Aaron Saunders
Track this bill to get notified when it advances a stage. One tap to stop, anytime.
What This Bill Would Do
The town of Petersham is authorized to continue the employment of police department members Richard D. Cooley, Jr., and David A. Shoemaker, bypassing the standard for police officers.
Allows specific named municipal employees to maintain their current employment status despite age limits, following a local vote and .
Who It Would Affect
Groups the bill's text would affect if enacted, as described in the record. Being affected is not a position for or against it.
Richard D. Cooley, Jr.
Permitted to continue employment in the police department past the maximum age limit.
David A. Shoemaker
Permitted to continue employment in the police department past the maximum age limit.
town of Petersham
Authorized to retain specific police personnel despite standard age restrictions.
Key Facts
You don't have to trust us. Each fact below is taken straight from the official document - click any one to see the exact passage, highlighted in the original.
Frequently Asked Questions
Who does this bill apply to?
What restriction does this bill waive?
What else do you want to know?
News Coverage
Follow the record
Votes, people, money & the original sourceWhere This Stands
Currently passed both. The next step in the legislative lifecycle is Law.
Procedural history
16 actions- Aug 24, 2026HouseCommitteeReferred to the committee on Bills in the Third Reading
- Aug 20, 2026SenateFloorRead third, amended and passed to be engrossed
- Aug 20, 2026SenateTaken out of the Orders of the Day
- Aug 6, 2026SenateFloorRead second and ordered to a third reading
- Aug 6, 2026SenateTaken out of the Orders of the Day
- Jul 23, 2026SenateRead; and placed in the Orders of the Day for the next session
Show 10 earlier actions
- Jul 22, 2026HouseFloorRead third and passed to be engrossed
- Jul 22, 2026HouseRules suspended
- May 18, 2026HouseFloorRead second and ordered to a third reading
- May 18, 2026HouseRules suspended
- May 18, 2026HouseCommittee reported that the matter be placed in the Orders of the Day for the next sitting
- May 11, 2026HouseCommitteeBill reported favorably by committee and referred to the committee on House Steering, Policy and Scheduling
- Mar 11, 2026Massachusetts General CourtHearing rescheduled to 03/11/2026 from 01:00 PM-01:25 PM in A-1 and Virtual Hearing updated to New End Time
- Feb 27, 2026Massachusetts General CourtHearing scheduled for 03/11/2026 from 01:00 PM-05:00 PM in A-1
- Feb 17, 2026SenateSenate concurred
- Feb 12, 2026HouseCommitteeReferred to the committee on Public Service
Version history
Only one version on file - nothing to compare yet. As later stages (committee substitute, engrossed, enrolled) are captured, the redline appears here.
View official text →Lobbying Activity
No state lobbying filings in our records match this bill. Federal lobbying reports (LDA) cover Congress, so they are not listed on state bills.
Full breakdown
Who this bill affects and the strongest case for and against it, written only from the bill’s own text.
Sponsors
Connected Entities
Sources
malegislature.gov
Analysis Score
0–100- Significance25How much this matters to a regular citizen
- Controversy10Intensity of disagreement among stakeholders
- Entertainment5Compellingness for a non-policy-wonk reader
- Buzz15Current news / social attention level
Publisher tools