BOSTON, Mass. (SHNS)--As the opioid crisis continues to claim lives across Massachusetts, lawmakers tasked with coming up with the next step in the state's solution to the epidemic are only now settling down to negotiate after weeks of no action. The House and Senate this year each passed opioid crisis response bills meant to boost access to overdose reversal drugs and potentially life-saving equipment to test the potency of drugs, create a new licensure and oversight structure for recovery coaches, and overhaul the state's child welfare laws to no longer require providers to report parents on medications that treat opioid use disorder. InFocus: September is National Recovery Month Massachusetts logged 2,125 confirmed and estimated opioid-related overdoses last year, marking a 10 percent decline compared to 2022. DPH Commissioner Robbie Goldstein previously attributed the decline to the state's distribution of naloxone, syringe service programs, an overdose prevention hotline and a drug checking program that allows officials to monitor the lethality of the drug supply in Massachusetts. The bills were sent to conference on the last day of formal sessions on July 31, where they have sat for six weeks. The conferees gathered for the first time Tuesday to kick off negotiations. This doesn't mean the chairs of the negotiating committee -- Rep. Adrian Madaro of East Boston and Sen. Brendan Crighton of Lynn -- haven't been in communication, but for over a month a bill on one of the topics lawmakers say is most pressing has sat untouched in Beacon Hill's formal process. The two chambers' versions of the bill have several differences, and key among them is a Senate plan to authorize overdose prevention centers, also known as safe injection sites. The Department of Public Health came out in support of the facilities last year. House Speaker Ron Mariano has shown no interest in the idea, which was not debated when the House passed its bill. Madaro, Crighton, Reps. Alice Peisch and Michael Soter and Sens. John Velis and Ryan Fattman sat down Tuesday for the first meeting of the conference committee (with Velis and Fattman streaming in virtually.) Conference committees do not always meet with all six members sitting down in a room together. Instead, negotiations often happen just between the House and Senate chairs and their staff, although the details are hard to know because lawmakers make their talks private. The conference committee met for a total of 1 minute and 54 seconds in the eyes of the public before moving into executive session for private negotiating. They are likely to continue all future negotiations in private. A reporter who joined the meeting virtually on Microsoft Teams asked the lawmakers, as they moved quickly into executive session without any opening remarks about the conference committee, why the public couldn't hear the debate. "I would just say it's certainly standard procedure for a conference committee to go into executive session to discuss the differences between the bills, so this is not anything unusual, but we appreciate the question," Crighton said. The reporter followed up, asking whether the lawmakers thought it was appropriate for the discussion to be had behind closed doors. No one responded to the question. Madaro said, "So I believe we have the majority to move into executive session. So with that, we move into executive session. Thank you." The House approved its bill unanimously and the Senate bill was approved on a rare standing vote (12-3). Passing a consensus bill during informal sessions would require the consent of all legislators present at sessions, although both branches often meet without a quorum.