Advocates press committee to restore presumptive placement and longer shelter limits for families

Lawmakers heard detailed testimony urging restoration of protections for families seeking Emergency Assistance (EA) shelter and related rehousing benefits.

Adam Houle, lead paralegal at Greater Boston Legal Services, told the Joint Committee that a recent change in the supplemental budget removed "presumptive placement" — the right for eligible families to be placed in shelter the same day they apply — and described a family that slept in their car for three weeks while attempting seven times to get shelter assistance. Houle said the family had 20 of 21 requested documents available but could not be placed quickly because of the tightened rules and the absence of presumptive placement.

Witnesses urged restoring a 9‑month limit on shelter for families (recent budget language shortened maximum stays and created tracks as short as 30 business days). Testifying for the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, Kelly Turley said six months is "not enough time for shelter families to find housing in Massachusetts" and pointed to structural barriers including low wages, eviction history and housing discrimination.

Other provisions in Senate Bill 136, witnesses said, would (1) require the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC) to accept evidence from state databases where possible rather than delay placement for missing documents, (2) establish an independent ombudsperson unit to help families navigate application disputes, and (3) require 90 days notice before changes that reduce benefits or eligibility.

Front-line providers and volunteers described the human effects. Tali Smokler, representing volunteer networks, read clergy and volunteer reports of families sleeping at train stations and volunteers hosting families for months while they awaited formal placement. Dr. Juliana Morris, a primary care physician who visits shelters, said shelter limits and delays worsen trauma and interrupt care for patients who are survivors of intimate partner violence.

Public health advocates emphasized downstream costs: Omi Amarasingham of the Massachusetts Public Health Association warned that limiting shelter shifts costs to emergency departments and worsens population health outcomes for children.

Sponsors and advocates asked the committee to report SB136 and the companion House bill favorably so the EA program restores access and administrative clarity; no vote occurred in the hearing.

Ending: Witnesses urged the committee to treat the EA program as an essential public-health and housing safety net and to restore statutory presumptive placement, longer durational limits and an ombudsman to resolve disputes.