House Committee finalizes walkthrough of homelessness bill, affirms hotel-motel caps and reporting, and sets FY27 rate limits

The House Committee on Human Services completed a final walkthrough of draft bill DR 260766 on May 12, focusing on definitions, shelter standards, hotel and motel use, reporting requirements and fiscal guidance ahead of an expected vote.

The bill creates a new chapter with updated definitions and a new definition for “highly structured shelter,” which the presenter described as one that “provides programming that emphasizes case management, housing stability, employment, education or treatment services as well as other services as appropriate and a manner that accommodates an eligible household’s disability if any.” The committee also added an annotated HUD definition of domestic violence; the presenter said this language was “taken directly from HUD.”

Members spent considerable time on the hotels and motels section, which was consolidated into a single section that directs the department to enter agreements with community partners for supportive services, to propose hotel and motel rates as part of its budget presentation, and to ensure services are not provided on a strictly overnight basis. The draft sets seasonal room caps (contingent on appropriations): up to 700 rooms per night between April 1 and Nov. 30, and up to 1,000 rooms per night between Dec. 1 and March 31. Committee members asked for explicit wording to confirm that placements arranged by domestic-violence service networks are not intended to count against those caps; staff and the presenter agreed DV placements are handled separately.

The committee also reviewed household obligations and exemptions. The bill requires households placed under the hotels/motels section to participate in case management “unless explicitly exempt from case management requirements under this chapter or by federal law,” reflecting the committee’s intent to preserve existing federal-law exemptions for domestic-violence service providers.

On termination and due process, the draft retains a safety qualifier for immediate termination of services. Committee members clarified the drafters’ intent that immediate termination be limited to conduct that poses a safety risk to others; the language uses discretionary terms ("may" rather than "shall") for immediate termination decisions. Members asked for clearer lead-in language so the safety qualifier governs the immediate-termination list.

Fiscal and payment items featured prominently. The presenter said the act provides for FY27 expenditures totaling about $82.6 million for program services. For fiscal year 2027 the draft would limit DCF payments to hotels and motels to no more than the facility’s lowest advertised room rate and not more than $80 per day per room: as the presenter read, "DCF shall not pay a hotel or motel establishment providing emergency housing more than the hotel's lowest advertised room rate and not more than $80 per day per room to shelter a household participating in the program." Committee members discussed which portions of the $82.6 million are state versus federal funds and noted that a fiscal note and a funding breakdown accompany the bill; the presenter said detailed appropriation will occur in the budget rather than in the bill text and that JFO and departments will finalize line items via a committee amendment.

Reporting and oversight language was clarified. The bill requires an annual status report addressing each level of the continuum and a monthly report to be posted before the last day of each month that substantially matches reporting required under 2023 Acts and Resolves No. 81. The committee reworded a section so the Department for Children and Families (DCF) or the relevant department presents a progress report on implementation to policy committees, and the presenter said the progress report should include an initial draft of rules.

Committee members also removed statutory text that singled out a particular provider in the domestic-violence section, saying oversight for named providers is more appropriately handled through grant agreements rather than statute.

No formal committee vote was recorded during the walkthrough; the chair said members would have a short window for final comments on the revised draft that Katie will circulate and that a recorded vote would follow.

What happens next: the presenter will circulate draft 8.1 with the small changes discussed; the committee plans to consider a full committee amendment that lists expenditure line items (working with JFO and the department) before taking a vote.