MA Senate Votes to Restrict Access to Emergency Shelter…Again

While Republicans in DC are creating havoc and letting white supremacist Big Tech billionaires like Elon Musk dismantle the federal government, what are Democrats in Massachusetts doing? Are they taking steps to protect MA from the barrage of cruelty coming from DC? Are they charting a vision for what progressive governance looks like?

No, the first bill passed by the MA Senate this new session was to kick unhoused families out on the streets. 

As explained by the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, for over 40 years, the Emergency Assistance (EA) shelter program has provided shelter and services to eligible Massachusetts children and families experiencing homelessness. This program represents a commitment to protect children and families in the greatest need.

However, for over a year, Governor Healey and the MA Legislature have been chipping away at the right to shelter in our Commonwealth. The shameful restrictions passed yesterday chip away even more by reducing the length of stay even further, excluding many immigrant families, and increasing the administrative burden to gain access to emergency shelter.

The Legislature could have listened to experts and providers about how to meet needs while addressing the growing costs of the shelter system. Instead, they chose to restrict access, a strategy that will displace costs rather than reduce them. Shelter restrictions are both harmful and ineffective. It is also clear that the system has a management problem, and that solving that is the only way to responsibly and humanely control costs. Remember: no one wants to end up in emergency shelter, contrary to what some right-wingers say; you only end up in emergency shelter when you have nowhere else.

Following the House’s vote last week, the Senate voted 33 to 6 to pass the bill. As in the House, the only Democrat to vote NO was a conservative Democrat (here, John Velis of Westfield) joining Republicans in opposition to spending, no in opposition to access.

68 amendments were filed:

  • 1 was laid aside
  • 7 received recorded votes (2 adopted, 5 rejected)
  • 11 were withdrawn without vote or debate
  • 11 were adopted without a vote (mostly on data collection and reporting)
  • 38 were rejected without a vote or debate (including numerous amendments to restore access)

The two adopted with recorded votes, both by Sen. Michael Moore (D-Auburn), were both unanimously approved:

  • 38 to 0 to require the Executive Office of Housing and Livable Communities (EOHLC) to study the feasibility of conducting a National Crime Information Center background check for each adult applicant or beneficiary placed in the emergency housing assistance program, including logistics and cost.
  • 38 to 0 to require EOHLC to develop a statewide safety plan for the emergency shelter system

Four out of the five rejected amendments were from Republicans:

  • 8 to 30 to limit emergency shelter access to individuals whose cause of homelessness occurred in Massachusetts, thereby excluding new arrivals and creating additional administrative burden for residents. Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Dylan Fernandes (D-Falmouth), and Michael Moore (D-Auburn) joined the 5 Republicans.

  • 12 to 26 to increase the cost of the system and administrative burden for those seeking emergency shelter, further restricting access, through requiring universal background checks when the bill already contains language to look into what that would entail. The purpose of the amendment was not safety, but demonizing immigrants and the unhoused to advance a right-wing agenda. 7 Democrats joined the 5 Republicans: Mike Brady (D-Brockton), Nick Collins (D-South Boston), Paul Feeney (D-Foxborough), Barry Finegold (D-Andover), Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford), Michael Moore (D-Auburn), and John Velis (D-Westfield).

  • 6 to 32 to limit emergency shelter access to individuals who have lived in Massachusetts for at least a year, excluding new arrivals and creating additional administrative burden for residents. Nick Collins (D-South Boston) joined the 5 Republicans.

  • 6 to 32 to require an investigation into security lapses in the emergency shelter system, something that would just become an opportunity for fear-mongering and not actual solutions. Michael Moore (D-Auburn) joined the 5 Republicans.

The Senate also voted down (10 to 28) an amendment from Sen. Becca Rausch (D-Needham) to require the inspector to conduct a review and analysis of all contracts, expenditures, and other materials or accountings pertaining to goods or services that have been or should have been provided pursuant to or in connection with the emergency.

The vote was a cross-partisan coalition of the five Republicans, 2 progressive Democrats–Rausch as well as Jamie Eldridge (D-Marlborough), and 3 moderate Democrats–John Keenan (D-Quincy), Edward Kennedy (D-Lowell), and Mark Montigny (D-New Bedford).

MA House Votes Overwhelmingly to Restrict Access to Emergency Shelter…Again

While Republicans in DC are creating havoc and letting white supremacist Big Tech billionaires like Elon Musk dismantle the federal government, what are Democrats in Massachusetts doing? Are they taking steps to protect MA from the barrage of cruelty coming from DC? Are they charting a vision for what progressive governance looks like?

No, the first bill passed by the MA House this new session was to kick unhoused families out on the streets. 

As explained by the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, for over 40 years, the Emergency Assistance (EA) shelter program has provided shelter and services to eligible Massachusetts children and families experiencing homelessness. This program represents a commitment to protect children and families in the greatest need.

However, for over a year, Governor Healey and the MA Legislature have been chipping away at the right to shelter in our Commonwealth. The shameful restrictions passed yesterday chip away even more by reducing the length of stay even further, excluding many immigrant families, and increasing the administrative burden to gain access to emergency shelter.

The Legislature could have listened to experts and providers about how to meet needs while addressing the growing costs of the shelter system. Instead, they chose to restrict access, a strategy that will displace costs rather than reduce them. Shelter restrictions are both harmful and ineffective. It is also clear that the system has a management problem, and that solving that is the only way to responsibly and humanely control costs. Remember: no one wants to end up in emergency shelter, contrary to what some right-wingers say; you only end up in emergency shelter when you have nowhere else.

The budget supplemental — which contained a $425 million increase in funding to the system combined with cruel restrictions to access — passed 126 to 26, with all but one Democrat voting yes. All of the chamber’s Republicans and Rep. Colleen Garry (D-Dracut), the most conservative Democrat, voted no — in opposition to the added funds (not in opposition to the restrictions). It’s a sad statement on the values of the Massachusetts Democratic Party.

38 amendments were filed. 20 of them were withdrawn without discussion or debate. 9 of the remaining 18 were rejected or laid aside without recorded votes, and another 9 received recorded votes.

The House adopted four amendments:

  • A unanimous vote for an amendment to require a competitive bidding process (Amendment #9, 152 to 0)
  • A unanimous vote for an amendment to improve data collection (Amendment #15, 152 to 0)
  • A unanimous vote to extend hardship waivers to families where a family member has a documented disability (#24, 152 to 0)
  • A mostly party-line vote to extend hardship waivers to families with children under age six (#27, 127 to 25, Garry voting with Rs)

The House rejected several Republican amendments to make the bill even more cruel:

  • Requiring expensive criminal background checks for any applicant, a way of further taxing the shelter system and demonizing the unhoused (Amendment #6, 26 to 126, Rep. Garry and Rep. Robertson with Rs)
  • Reducing the funding to $200 million (Amendment #8, 26 to 126, Rep. Garry and Rep. Robertson with Rs)
  • Requiring a 12-month residency requirement (and thereby excluding new arrivals), 26 to 126, Rep. Garry and Rep. Robertson with Rs)
  • Limiting shelter access to families who became homeless because of an event in MA (again, excluding new arrivals or even people who have moved around between MA and neighboring states like RI and NH with high degrees of regional integration) (#18, 25 to 127, Rep. Garry with Rs)

The House also laid aside two Republican amendments to require ICE to be allowed in state shelters, a decision that was upheld by a party line vote to sustain the ruling of the chair each time.

PM in the News: “Spill of the Hill: Healey hears it from both sides”

Mike Deehan, “Spill of the Hill: Healey hears it from both sides,” Axios Boston, January 22, 2025.

What they’re saying: “Governor Maura Healey is using this moment to sound Trumpian in her approach to emergency shelter,” Progressive Massachusetts policy director Jonathan Cohn wrote in response to Healey’s proposed shelter changes.

He called Healey’s move “straight out of the playbook of the soon-to-be-president and the right-wing Republicans in Congress.””

Maura Healey to Struggling Families: There’s No Room at the Inn

Forty-one years ago, Massachusetts enacted the first-in-the-nation “right-to-shelter” law, guaranteeing all homeless families with children and pregnant women access to temporary housing and other emergency services.

However, over the past year, Governor Maura Healey and our State Legislature have been chipping away at this critical guarantee. Just last month, the MA Governor’s Office announced policy changes that further dismantle the state’s emergency shelter system for all families by creating a two-track system, with some families being sent to barracks-style respite centers capped at 30 days and other families being capped at six months.

Let’s be clear: with our rapidly growing rents, weak tenant protections, and exclusionary zoning policies across the state, affordable housing opportunities do not magically appear after six monthsjust because the state wants to wash its hands of any responsibility to care for our residents. Kicking families out of shelter during the coldest months of the year is especially obscene.

Write to Governor Healey and your state legislators about why we need to end these cruel new shelter policies and uphold our status as a right to shelter state.

Recently, a group of local elected officials from across the Commonwealth sent a sign-on letter to Governor Healey urging her to end these harmful restrictions. Can you also ask any local elected officials you know (your City Councilor, your Select Board Member, your School Committee Members, etc.) to join them? In solidarity,

Solidarity Lowell Featured in Boston Globe, Lowell Sun

Sean Cotter, “In Lowell, debate over homeless encampment behind park,” Boston Globe, June 25, 2023.

“The protesters, waving signs with messages including “Lowellians Over Luxury” and “Stop The Sweeps,” said they didn’t like how City Hall was handling issues of homelessness. In January, according to the Lowell Sun, the city began an effort to get rid of homeless camps….“They need to treat them like human beings,” Joseph Boyle of Solidarity Lowell said at the encampment Sunday.” (Photo also includes Marissa Dupont and Amy Baranoski!)

Melanie Gilbert, “City plans sweep of homeless camp; unhoused, advocates cry foul,” Lowell Sun, June 25, 2023.

“But Marissa Dupont, of Lowell, and a member of the coordinating committee of Solidarity Lowell, said that although notice was given, the city doesn’t have sufficient beds to rehouse the Dog Park residents.

Solidarity Lowell is a volunteer group of community members of Greater Lowell working toward social justice by defending the human rights, dignity and equality of all persons against all forms of hate and discrimination. They joined members of the group LLAMA, which stands for Lifting Lowellians: Assistance and Mutual Aid, who gathered Sunday morning in nonviolent opposition to the anticipated sweep.

“We want these people to have homes,” Dupont said. “(The city) says, ‘We have four beds’ (in Lowell) but that’s not 23, and there’s no mention of getting them into hotels or anything. They say they are going to get vouchers.””