logo
Despite ahead-of-schedule closing of hotel shelters, Healey admin still says emergency shelter system can't meet demand

Despite ahead-of-schedule closing of hotel shelters, Healey admin still says emergency shelter system can't meet demand

Boston Globe4 days ago
Healey's housing secretary, Ed Augustus, wrote in
The extended declaration lasts until Nov. 9, and proclaims that because of the strain on the program, the shelter system must keep operating under a number of restrictions the administration began to put in place in the deepest throes of the emergency. The declaration, which is required under rules set out by the Legislature in a 2023 spending bill, can be extended again if Augustus determines it necessary.
Amid that bureaucratic change, Healey's office said her emergency declaration from August 2023 still stands.
The number of families in emergency shelter has fallen to
Advertisement
Meanwhile, the ongoing state of emergency means the administration, which has issued at least four contracts
In a statement, a spokesperson for Healey said the governor imposed reforms that 'successfully reduced caseloads and costs,' and that 'it is essential that we continue these reforms so that the system does not experience another unsustainable surge and to protect taxpayer dollars.'
'Governor Healey inherited a shelter system that was not equipped to handle the surge in demand Massachusetts experienced these past few years,' the spokesperson, Karissa Hand, said.
She said Healey's administration is actively evaluating 'whether the Governor's emergency declaration should remain in place.'
Massachusetts experienced a rush of immigrants into the state beginning in the
Since Healey took office in January 2023, officials drastically expanded the state's emergency shelter system to house thousands of homeless and migrant families
For decades, homeless families have been guaranteed a roof over their heads under
Advertisement
As costs mounted over the last
two years, Healey and legislators repeatedly added new requirements to dial back eligibility, including requiring homeless families to prove lawful immigration status, show they have lived in Massachusetts for at least six months, and undergo
In 2023 Augustus, the housing secretary,
The state's most recent data show fewer than 3,500 families in the system currently — half of the number there were at the emergency's peak.
Mary Connaughton, chief operating officer for the Boston-based think tank Pioneer Institute, said 'calling this ongoing crisis an emergency is not only puzzling, it's costly.'
Connaughton said the emergency declaration remaining in place has given cover for the administration to abide by 'weak internal rules,' and pointed out, as an example, a
Healey officials and shelter operators rejected conclusions that her office broke the law in using no-bid contracts, and criticized the audit.
Advertisement
'As we have seen, the emergency label has become license for weak internal procedures and faulty procurements,' she said.
Healey, who is running for re-election in 2026, has drawn criticism of her handling of the shelter system by her GOP opponents.
Mike Kennealy, a housing and economic development secretary under Baker, said the crisis 'has become a never-ending emergency' and that the latest extension 'only proves it's not going away.'
He said as governor, he would create a 'loophole-free' residency requirement for the emergency shelter system.
'More than two years in, we're still in this situation because the state government lacked either the will or the ability to address the root cause from the start,' Kennealy said. 'Now, it's spiraled out of control.'
Former MBTA executive Brian Shortsleeve, who is also running in the GOP primary, said Healey 'wants to use the crisis she created to continue to exercise extraordinary power with little transparency or oversight.'
'The real state of emergency is Maura Healey's out of control spending that is breaking the backs of taxpayers who are fed up with paying for billions in migrant benefits with no accountability,' he said. 'Beacon Hill needs a total overhaul, and that starts with firing the Housing Secretary followed by firing Maura Healey.'
Some advocates say the current state of emergency and the related cap at 4,000 families also puts undue pressure on homeless families. Kelly Turley, associate director of the Massachusetts Coalition for the Homeless, said the current limits on the shelter system have created a cycle where people are leaving and re-entering the system instead of finding permanent housing they can afford.
'When the state of emergency was first declared, we weren't sure what powers it would give the state,' Turley said. 'Families are being timed out of shelter before they are able to secure long-term housing. The landscape has changed since August 2023 since the state of emergency was first declared.'
Advertisement
Matt Stout of the Globe staff contributed to this report.
Samantha J. Gross can be reached at
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

AOC's Bronx HQ vandalized with red paint after Israel vote: ‘F-CK AOC!'
AOC's Bronx HQ vandalized with red paint after Israel vote: ‘F-CK AOC!'

New York Post

time14 minutes ago

  • New York Post

AOC's Bronx HQ vandalized with red paint after Israel vote: ‘F-CK AOC!'

Progressive New York Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez's Bronx headquarters was vandalized by anti-Israeli activists after she voted against cutting US funding for Israel. The office in Westchester Square in the East Bronx was splattered in red paint on Sunday, and adorned with a sign reading 'AOC funds genocide in Gaza' days after congresswoman ditched her fellow 'Squad' colleagues and voted against a proposed amendment to slash millions in aid for Israel's missile defense. A photograph of Ocasio-Cortez's face in the window was completely covered by the paint, photos show. Advertisement 'F–K AOC,' a group known as the Boogie Down Liberation Front told reporter Ashoka Jegroo while taking responsibility for the vandalism. AOC's Bronx office was defaced with red paint. James Keivom 'The Bronx is sick and tired of people like AOC and Ritchie Torres using us as a stepping stone for their own political careers,' the group said in a statement. Advertisement 'The Bronx stands with the people of Palestine and we denounce the hypocrisy of AOC who voted to fund Israel's ongoing genocide and starvation campaign in Gaza. F–K AOC!' The lefty congresswoman has been taking heat from her progressive supporters after she voted against an amendment for the Department of Defense Appropriations Act proposed by Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene on Friday that sought to cut $500 million from Israel's air defense systems. The amendment, which was emphatically spiked 6 to 422, was supported by GOP Rep. Thomas Massie (Ky.) and Ocasio-Cortez's progressive 'Squad' pals, including Reps. Ilhan Omar (Minn.) and Rashida Tlaib (Mich.). AOC voted against an amendment to a defense bill that would have cut funding for Israel. James Keivom Advertisement The House of Representatives ultimately passed the bill early Friday 221 to 209, allocating some $832 billion in defense funding for fiscal year 2026, including a boost in pay for troops as well as increased research and development spending. 'Marjorie Taylor Greene's amendment does nothing to cut off offensive aid to Israel nor end the flow of US munitions being used in Gaza. Of course I voted against it,' the congresswoman posted on X amid the backlash. 'What it does do is cut off defensive Iron Dome capacities while allowing the actual bombs killing Palestinians to continue,' she continued. 'I remain focused on cutting the flow of US munitions that are being used to perpetuate the genocide in Gaza.'

Over half of Americans say ‘big, beautiful bill' going to raise health care costs: Poll
Over half of Americans say ‘big, beautiful bill' going to raise health care costs: Poll

The Hill

time14 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Over half of Americans say ‘big, beautiful bill' going to raise health care costs: Poll

More than half of Americans — 57 percent — said in a new survey that they think the GOP's sweeping package extending tax cuts and slashing welfare services will increase their health-care costs. Thirteen percent in the CBS/YouGov poll released Sunday said that the 'big, beautiful bill' will lower their health-care costs and 33 percent said there will be no impact. While the Congressional Budget Office has not yet released a final estimate for the measure as enacted, it projected that 16 million people would lose their health insurance by 2034 under an earlier House-passed version of the bill. This analysis has been the basis for many Democrats' messaging around health care, and health-care advocates have still warned that the final version could be devastating to communities relying on Medicaid. The sprawling package permanently extends many of the temporary tax cuts passed by Republicans during President Trump's first term, alongside making deep spending reductions to Medicaid, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and other welfare programs. The measure would primarily benefit wealthy Americans, an analysis by the Yale Budget Lab found last month. Democrats have assailed the legislation as a historic transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich and are looking to message around its cuts to health care for the 2026 midterms — even if some of the package's most significant changes don't kick in until 2028. Overall, six in 10 questioned in the CBS/YouGov survey disapprove of the GOP megabill. A similar percentage said that it will help wealthy people and hurt poor people. A separate AP-NORC poll released Saturday found that nearly two-thirds of Americans think the legislation will do more to help wealthy people. In the CBS/YouGov poll, 40 percent of respondents said they thought the measure will increase their taxes. Another 32 percent said they thought their taxes will not be impacted either way. A majority — 56 percent — said that they tied issues regarding the megabill significantly to how they evaluate President Trump's second term. A plurality of Americans, 44 percent, said they had a 'general sense' of the content of the legislation alongside some specifics. Meanwhile, roughly two in 10 — 22 percent — said they had a general idea of it but lacked specifics. The CBS/YouGov poll was conducted between July 16 and July 18, with a sample of 2,343 and a margin of error of 2.5 percentage points.

New Hampshire's new law protecting gunmakers faces first test in court over Sig Sauer lawsuit
New Hampshire's new law protecting gunmakers faces first test in court over Sig Sauer lawsuit

San Francisco Chronicle​

time14 minutes ago

  • San Francisco Chronicle​

New Hampshire's new law protecting gunmakers faces first test in court over Sig Sauer lawsuit

CONCORD, N.H. (AP) — A new state law in New Hampshire that makes it harder to take gunmaker Sig Sauer to court is getting its first test before a judge on Monday. The 2-month-old law was created by the Republican-led Legislature in response to mounting lawsuits faced by the Newington-based manufacturer over its popular P320 pistol. The lawsuits say that the gun can go off without the trigger being pulled, an allegation Sig Sauer denies. Sig Sauer, which employs over 2,000 people in New Hampshire, said the gun is safe and the problem is user error. Several large, multi-plaintiff cases filed since 2022 in New Hampshire's federal court representing nearly 80 people accuse Sig Sauer of defective product design, marketing, and negligence, in addition to lawsuits filed in other states. Many of the plaintiffs are current and former law enforcement officers who say they were wounded by the gun. They say the P320 design requires an external mechanical safety, a feature that is optional. The most recent New Hampshire case, representing 22 plaintiffs in 16 states, was filed in March. It's the focus of Monday's hearing. The new law on product liability claims against Sig Sauer and other gun manufacturers covers the 'absence or presence' of the external safety and several other optional features. Claims can still be filed over manufacturing defects. Attorneys for Sig Sauer argue it should apply to the March case, even though the law didn't exist at the time. 'New Hampshire has a clearly articulated position against such claims being cognizable in this state,' they argue in court documents for breaking up the cases and transferring them to court districts where the plaintiffs live. Lawyers from a Philadelphia-based firm representing the plaintiffs, disagree, saying the law 'has zero implication' on the case and only applies to future lawsuits. New Hampshire was the chosen location because federal rules allow lawsuits against a company in its home state, the plaintiff's attorneys say. Those lawsuits have been assigned to one federal judge in Concord. Sig Sauer is trying to decentralize the case, they say. Sig Sauer has prevailed in some cases. It has appealed two recent multimillion-dollar verdicts against it, in Pennsylvania and Georgia. A judge recently allowed the Pennsylvania verdict to stand, but vacated $10 million in punitive damages awarded to the plaintiff.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store