A timeline of the Massachusetts shelter crisis — and Healey's changes to the system

Editor's Note: This is an excerpt from WBUR's politics newsletter, Mass. Politics. If you like what you read and want it in your inbox, sign up here. 

It’s been a whirlwind week for people working to house migrants in Massachusetts. On Friday, a new five-day limit took effect on stays in “temporary respite centers,” where some 270 families have been sheltering. The week was marked by protests and actions at the State House, letters from city councilors, and scrambling by activists to aid families unable to find shelter.

How did we get here?

Massachusetts has certainly seen waves of immigration before — that’s really what we’re made of. But with the boom of migrants from war-torn Haiti, and to a lesser extent Venezuela, the state’s shelter system is in uncharted territory.

The events have sparked big political changes in a state where immigration has rarely stirred much public attention. Gov. Maura Healey has instituted a series of restrictions – to cap the total number of people housed and how long they can stay. Let’s break down some of the changes in shelter policy over the last year and a half.

Former Gov. Charlie Baker administration rings the alarm about the state’s Emergency Assistance shelter system, which has traditionally guaranteed shelter to those who are pregnant and to families with children under 21. He sought “urgent federal government assistance” to resettle some 133 immigrant families. At the time, state data showed a total of 3,412 families in the system.

Healey declares a state of emergency around migrant arrivals. She says the number of families seeking shelter has risen from 68 per day in March to over 100 by that July. In a letter to the Department of Homeland Security, Healey blames  “a confusing tangle of immigration laws, an inability for migrants to obtain work authorization from the federal government, an increase in the number of people coming to Massachusetts, and the lack of an affordable housing supply in our state.”

Healey halts expansions of emergency family shelters, declaring the system has hit maximum capacity. She imposes a cap of 7,500 families, or approximately 24,000 individuals, that hits in early November. A waitlist and overflow shelters are later created to house new arrivals.

Healey announces a new 30-day limit on the length of time certain families can stay in overflow shelters while waiting to enter the larger Emergency Assistance shelter system.

Healey signs a law limiting most families’ stays in the Emergency Assistance shelters to a maximum of nine months. (The law also allocates an additional $426 million for the program.)

Healey dispatches officials to the U.S./Mexico border with a message that the state’s shelter system is full. “If families are traveling to Massachusetts, they need to be prepared with a plan for housing that does not include Logan Airport or our Emergency Assistance shelters,” Emergency Assistance Director Scott Rice says in a statement.

For months, families (sometimes up to 400 people) have been staying at Logan Airport’s E terminal. But as of July 8, Healey says the airport can no longer be used as a shelter of last resort and diverts migrants to a temporary shelter in Norfolk.

The state begins referring to its overflow shelter sites as “temporary respite centers” and reduces  the standard stay limit from 30 days to five. Providers still have the option to allow families to stay up to 30 days. As for the broader family shelter system, the state rolled out a new priority list, placing at the top veterans, people with specific medical needs, those at risk of domestic violence, and those homeless because of disasters or no-fault evictions.

Activists are scrambling to come up with alternatives, including tent encampments, to help migrant families with no options. Meanwhile, the state is willing to buy plane tickets to send people elsewhere for housing.  There’s also the HomeBase program, which offers rent subsidies. (You can read my full story about these small-scale efforts here.)

But it remains to be seen how a state that once codified in law the duty to house families will manage through this moment.