Photo by John Gervasi Photography on Flickr.

Councilmember Tommy Wells introduced legislation Tuesday that would ensure only families with DC residency can receive Family Emergency Shelter in DC.

He also withdrew the emergency legislation that he had previously proposed, a change which will allow for public input and debate prior to a vote.

In a phone interview Tuesday morning, Wells’ Chief of Staff Charles Allen explained that DC General is already at or almost at capacity with 130-135 families receiving shelter, in comparison to 35 at this time last year. He wants to make sure that every room goes to a DC family, especially after the recent discovery that 10% of families in shelter are not DC residents.

“The priority here is that we’re able to provide housing for DC families who find themselves homeless,” Allen said.

Allen also explained that the vast majority of DC families seeking shelter have already been processed in the system through WIC, the schools, or other social programs. To avoid turning away someone in sudden need who is a genuine DC resident, Allen noted that the legislation applies to family shelter only and excludes “low-barrier shelters,” the ones that primarily serve people who suddenly become homeless due to misfortune.

The Washington Legal Clinic for the Homeless published an Action Alert yesterday about the emergency legislation, and Staff Attorney Andy Silver commented today that the Clinic’s main concerns about the proposed emergency legislation were: (1) The verification burdens would actually increase the cost of providing services, and (2) Many of the requirements would inadvertently deny shelter to DC residents.

Silver noted that among people fleeing domestic violence, living with mental illness, or experiencing life emergencies (such as a fire), demonstrating proof of residence can be difficult or impossible, and in the days or weeks required to gather documentation, people “could die of exposure.”

The new legislation highlights two larger questions.

1) How should we, as citizens, respond when there is a greater demand for shelter than is being provided?

2) How should DC deal with out-of-jurisdiction homeless families seeking shelter?

Question #1 has been debated elsewhere and is greater than the scope of this article. However, because of an increase in projected demand, the denial of the Spring Rd. shelter in Ward 4, and the fact that we are starting the “hypothermia season” with DC General at capacity, the question appears especially relevant this winter. I would argue that whatever the answer, we shouldn’t cause anyone to suffer the cold and danger of spending the night on the street.

For Question #2, is there a more creative solution to dealing with the jurisdictional hurdles that doesn’t place the burden on those who are most vulnerable? Clearly it is unfair for Maryland and Virginia to expect DC to house their residents. For instance, could a DC/MD/VA agreement be proposed between the states that would allow a state to bill another for emergency services rendered to residents? Or could families be temporarily housed and then transported the next day to an appropriate shelter in their home state? (Of course, often, none exists.)

Should DC residents bear the extra costs of housing out-of-jurisdiction families (currently there are approximately 13 families), even though it creates a moral hazard for MD and VA, simply to avoid having families suffer or perhaps die on our watch? Or are there other, better solutions?

For further resources, see the Washington Post article on the 2010 Winter Plan, Clarence Carter’s testimony on the winter plan, and the 2009 Shelter Capacity Letter to the Mayor signed by many nonprofits and individuals, which includes many statistics on shelter usage and denial.

Tim Hampton is an avid bicycle commuter, lives in DC, teaches digital arts and coaches a student graphic and web design team that performs work for local nonprofits and small businesses. He tries to do what bits he can to improve local education and to bring full DC Voting Rights a little closer.