15:08:21 . With that being said, I will go ahead and begin recording 15:08:30 . 15:08:34 Thank you, Ryan. Also saying welcome, 15:08:37 everyone, to the August meeting of the fair housing 15:08:39 advocacy meeting. My name is in this casey 15:08:43 15:08:46 Nicky Gillespie. We will 15:08:49 begin by doing roll call. When your 15:08:52 name is called, unmute and indicate you are 15:08:55 present. We'll start with Ashley Miller. >> Present 15:08:59 . >> Rachel Nehse. >> 15:09:02 Present 15:09:05 . >> Lauren. 15:09:10 Taylor Smiley. >> Present 15:09:13 . >> Ada 15:09:20 . Allen Laz 15:09:23 o. >> Present. >> Barbara, if you can 15:09:26 indicate your presence again 15:09:29 . 15:09:39 I can't hear you, Barbara, but I heard you earlier. 15:09:41 I'll mark you as present. >> This is Barbara. 15:09:43 I'm here. Thank you. Sorry. 15:09:46 >> No worries. Becky Stra 15:09:50 us. >> Here 15:09:53 . >> [INDISCERNIBLE] >> Present. 15:09:56 >> Ellen 15:10:05 . Pauline Stevens 15:10:09 . Camilla 15:10:15 Tai. Maura Romero. 15:10:19 >> Here. 15:10:22 >> Marissa Espinoza. >> Present 15:10:26 . >> Maura Warren 15:10:31 . And lastly 15:10:34 , May Chop 15:10:38 . Thank you. We did have enough committee 15:10:42 members here to meet quorum, so the meeting is officially 15:10:45 called to order. Ryan 15:10:48 has our agenda up here on the screen. I should also have received 15:10:51 a copy of it yesterday via email. 15:10:54 I am just going to do a quick review of the agenda before we 15:10:57 get started. We do have a few updates and 15:11:00 housekeeping items that I will begin with followed by two 15:11:03 different presentations. And there should be time for any questions 15:11:07 and discussion 15:11:10 that is built into the time slot for each presentation. 15:11:13 For any members of the community that are in attendance, thank you for 15:11:16 joining us today. We do have a public comment period 15:11:19 that's scheduled at had 15:00 p.m. We look forward to hearing 15:11:23 from you at that time. After public comment 15:11:26 , Matthew Ts 15:11:29 chabold is going to give us a brief update 15:11:32 on fair housing planning before moving forward. 15:11:36 Before launching into the agenda items, Matthew and the bureau would like to do a quick 15:11:38 introduction of our newest manager to the committee 15:11:41 members. I will pass that off to Matthew 15:11:45 . >> Thank you, Niki. 15:11:48 Good afternoon, members 15:11:52 of FHAC. I am pleased to 15:11:55 introduce our new rental services manager PWRAOE on decker 15:11:59 Brionn 15:12:02 e Decker. She has been with us since 15:12:04 the spring but we haven't had a meeting. 15:12:07 She comes to us from Louisiana. She has experience in affordable housing 15:12:11 , landlord tenant and fair housing. And so I'm going to 15:12:14 pass it over to Br 15:12:17 eonne to introduce herself, but we're very 15:12:21 fortunate to have her and she is -- she's 15:12:24 taking on a lot in her first six months here on the job 15:12:27 and we appreciate that and you'll be engaging with her as well 15:12:30 as Niki as you move forward. With that, 15:12:33 Breonne. >> Hi, 15:12:37 folks, good afternoon. I'm really excited to be here. I 15:12:40 see a lot of familiar faces and names and some unfamiliar ones 15:12:43 . As Matt mentioned, I come to portland from 15:12:46 New Orleans, Louisiana, where I did work around 15:12:49 affordability, community land trust, disaster and resiliency 15:12:53 planning, and tenant rights. I'm very excited 15:12:56 to be in Portland. I 15:12:59 am looking forward to supporting the extremely important work of this 15:13:03 advisory committee. So thank you so much. 15:13:06 I am looking 15:13:09 forward to learning from all of you. >> Thank you. 15:13:12 And thank you, Matthew, for the introduction 15:13:16 . 15:13:22 Give me one moment to share my screen 15:13:26 . If I can get a few thumbs up to 15:13:28 make sure everybody can see that slide. 15:13:31 Great. 15:13:40 A few housekeeping items. Two of them revolve around 15:13:43 some updates from HU 15:13:46 D. The first I'm going to give just a real brief overview 15:13:49 of this and Matthew will come back in towards the end of our 15:13:52 meeting and provide more details. But we did get some updated 15:13:55 guidance from HUD regarding requirements 15:13:58 around affirmatively furthering fair housing. 15:14:01 So there is a new interim role in 15:14:05 the 2021 interim rule is entitled restoring affirmative 15:14:08 ly furthering fair housing definitions and certifications 15:14:12 . As anticipated, it is moving us back 15:14:15 to the standards around a more comprehensive fair housing 15:14:18 planning process. At this time the 15:14:21 fair housing planning process is voluntary, but it did 15:14:25 reinstate in technical assistance and 15:14:28 support for jurisdictions that we'd like to engage 15:14:31 in that work. Matt will come back and talk to us about the 15:14:34 impacts and implications, what that means for 15:14:37 us and what that means for this committee. The 15:14:41 second piece from HUD is regarding the disparate 15:14:44 a.m. account rule. The disparate 15:14:48 impact rule is also known as the discriminatory effects 15:14:51 rule and similar to the FFH housing 15:14:55 rule the ho administration made some 15:14:57 changes here. I know many of you are probably 15:15:01 familiar, but for the benefit of anyone who is not, I'm just 15:15:04 going to give some brief background. 15:15:06 So this rule is what allows cases of fair housing violations 15:15:10 to be brought forward if a policy has 15:15:14 discriminatory effects on a protected class. 15:15:17 And it doesn't serve any sort of substantial 15:15:21 or legitimate nondiscriminatory interest. Or if there 15:15:24 is some sort of other less discriminatory 15:15:27 alternative policy that could be put in place that hasn't been 15:15:30 enacted. So 2020 the changes from the 15:15:34 last administration made it harder to establish that the 15:15:37 policy had that discriminatory effect and it also created 15:15:40 multiple new defense 15:15:43 s that could be used 15:15:48 against a planning. HUD is proposing 15:15:51 a return on this front as well back to the 2013 standard 15:15:55 . Currently, it is at the end of a 15:15:58 60-day public comment period, 15:16:02 but the indication is that it will be restored back 15:16:05 to the Obama era administration policies 15:16:10 . Additionally we did 15:16:13 have one committee member resign since our last 15:16:17 April meeting, so I wanted to let you all know that we do have a 15:16:20 vacancy. I will be working on outreach and 15:16:24 recruitment for a new 15:16:26 committee member. We will be reaching out to a lot 15:16:30 of our community organizations, including a 15:16:34 large list of police specific organizations in order to recruit 15:16:37 for this committee member, but I want to offer you all 15:16:40 an opportunity to shoot me an 15:16:43 email if you feel like there is a specific organization you want to 15:16:46 make sure is included. Do send that to me and 15:16:49 I will make sure that they're on a list. 15:16:52 If you have a specific contact, all the better. 15:16:55 Once that outreach plan is 15:16:58 conceded and there is a posting, I will forward that to all the 15:17:00 committee members as well, so you'll have a second opportunity 15:17:04 to share that with your networks or ensure that you show it to 15:17:07 a colleague or someone that would 15:17:10 like to potentially put in an application. 15:17:13 I'll give you an up date on that as well at the next meeting 15:17:16 in terms of how that is going and where we're at with that 15:17:19 recruitment process, but it is one vacancy for the community at 15:17:23 large. And also it's 15:17:27 been just I feel like kind of a quick -- we're almost hitting 15:17:30 a year, but with 15:17:33 these quarterly meetings, they seem to be tipping right by 15:17:37 . After everybody got appointed, we had those first 15:17:39 initial few meetings. At this point we haven't 15:17:42 actually picked a committee chair or a vice chair. So 15:17:46 that is something that needs to be done. And so I would like 15:17:49 to ask all of you that may be interested in fill 15:17:52 ing one of those positions to shoot me an email and let me 15:17:56 know of your interest and I will compile a list of interested 15:17:59 committee members that will be available for 15:18:02 the director's review and final selection. 15:18:06 The committee chair and the vice chair will help assist bureau staff 15:18:09 in setting work plans and agendas as well as managing 15:18:12 and facilitating the meetings moving forward 15:18:16 . So please if you have any interest whatsoever, send 15:18:19 me an email and let me know. I don't want to volunteer anyone 15:18:23 on their behalf. So please let me 15:18:26 know. Finally, the next meeting that we 15:18:30 have scheduled is on Tuesday, October 12th 15:18:33 , 2021. Please keep an eye on your inbox and 15:18:36 Ryan will be sending that event invite as well as 15:18:40 the Zoom details and information 15:18:44 . Does 15:18:47 anybody have any questions on the update 15:18:51 ? Feel free to unmute 15:18:54 . 15:19:00 Okay. I will just move us on along 15:19:03 . The next item on our agenda is to 15:19:07 review the first section, subsection 15:19:10 A of the table of recommendations from that 15:19:14 2011 analysis of impediments. 15:19:17 Fair housing choice. So if we kind of reach back to 15:19:21 April at our last meeting, I had put together a table 15:19:24 for you guys that listed all of the recommendations 15:19:27 from the 15:19:30 2011 report analysis and I gave you a brief 15:19:33 overview of, you know, actions or programs or whatever 15:19:37 whether that recommendation had any movement on it over the last 15:19:40 decade. It was very high level and kind of just giving you a yes or 15:19:43 no. When we were discussing how we wanted 15:19:47 to move forward and what type of approach that you guys would 15:19:50 like to take in terms of getting more information, and 15:19:53 in terms of thinking about where these recommendations 15:19:57 were, I heard that we wanted to start back at the 15:20:00 top of that table and dig in a little bit deeper 15:20:03 and then potentially make comments, have questions 15:20:06 , or mark whether we thought recommendations were still 15:20:10 appropriate or needed verification 15:20:14 . I'm going to start with the first four items that 15:20:17 were in subsection A. The first 15:20:20 item was to commit funding and support to the education of 15:20:24 fair housing laws. The second is to commit funding 15:20:27 and support of enforcement of fair housing laws 15:20:31 . The third is to conduct audit testing 15:20:34 to document discrimination. And the fourth is 15:20:37 to partner with housing providers to modify screening and 15:20:41 credit criteria such as requiring a social security 15:20:45 number that have an inadvertent 15:20:49 impact on protected classes. For this presentation I'm 15:20:52 just going to give you a little bit more detail for items 15:20:56 one, two, and four. Item three regarding audit 15:21:00 testing we'll actually address at the next 15:21:03 meeting. The fair housing council of Oregon, the plan 15:21:06 is that we will be providing more information about what audit testing 15:21:09 looks like and their findings on their report from testing from this 15:21:13 last fiscal year. So rather than get into that today 15:21:16 , we already have that slated for our next meeting 15:21:20 . So let's start with just kind of education and 15:21:23 enforcement. Last time I told you yes, we have 15:21:26 contracts for that. 15:21:30 So what does that look like? What types of services are 15:21:33 available in the jurisdiction? Here is, again 15:21:37 , still pretty high level, but to give you more 15:21:39 understanding and context around what are those services, what 15:21:43 has been implemented, and what has continued to be supported since the 15:21:46 2011 recommendations. We have direct classes that 15:21:49 are available to tenants and landlords. 15:21:52 These are free of charge. They 15:21:55 are conducted by community partners and community-based 15:21:58 organizations. Some of these, 15:22:01 you know, are going to cover specific subjects within 15:22:05 landlord tenant law in a more 15:22:08 general sense, but all of them are going to have fair housing elements 15:22:11 and general fair housing education available in them as 15:22:15 well. We have 15:22:18 call in services. Some of these call lines 15:22:20 are just generally available for housing providers and for 15:22:24 tenants, but they can flag fair housing issues and make referral 15:22:28 referrals over to intake services that are fair housing 15:22:33 specific. There are trainings and educational questions provided 15:22:36 to other housing and social service organizations within the 15:22:40 jurisdiction to ensure that housing 15:22:43 counselors, housing providers and those working within the 15:22:46 housing community have information on fair housing law 15:22:50 . We have workshops, fairs and events, obviously 15:22:54 , that are being put on by different organization that focus 15:22:57 on elements of fair housing and have resources related 15:23:00 to fair housing as well. Culturally specific supports 15:23:03 and connections of fair housing enforcement 15:23:08 . We have services that are designed 15:23:11 to provide that additional layer to folks 15:23:14 that have a disconnect from dominant culture to 15:23:18 assist them through what can be a bit of a tedious process in a lot 15:23:22 of different administrative processes around various organizations. 15:23:25 So having a support person and culturally specific services 15:23:28 has been addressed in that narrow way 15:23:32 . Beyond 15:23:36 that, there is extended legal service for community members that are dealing with 15:23:39 fair housing. 15:23:43 In terms of modifying screening and credit criteria 15:23:47 , this has had quite a bit of movement since 15:23:51 2011 when these recommendations 15:23:56 . Committee members are familiar with what I'm about to talk 15:23:59 about, but again, giving high level overviews of what has 15:24:02 happened in terms of policy around screening, 15:24:06 credit criteria for renters. 15:24:09 The earliest change that we saw in this regard that was a 15:24:12 major overhaul is within Portland city code 15:24:16 and it was an ordinance that adjusted requirements 15:24:17 around application and screening criteria. 15:24:21 This was within the State of Portland, also KWOEPB 15:24:24 known as the fair ordinances. This was one piece 15:24:27 of that two-piece package of policy 15:24:31 . There's a lot of pieces and parts. 15:24:34 If you read this code. But I am just giving a few 15:24:37 of the points that address most directly the fair housing 15:24:41 concerns that I saw reflected within the analysis 15:24:45 . The first is that any post 15:24:48 ing of a unit available for rent that's made 15:24:51 to the public needs to indicate whether that unit is 15:24:54 type A accessible. And type A accessible means that 15:24:58 it's designed and accessible for 15:25:01 wheelchair users. It mandates a first come first 15:25:04 serve policy for most publicly advertised units 15:25:08 . But for everyone else, it's the first come first serve. 15:25:11 The caveat being that mobility disabled 15:25:14 community members are prioritized for 15:25:17 accessible units. A matching process 15:25:21 there. And again, it's indicated within the advertise 15:25:24 ment for any rental unit as well 15:25:27 . Multiple forms of ID or combination of ID has 15:25:30 to be accepted by housing providers in 15:25:33 order to establish identity. A landlord cannot 15:25:36 reject an application as incomplete due to the lack of 15:25:40 a social security number being provided by an applicant 15:25:44 . It created a tenant right to submit supplemental 15:25:47 evidence to mitigate negative screening results 15:25:50 . So what that means is that an KHRAPBLT can submit 15:25:54 applicant can submit a variety of 15:25:56 different types of recommendation that can provide 15:26:00 context or otherwise mitigate issues that a housing provider 15:26:02 may see while they're doing a screening. 15:26:05 That could be related to their credit history. It could be related to criminal 15:26:08 history. Or it could be related to the 15:26:11 rental history. It 15:26:14 also in terms of criminal history issues requires THRA 15:26:17 that a housing provider has 15:26:20 consideration of the supplemental evidence that's provided and an 15:26:23 individualized assessment before denial. All these elements are part 15:26:27 of Portland city code in application and screening 15:26:32 . On the state level, more recently, 15:26:35 some of that has actually been mirrored 15:26:39 within ORS 90. Senate Bill 15:26:43 291 and ORS 90 and these changes will go into effect 15:26:46 January 1st, 2022. It requires that a 15:26:49 statement of denial with reasons for denial are provided to 15:26:52 applicants within 14 days rather than being provided 15:26:55 upon request. Again, statewide. 15:26:58 It has limitations on considering previous arrests 15:27:03 . Whatever the conduct was that led to the arrest must present 15:27:06 ly be legal in Oregon. And the 15:27:09 housing provider cannot 15:27:13 consider any pending charges. If 15:27:16 that applicant is participating in something like a 15:27:19 diversion program, there is a conditional discharge or there is a deferral 15:27:22 program 15:27:25 that they're working from. Criminal history issues require 15:27:29 a landlord to consider supplemental evidence and conduct individualized 15:27:32 assessments. 15:27:35 All these pieces kind of going back and connecting to that 15:27:38 recommendation from 2011 movement in 15:27:42 the local jurisdiction as well as statewide 15:27:45 . Finally, there are some things that I felt 15:27:49 were relevant. Specifically to the credit criteria 15:27:52 and screening when it came to COVID. I expect a 15:27:55 lot of us also know this. These aren't 15:27:59 necessarily long-term system 15:28:02 ic changes that are happening, but things that do 15:28:06 mitigate COVID specific impact 15:28:09 s that tenants may have experienced. The 15:28:13 landlord cannot report a tenanty 15:28:16 not current rate, charges or fees that were accrued during 15:28:19 what's considered to be the emergency period of COVID-19 15:28:22 . Those dates are April 1st, 2020, and July 15:28:25 1st, 2021. None of 15:28:28 that can be reported to a credit reporting agency 15:28:32 . The landlord cannot 15:28:36 consider eviction plans that arose between April 1st 15:28:39 , 2020, and March 1st, 2022. That 15:28:43 will be after the period has finished. And the landlord cannot 15:28:46 consider an applicant's unpaid rent, including rent 15:28:49 reflecting judgments that accrued during this time as well 15:28:53 . Again, COVID specific, but touching 15:28:57 on that rental history and that credit history for applicant 15:29:01 s in regards to fair housing. With 15:29:04 that said, does anyone have any questions 15:29:08 ? about 15:29:11 those items presented? 15:29:16 Or comments or general discussion 15:29:19 ? >> I have a question 15:29:22 . I'm not sure if we're going to get into this right away, 15:29:26 but -- well, thank you, first of all, for the presentation 15:29:29 . I think what I am seeing as far as, 15:29:33 like, the slides that talk about modifying screening and credit 15:29:37 criteria, there's so much in there that's been really I think 15:29:41 helpful for tenants. It makes me 15:29:44 wonder about where our 15:29:49 current fair housing education and enforcement includes some of 15:29:52 those changes. Specifically around the fair ordinance 15:29:56 . I just feel like that's kind of been -- it's too 15:29:59 bad that it kind of went into effect right at the beginning of the 15:30:01 pandemic. Obviously, that's a problem PW-P 15:30:05 . But how do 15:30:08 we adjust that is what comes to mind for me. >> 15:30:11 That is part of the education. When I was kind of talking about 15:30:14 that more general landlord tenant, those subjects 15:30:17 are definitely included in the educational offerings 15:30:21 . Actually a large focus as well as more 15:30:24 jurisdictional policies and relocation assistance and the 15:30:27 security deposits. And that would be in 15:30:31 addition to general fair housing information about protected 15:30:34 classes, sorts of income, what to do if you 15:30:37 believe you experienced 15:30:40 discrimination. That general fair housing 15:30:44 information is incorporated in the classes 15:30:47 . In terms of looking at fair, it is often present 15:30:50 presented as subject specific. There's a lot of 15:30:54 information too. It's not even reflected on that 15:30:56 slide. It's quite a bit. 15:30:59 But those resources are available additional 15:31:03 ly for folks in terms of O 15:31:07 8 of, we have the services hotline for 15:31:10 landlords and tenants to contact. We have translated materials 15:31:14 available on our website and brochures on 15:31:17 application screening. I believe it's about a 20-page 15:31:20 booklet that covers everything and we have it translated into 15:31:24 nine other languages. 15:31:36 That said, it's interesting, I don't know of anything at this 15:31:39 point yet that covers those statewide changes 15:31:43 . It will be interesting to see what 15:31:48 is available for folks to build some awareness 15:31:51 around that, especially when that's the coverage that they're 15:31:54 getting in terms of supplemental evidence and 15:31:57 individual act assessments. 15:32:01 >> Niki and Marissa, thanks for that question 15:32:05 . One of the things I'd say, for us in the fair housing trainings 15:32:08 we do, much of what's reflected in the fair 15:32:11 ordinance and in SB 291, especially 15:32:14 around the use of criminal history and screening criteria, are elements 15:32:17 that are part of what we 15:32:20 think are the federal guidelines around 15:32:24 , for instance, use of criminal history, you know, 15:32:27 accepting alternative forms of ID other than social security 15:32:30 numbers, so they're not necessarily specific to those two ordinances. 15:32:33 We think they are both part of federal 15:32:37 fair housing law and best practices, so we tend to train on those 15:32:40 . We have trainings that we do specifically around use of 15:32:42 criminal history at that level also. 15:32:45 But we don't train specifically on the fair ordinance because there's 15:32:48 also a really high percentage of that that is related to 15:32:52 landlord tenant law. I know that there is a team of folks at 15:32:55 PHB that are doing fair ordinance 15:32:58 specific trainings in the community right now also 15:33:02 . >> If I can respond to that 15:33:06 , thank you Allan. I guess part of my question 15:33:09 , too, is about enforcement as well, because I know 15:33:12 that that's one of the hardest things to do, obviously 15:33:15 . Providing not even just actual legal 15:33:18 representation in court, but just legal advice can be so 15:33:21 difficult. I'm wondering how does 15:33:24 that figure into this picture as well? 15:33:27 So for example, I'll just give an 15:33:30 example, from where I'm at as a social service 15:33:34 provider that's connecting folks to existing housing resources, when 15:33:37 we see a housing provider that we believe is 15:33:41 not exempt from fair, obviously we do our due diligence 15:33:44 to try to educate them about that, but we 15:33:47 can't necessarily be the ones to tell them hey, you 15:33:50 need to be providing these materials in your 15:33:54 application. You cannot screen in this way, 15:33:56 et cetera. I'm just kind of wondering, 15:33:59 like, to what rate, you know, services, 15:34:03 rental services office are utilized in 15:34:06 that vein or could be expanded, you know 15:34:09 , just to ensure that, like, at the point of 15:34:12 contact we are seeing that enforcement 15:34:15 happen when not just 15:34:18 folks being aware of them but when we see potential back of compliance 15:34:22 with those rules. >> 15:34:25 Thank you, Marissa. I know that is a question 15:34:28 that comes up a lot 15:34:31 . I still make note of it and I think that question of 15:34:34 enforcement is a great one. I also want 15:34:38 to make sure, I know Mara, you had your hand 15:34:41 up for a while and after that if we could let Taylor have a 15:34:45 moment as well. 15:34:50 >> Thank you. I was actually just going to 15:34:53 touch a little bit on what we've been talking about 15:34:57 . I was just going to add that I 15:35:00 appreciate the 15:35:02 Portland Housing Bureau's training that they do offer around this. 15:35:05 I know there haven't been some since, like, May or so of this 15:35:07 year. One of the things I really like 15:35:10 about them is that they're geared towards different audiences which 15:35:13 I think is really important. 15:35:16 Geared towards a landlord, geared towards a case manager, 15:35:19 geared towards a tenant, and that way we all 15:35:22 kind of understand, because yeah, you know, as 15:35:25 a social worker, I walk a fine line every 15:35:29 day around legal advice and not giving that 15:35:32 that. So, you know, if you do fair 15:35:35 housing work and you work around the landlord tenant law, it's really 15:35:38 hard sometimes to feel like you can give people good information about how 15:35:41 to advocate for themselves without getting them in 15:35:44 danger, so again, having that perspective of 15:35:47 , like, what do you have the right to do, what can you do, what should 15:35:50 you say in the moment. You know, not just reporting, 15:35:54 but also how can we prevent folks from being denied housing in the 15:35:57 moment instead of just reporting on it. Thanks 15:36:00 for bringing that issue up 15:36:03 . >> Thank you, Mara. Taylor 15:36:08 ? 15:36:11 >> I was struggling to unmute there. 15:36:15 I just wanted to agree with 15:36:18 what Allan said around the sort of application 15:36:22 of the federal guidance around screening criteria 15:36:26 and criminal background in particular and just share that, you know, 15:36:30 when home was implementing the fair ordinance, we 15:36:33 used that as an opportunity to 15:36:37 reduce -- beyond the low screening criteria and move to universal 15:36:41 IAs individual assessments as well, so there's 15:36:44 outside of the two HUD sort 15:36:47 of permanent bans for folks, folks always 15:36:50 have an IA performed and we significantly reduce those 15:36:54 . I am sure that, because I know with the application bill 15:36:57 of Senate Bill 291 it's possible that landlords may no longer 15:37:00 do -- or may avoid the low barrier path. 15:37:03 Will I'm not sure. In terms of the lower look 15:37:06 back period since they have to do the IA anyway. 15:37:10 I was just curious if the city or leaders in the city 15:37:13 are considering revisiting 15:37:16 the fair ordinance and requiring both the 15:37:19 IA and the lower look back theory 15:37:23 . >> I don't have any comment on that right now 15:37:27 . But I'll ask, 15:37:30 Taylor, and bring it back. Becky 15:37:33 ? >> On that question, apologies 15:37:36 for kind of -- I'm on two different screens right now 15:37:40 . In two different places. So sorry about 15:37:43 that. On that topic, we've talked 15:37:47 about whether there's opportunity to really assess 15:37:51 what's going on with fair. Like, to kind of picking 15:37:54 up on Taylor's question, 15:37:57 and maybe I'm not seeing Molly in the room, I would love 15:38:01 some perspective and don't have any way of getting it on what's 15:38:04 happening with landlords in terms of whether they're implement 15:38:07 ing a low barrier option for people or whether they're 15:38:10 consistently sticking with their own criteria and 15:38:13 doing an individualized assessment. I think some of 15:38:18 that kind of context might help figure 15:38:21 out would we want to advocate that council 15:38:24 revisit the fair ordinance or how are we 15:38:27 integrating Senate Bill 291, kind of all those questions 15:38:31 . I feel like I'm lacking a lot of context that I don't 15:38:34 know where to get those, other than 15:38:37 anecdote from some of our partners 15:38:41 . >> Well, I don't know of anything 15:38:45 formal in regards to that, Becky, that's been put 15:38:48 out like any sort of data report around that. 15:38:51 I do know that it's a question that 15:38:54 has been asked in terms of looking at the 15:38:58 impact from fair and I'm noting it down and I will 15:39:02 see if I can have something that's within that realm to bring back to you 15:39:06 . The other part 15:39:09 in terms of integrating Senate Bill 15:39:12 291 couples with Taylor's question, too, and I'll see 15:39:15 what I can find out. >> Thanks 15:39:19 . 15:39:27 Any other questions or comments? 15:39:30 >> This is Mara. I was just going to respond to 15:39:34 that quickly and say I think fair has been pretty overshadowed 15:39:37 by COVID and it has been hard 15:39:40 to -- as just a housing advocate and a social worker 15:39:43 in the community, a lot of it has been helping landlords understand 15:39:46 this other piece that's been going on. When the fair stuff comes up 15:39:49 around the screening, it doesn't really sound like people have 15:39:52 really developed any systems or organization around it. But 15:39:56 definitely people have been receptive and open to changing policies 15:39:59 based on once they learn. 15:40:02 But yeah, it's mostly been very overshadowed by 15:40:05 COVID. >> I think 15:40:08 that's a great point. I think even with being at the 15:40:11 market, just speaking personally, everyone 15:40:15 -- it's very hard to ESZ what's going on at all 15:40:18 assess what's going on right now because of 15:40:21 all the impacts COVID has had and given that fair 15:40:24 and COVID were going -- PHREPT 15:40:28 implementing it at pretty much the 15:40:31 exact same time of March, 2020, that may be a barrier 15:40:34 to analysis. Let's flag that as well. 15:40:37 I think that's a great point 15:40:40 . 15:40:44 Okay. The next item on our 15:40:48 agenda is an enforcement overview 15:40:51 . So again, based on the meeting 15:40:55 in April 15:40:58 , the fact that I received is we would like more information and 15:41:01 grounding and what enforcement looks like, mechanism 15:41:04 s for enforcement, and from a community member's 15:41:07 perspective what that process may look like. 15:41:10 The fair housing consult of 15:41:13 Oregon has graciously volunteered to provide a 15:41:16 presentation for us and their expertise. We have 15:41:20 Kirsten Bloom available. I know you're a few minutes 15:41:24 early, Kirsten, if you don't mind me calling on 15:41:27 you. >> No. That's great. 15:41:30 I'm also joined by our executive director 15:41:34 Allan Lazo who 15:41:37 will be add something content here and our testing 15:41:40 accorder will be joining us too. Thanks for having us to 15:41:44 speak to enforcement activity in the 15:41:47 City of Portland and throughout the state. 15:41:50 We're happy to be able to provide this context to you all. Just to 15:41:53 give you some grounding, I'd love to start by just sharing a bit 15:41:57 more about the fair housing council of Oregon. So 15:42:00 our -- we're a statewide civil rights organization that works to 15:42:04 promote justice, equity and inclusion in housing in Oregon. 15:42:06 And our mission is to end housing discrimination 15:42:10 throughout the state. We do that through education and outreach 15:42:13 , enforcement and public policy. So also 15:42:16 to set some framework, really the laws 15:42:20 in the main legal scheme that we're working under 15:42:23 , we're not a law office, but we 15:42:27 are ensuring enforcement to the main federal, state, and 15:42:30 local fair housing. So the main is the fair housing 15:42:33 act that was passed in 1968 and currently in its current state 15:42:37 covers seven protected classes. So race, 15:42:40 color, national origin, sex, disability, religion 15:42:43 and TPAPLial 15:42:47 familial status. 15:42:50 We have marital status, sexual orientation 15:42:54 and domestic violence survivorship. Those are the main protected 15:42:57 classes we work within. Our three departments within 15:43:00 the fair housing council of Oregon, education and 15:43:03 outreach, provides trainings to housing providers and landlords 15:43:07 throughout the state. Our public 15:43:11 policy department monitors fair housing based issues and helps try 15:43:14 to shed light on the fair housing laws 15:43:18 and advocate on issues that have fair housing 15:43:21 implications, particularly around historical harm and protected 15:43:26 proof. Our enforcement group receives inquiries from 15:43:30 throughout the state and we respond to those inquiry 15:43:33 ies in quite a few different ways. I'll provide more 15:43:36 context about that. So just to give you a sense 15:43:39 , too, of how many inKWURy 15:43:42 inquiries we received statewide 15:43:46 in the 2020 to 2021 year, we received over 15:43:50 1,300 inquiries throughout the state. Of those, 15:43:53 174 were bona fide allegations. What I mean when I say 15:43:56 bona fide allegation is that they had fair housing implications 15:43:59 in that they had a protected class 15:44:03 at play as well as an allegation under the statutory 15:44:06 scheme of the fair housing laws. So those 15:44:09 can be things like misrepresentations of availability, 15:44:12 applying to an apartment based on protected 15:44:16 class, neighbor on neighbor harassment or 15:44:19 discrimination. So that's what I referred to when I mean a 15:44:23 bona fide allegation. In 15:44:26 the city of PORD 15:44:29 City of Portland we had 269 fair 15:44:32 housing 15:44:35 inquiries and 52 were bona fide 15:44:39 . 15:44:43 Some of that is attributed to the education efforts we've 15:44:46 had ongoing in relationship with entities like the 73 of 15:44:49 Portland to ensure that education piece and that 15:44:53 landlords know and tenants know their rights related to fair 15:44:56 housing laws. What we do when we 15:44:59 receive these in 15:45:03 inquery, we have an email hotline. Folks can 15:45:07 always email us. We also have a phone hotline. 15:45:10 That number is 1- 15:45:13 800-424-3247, extension 15:45:17 2. You can find all this on our website 15:45:21 FHCO.org. And we receive 15:45:24 referrals so partner agencies throughout the state and partner 15:45:27 jurisdictions from throughout the state who send us direct 15:45:30 inqueris to either my email or to 15:45:34 our information email. When we receive those, we 15:45:37 conduct intakes to determine whether or not there is a bona fide allegation at play 15:45:41 related to fair housing laws. And then we decide 15:45:44 as an enforcement team what the best path 15:45:47 forward is based on what the tenant 15:45:50 or person reaching out to us wants to have happen. 15:45:53 So our main routes of responding are both 15:45:57 informal and formal processes. Our informal 15:46:00 process includes writing 15:46:03 advocacy letters to housing providers and landlords to inform them of the 15:46:08 fair housing laws and to their obligation 15:46:11 s and expressing concerns of situations arising where fair 15:46:14 housing laws don't seem to be protected and making asks on 15:46:17 behalf of tenants for things like reasonable accommodations 15:46:21 or for intervention where there is neighbor on neighbor harass 15:46:24 ment based on 15:46:28 protected class. And then we have more formal processes too. 15:46:31 Our formal processes include drafting complaints on 15:46:34 tenants behalf and we submit those complaints both 15:46:37 through the department of housing and urban development at the federal 15:46:41 level and to the bureau of labor and industries of the 15:46:44 statewide level. And then at times we also 15:46:47 help represent folks in those administrative processes. 15:46:50 We also conduct further 15:46:53 investigations to support those complaints or 15:46:56 to support legal action that we sometimes partner with private 15:46:59 attorneys and we have an attorney pool made up of private 15:47:03 attorneys throughout the state that then we can partner with on cases 15:47:06 to provide and hand off the investigations that we've conducted 15:47:11 . Let's see. In that investigation realm 15:47:14 , one of the things that we do is we conduct testing 15:47:17 and Anirban will get into this in 15:47:21 further detail. In our testing, what we have the ability 15:47:24 to do is send in secret shoppers that then help to 15:47:29 identify if we get an inquiry in the 15:47:32 application phase of applying to an apartment think they were treated different 15:47:35 ly based on race, we can send in a white applicant and a black 15:47:38 applicant to see if they receive the same information and 15:47:41 the Supreme Court has held that that evidence can then be 15:47:45 used to show different 15:47:48 treatment in court cases. And 15:47:51 that organizations can have standing, too, to be able to 15:47:54 bring complaints alongside folks that have been harmed 15:47:58 or tenants that have gone through those experiences 15:48:01 . As I mentioned, we also private partnered with -- 15:48:05 we partnered with private attorneys and in that 15:48:09 context you know, in some of the more egregious cases, we will 15:48:12 reach out to our partnering attorneys and share 15:48:16 the case and then also kind of make a plan for moving the 15:48:19 case through potential litigation. I can give an 15:48:22 example of a case that we recently 15:48:25 had filed and you can find more information about that complaint online 15:48:29 , but in the City of Portland area related 15:48:32 to source of income 15:48:35 and tenants being refused housing because 15:48:38 they had a federal subsidy 15:48:42 for rent assistance coming through a nonprofit and a 15:48:45 nonprofit that predominantly serves folks with disabilities 15:48:48 related to HIV. And so 15:48:51 we found that that outright denial 15:48:55 of the two-year secured source of income rent 15:48:58 assistance was a pretty egregious example of source of 15:49:01 income discrimination as well as some dissipate rat 15:49:06 some 15:49:09 -- that's an 15:49:12 example of a case we had come through our office that seemed there was a 15:49:15 lot of evidence around pretty distinct different treatment 15:49:18 . We were able to then partner with private attorneys 15:49:22 . We also, in collaboration 15:49:25 with the City of Portland and multiple other group 15:49:30 s, through our testing reports that we 15:49:32 partnered with the City of Portland for, and we'll talk 15:49:36 more about and we'll also be joining you all in I believe 15:49:39 in October, November, to present on, the 15:49:42 City of Portland, we also identified 15:49:45 a couple of years ago that it seemed like there was 15:49:48 an underreporting of cases based on national origin 15:49:52 and race. 15:49:55 What we know is that likely those incidents are 15:49:58 underreported because of historical harm and mistrust of reporting those incidents 15:50:02 to government agencies or to, you 15:50:05 know, semi government funded agencies like ourselves 15:50:09 . So in partner with the urban league of Portland and having 15:50:12 conversations and identifying that it was likely 15:50:15 underreporting of these national origin and race claims, we came 15:50:18 to the City of Portland and we received fundings for the 15:50:21 collaborative effort led by the urban league and in 15:50:25 partnership with ourselves 15:50:28 fair housing council, legal aid 15:50:31 to help create an ability for direct referrals to come through 15:50:34 culturally specific trusted partnering agency 15:50:37 ies to our legal entities to be able to then work 15:50:42 together to create a legal plan and to respond to race 15:50:45 and national origin claims. 15:50:48 Along those lines we've been able to expand on this 15:50:51 collaborative approach where we meet as a 15:50:55 group every month and do case management together. And it's really an 15:51:00 incredible multi facetted approach to sharing a 15:51:03 trusted entity and advocate is with you from an cultural 15:51:07 ly specific agency while also partnering with the 15:51:10 legal entities and being able to address multiple housing 15:51:13 needs at once. So say, for instance, some of 15:51:16 the culturally specific agencies received funding as well for 15:51:19 various types of housing resources, then we can partner 15:51:23 as a group that our agency can represent the 15:51:26 legal part and the culturally specific agency can also 15:51:29 help kind of navigate housing needs like finding housing 15:51:33 or rent assistance. So that's 15:51:36 another piece of enforcement effort that's been really remarkable 15:51:41 . With that, I will hand it over to An 15:51:44 irban to speak a little bit further about our testing 15:51:48 program and the importance of testing. 15:51:53 >> Thanks, Kirsten. Hi, everyone. 15:51:56 I am Anirban Pal 15:51:59 . I am one of the testing and enforcement coordinator 15:52:04 s. So I was asked to 15:52:07 talk very briefly about our fair housing testing 15:52:11 program, what testing is, 15:52:14 why we do testing, how do we do 15:52:17 them, and different types of testing that we do. 15:52:21 So what is testing? It's a means 15:52:24 of -- means to uncover evidence of discrimination and 15:52:28 housing context. It happens 15:52:31 in other context as well and employment context 15:52:34 . Other agencies are doing it 15:52:36 . Academic researchers are doing it. 15:52:39 Now there is a longstanding 15:52:45 test -- testing has become a very standardized process 15:52:48 across the country. We are part of a network 15:52:51 of fair housing organizations throughout the 15:52:55 country that do these kinds of tests 15:52:58 . They're essentially 15:53:02 -- our test is essentially secret shoppers who 15:53:06 respond to advertisements for rental housing and 15:53:09 then they report back to 15:53:12 us the information that was provided to them by the housing provider and 15:53:15 we determine whether there was any 15:53:19 different treatment that was offered 15:53:23 to testers who are I dents cal 15:53:26 are identical 15:53:30 in most attributes except perhaps their member 15:53:33 ship to a particular protected class. Why do we do testing 15:53:36 ? Well, the nature of discrimination has changed, 15:53:40 so we see less of 15:53:43 overt slamming the door saying 15:53:46 that we don't rent 15:53:49 to blacks or to people with 15:53:52 disabilities. We now see more 15:53:56 covert discrimination. So it 15:53:59 sometimes becomes hard for even a person who has been a 15:54:02 victim of discrimination to know that they were treated different 15:54:06 differently based on a protected class. 15:54:10 So like Kirsten mentioned in 15:54:15 1982 in a landmark Supreme Court decision 15:54:19 that approved 15:54:23 fair housing testing as a legitimate way 15:54:26 to uncover evidence of discrimination. 15:54:29 So since then, this has become a 15:54:32 very standard practice that many organizations are doing around 15:54:36 the country. So how do we do them? We have a pool of trained 15:54:40 testers. 15:54:43 Both here in Portland and we try to recruit new 15:54:46 testers throughout 15:54:50 Oregon wherever we are doing testing. 15:54:53 They belong to different protected classes, so we have 15:54:56 testers from different race, national o 15:54:59 origin, 15:55:03 foreign accent, and people of different religions 15:55:06 . And we use these testers depending 15:55:09 on the kind of tests we are doing 15:55:13 . We identify properties to test, either based on 15:55:16 a complaint 15:55:20 that we have received against a particular housing provider, or 15:55:25 if it's a test which I will talk about soon. We 15:55:28 would go through 15:55:32 our apartment 15:55:35 .com ads and places where people generally post 15:55:38 for housing. We do a vacancy check by calling them 15:55:42 to see if there is a vacancy. We 15:55:45 identify testers and prepare a script to give to our test 15:55:48 ers which have a list of questions that 15:55:51 they need to ask the housing provider 15:55:54 . And then the tester contacts 15:55:58 the housing provider and reports back to 15:56:03 us and reports what they were told about the 15:56:06 availability or about attributes of the 15:56:09 housing. And then we as test coordinator 15:56:13 s then gather these reports, compare these 15:56:16 reports, and 15:56:19 determine if different treatment has happened and the nature of 15:56:22 different treatment and determine if there is any either enforce 15:56:25 ment action that needs to be taken, then 15:56:28 we follow-up with 15:56:32 those or in some cases we 15:56:35 write to the housing provider alerting that we tested them 15:56:38 and that the test came positive and 15:56:42 that we might take enforcement 15:56:46 action if they continue to discriminate people 15:56:49 on the basis of protected 15:56:52 class. 15:56:58 What are the different types of testing? 15:57:01 We do 95% of rental test but we also do a limited 15:57:04 number of tests 15:57:07 for -- in sales. So housing 15:57:11 sales. We test real estate agents, both seller 15:57:15 's agent and buyer's agent to see 15:57:18 whether they are discriminating on the basis of any of the 15:57:21 protected classes. We 15:57:24 test mortgage lenders, homeowners insurance, providers 15:57:28 , and we used to do design and construction 15:57:31 tests which are tests 15:57:34 that are a specialized kind of test 15:57:37 for disability as a protected class to go and 15:57:40 take measurements to see 15:57:45 if new reconstructed housing unit is 15:57:48 meeting all the standards of accessibility for a 15:57:53 person in a wheelchair, for instance. So those 15:57:56 -- so primarily mostly rental tests 15:57:59 , but some of those advanced tests 15:58:03 . We can also classify the kind 15:58:06 of tests we do whether they are complaint-based tests 15:58:10 or audit tests. A complaint-based test is 15:58:13 where we have a complainant who comes and 15:58:16 reports a case of housing discrimination and then in the 15:58:19 process of our investigation we use testing as 15:58:22 a means to gather more evidence in support 15:58:26 of either bringing a 15:58:29 case in partnership with 15:58:33 a private attorney or to file 15:58:36 an administrative complaint with either 15:58:39 the bureau of labor and industry 15:58:43 . So -- and the audit tests 15:58:47 are to generally see 15:58:50 if there are impediments 15:58:54 that people looking for housing in a particular jurisdiction are 15:58:57 facing because of a protected class 15:59:00 . So complaint-based test is more 15:59:03 for enforcement purposes whereas audit testing 15:59:08 is magnifying patterns of general impedimentses 15:59:11 iments 15:59:14 pediments, access to housing based on a protected 15:59:17 class from a jurisdiction. We just completed, as 15:59:20 Kirsten mentioned, we completed our 2020/ 15:59:24 2021 City of Portland product testing and we are in the process of finalizing 15:59:28 for that, so stay tuned and we'll be presenting 15:59:31 that -- the findings of that report sometime 15:59:35 in October or November 15:59:38 . The 15:59:41 way we can classify these tests is based on how we do 15:59:44 these tests. So we can either ask 15:59:47 our testers to make phone calls 15:59:52 to housing providers 15:59:55 and interact with them on the 15:59:58 phone to find what information is provided. 16:00:01 We do those kinds of tests mostly for a 16:00:05 source of income test 16:00:09 or national origin tests. So we would ask a 16:00:13 tester who has a foreign accent to call a housing 16:00:17 provider and then see what was told to that person 16:00:20 versus another tester who 16:00:24 has -- who is a native English speaker, for instance 16:00:29 . We also do email tests which we have 16:00:33 been using a lot in the past year during 16:00:36 the pandemic. We are not able to send test 16:00:39 ers in person, so most of 16:00:43 our tests are where we send a white and 16:00:46 a black tester to a 16:00:49 property to do tests so that it's clear 16:00:52 to the housing 16:00:55 provider the race of the person interested in the housing 16:00:57 housing. We haven't been able to do that 16:01:01 during the pandemic. We don't want to send out testers 16:01:04 out to do tests when 16:01:07 we ourselves are not returning to office yet 16:01:10 . So we have used email as a way to do those kinds 16:01:13 of tests where we have created 16:01:17 email addresses. So 16:01:20 census bureau publishes a list of 16:01:24 most common African-American names 16:01:28 . First names and last names. So we have created 16:01:33 fake email -- tester email addresses with those names 16:01:37 that easily can be the race of the person 16:01:40 . We also add 16:01:43 the nature of the email a code from a 16:01:46 civil rights leader, 16:01:50 say a code from Malcolm X 16:01:53 or Martin Luther King, Jr. And in 16:01:56 some cases we also put 16:01:59 a photograph of a black person in the 16:02:02 signature. So those are the ways by which we try to 16:02:06 make it explicit that the person contacting is a black tester 16:02:11 -- black applicant versus another applicant who is 16:02:14 a white applicant. And 16:02:18 we also do -- usual circumstances, 16:02:21 we will do in-person tests 16:02:27 for space tests. That was all that I had prepared 16:02:29 to talk about. If any of you have questions, I 16:02:33 can take those. Otherwise, I'll pass it to Allan for 16:02:36 the next part of the presentation. 16:02:40 >> I actually do have just two quick questions 16:02:42 . >> Sure. >> The first is I was interested 16:02:47 in that split of 95% of testing 16:02:50 being done in the rental environment versus 16:02:54 5% it sounds like calling 16:02:57 in from ownership. Is that just due to the funding sources 16:03:00 that are available for testing, or is there another reason for 16:03:05 that heavy percentage going towards 16:03:07 rental? >> Yeah. It's primarily most 16:03:11 of our jurisdiction funds that 16:03:14 we get are for rental tests 16:03:17 , so Portland Housing Bureau 16:03:24 will receive a grant to do audit tests which are rental 16:03:28 tests, and we also have other jurisdictional grants that 16:03:32 are similar rental tests. The only 16:03:35 grant that we have currently that 16:03:38 pays for advanced tests like sales, mortgage lending 16:03:41 , 16:03:45 homeowners insurance are through heart funded advanced 16:03:48 tests. And that's a very limited number compared 16:03:51 to most of our other testing 16:03:55 . >> Just quickly, I'd also shire 16:03:58 that part of that is also because those tests require a 16:04:02 bit more time and design in terms of they're a bit more complicated 16:04:05 in terms of, you know, comparing and applying. 16:04:08 We also do mortgage lending, so going through that process 16:04:11 of providing that information and designing those tests are 16:04:15 a bit more detailed, so they 16:04:17 require more of our staff time. That's probably why only one of 16:04:21 our grants really covers it 16:04:24 . >> My other question was 16:04:27 if you could just give the committee a general idea 16:04:30 of what type of civil penalties a housing 16:04:34 provider might face if they're found in 16:04:38 violation or take it to any other sort of resolution or 16:04:41 mediated agreement about how to address the issue during 16:04:44 the process and we've really got to take it all the way up 16:04:48 . What does that look like for a housing 16:04:52 provider? 16:04:57 >> Yeah. So part of one of 16:05:00 the main roles that we work through in the 16:05:03 administrative process with HUD 16:05:06 does include providing a damages worksheet. 16:05:09 Being able to determine what the harm is 16:05:12 and monetary wise what people have experienced 16:05:16 is part of what the process we go through with the 16:05:19 administrative experience. And 16:05:23 so sometimes our intervention can include things like 16:05:26 having an application rereviewed and reconsidered in a place 16:05:30 where they have -- where an applicant was denied for 16:05:32 , say, something like criminal history. 16:05:35 Or, you know, had an RA denied and then were 16:05:38 denied the housing. So sometimes our interaction 16:05:42 will be to change that outcome. And then 16:05:45 in other cases it is to, especially 16:05:49 in administrative process, to determine what the monetary 16:05:52 damage and harm was and be able to help walk folks 16:05:56 through that process to articulate that to 16:05:59 hud. 16:06:02 >> I think part much that is the act 16:06:06 doesn't prescribe sort of damages. It's not 16:06:09 $100 per violation. So it really depends on what the 16:06:13 damage that was done in the violation and that can be 16:06:16 determined as part of a conciliation processor through a 16:06:19 court process. There are other statutes, local 16:06:23 state statutes that do prescribe, you know, sort of 16:06:26 a dollar amount per violation, but for much 16:06:29 of the work we do, I think Kirsten, tell me 16:06:32 if I'm framing that properly, it really is 16:06:35 that comes through the enforcement process and 16:06:39 can be significant in some cases where the damage is extensive 16:06:42 that has been done by the violations 16:06:45 . >> Yeah. I can provide an example. 16:06:48 In the example I shared earlier 16:06:52 with a couple that was denied housing based on their source of 16:06:55 income through a nonprofit, in that 16:06:58 instance, you know, they had to stay in a hotel for 16:07:01 a period of time, so damages included hotel costs. 16:07:04 They also, you know, were trying to move 16:07:08 closer to the apartment they were 16:07:11 denied at was close to their doctor's office 16:07:14 , to their 16:07:17 community, to family caregivers. There were 16:07:20 multiple ways they were harmed monetarily that were included 16:07:23 within the damages and complaint process. 16:07:28 >> Mara also has a question and I do want to 16:07:31 flag everyone for time. It's 4:07 and we 16:07:35 do have public comment in 4:15. I'll give 16:07:38 a minute warning and we will pause if we are in discussion of presentation 16:07:42 . Mara 16:07:45 . >> No comment. Sorry about that 16:07:49 . 16:07:59 >> Okay. It sounded like Allan still had 16:08:02 part of the presentation. Is that correct? >> Yeah 16:08:06 . Thanks for those questions. The only piece I was going to 16:08:09 bring forward is that in addition to the work that's 16:08:12 pertinent to this group, in addition to the work that we do 16:08:17 with the Portland Housing Bureau and of course work that's supported by HUD at the 16:08:20 federal level, we also this year are embarking on fair housing 16:08:21 specific work with Multnomah County. 16:08:25 So extending the reach of our work, 16:08:28 particularly out into the outer part of 16:08:35 East 16:08:38 County. It is an opportunity for us as 16:08:41 we know, given the dynamics we've seen in the housing 16:08:45 marketplace, for us to look into what's happening out 16:08:49 in east Multnomah County and some of those areas that may have 16:08:52 received less attention in the past. So we're grateful for that 16:08:56 opportunity. We'll be doing both education 16:08:59 enforcement and including testing out in those 16:09:02 areas of the city. So kind 16:09:05 of expanding the horizons of the work that we're doing in 16:09:08 these areas here. 16:09:12 >> Hi, this is Barbara on the phone. 16:09:15 Can I ask a couple questions, please 16:09:19 ? >> Go ahead, 16:09:22 Barbara. >> I'm sorry, I couldn't hear. >> Go ahead, 16:09:25 Barbara. >> Okay. Hi 16:09:30 . On testing, first of all 16:09:34 , do you have for buildings or in buildings 16:09:38 that have these long wait lists? I think I've raised that once 16:09:41 before. I'm just wondering if you mentioned it and I missed 16:09:45 it somehow. 16:09:49 But -- okay. Do you know how -- do 16:09:52 you do that? Have you -- how is that 16:09:56 accomplished? You know, so a building has two, three 16:09:59 , four year wait list for tenants 16:10:04 . >> Yes. Thanks, Barbara. 16:10:09 We do do tests in properties 16:10:12 that have wait lists and usually these 16:10:15 are income restricted properties, 16:10:20 so they're only -- 16:10:24 you can be for the housing if 16:10:26 your income is under a certain limit. 16:10:29 They usually have long wait lists and we do tests there. 16:10:32 We give a different set of script to our 16:10:35 testers in those situations. We ask them to 16:10:39 engage with the property manager 16:10:43 or whoever they're talking to to ask about the 16:10:46 length of the wait list. 16:10:51 About other processes, pre-PHRABGZ phase, 16:10:54 application phase, what 16:10:57 sort of information we're looking for to find if the property management 16:11:00 company is discriminating on the basis of 16:11:03 a protected class. We would find other alternative 16:11:08 s script to 16:11:11 see whether -- if they are being told of a longer waiting 16:11:15 time than a person who is not a member of a protected 16:11:19 class, for instance. 16:11:22 >> Or a more desirable continue ant. 16:11:25 >> Right. >> Can often circumvent those 16:11:28 long waiting lists and we know of and 16:11:32 hear of tenants getting an apartment in a 16:11:36 year and a half while someone else languishes for four 16:11:39 years waiting. So 16:11:43 yeah. Thanks. The second question I had 16:11:46 was for Kirsten. I thought I heard, KREURS ten, 16:11:49 Kirsten, that you said 16:11:53 it was felt that race discrimination 16:11:56 or discrimination based on national origin 16:12:00 was underreported. Can 16:12:03 you say why you think it's underreported 16:12:06 or why you thought it was -- it is underreported 16:12:10 . >> Yeah. Sure PH-P 16:12:13 . Thanks, Barbara. I might ask Allan for 16:12:16 his perspective on this, too, because he has more of the 16:12:19 historical knowledge on this. I also wanted to follow-up 16:12:22 , I was just reviewing tests yesterday and analyzing tests 16:12:26 related to one of our grants and 16:12:29 had an example of a wait list test 16:12:32 where one applicant with a -- 16:12:35 without a discernible accent was told 16:12:38 six months for the wait list where 16:12:42 the applicant with an 16:12:45 accent was told over a year. We see a distinction 16:12:48 between given information about how to get on the weight list given 16:12:51 to the nonprotected class person versus 16:12:54 the person in protected class not being given that information. 16:12:57 That's a great question on that front. Thanks for asking 16:13:01 . In terms of the race and national 16:13:05 origin, the largest number of 16:13:09 inquiries we received to our office based on protected class 16:13:13 revolve around disability. What we know is that it's not necessarily 16:13:16 that folks with a disability are being discriminated 16:13:20 against more. It's probably more likely they just have received more 16:13:23 information about how to or potentially more advocacy or 16:13:26 access to report those claims of 16:13:29 discrimination. And so in conversations 16:13:32 with culturally specific agencies like the urban 16:13:36 league, you know, when we were talking about how many instances 16:13:39 they were seeing of folks coming into their doors that 16:13:43 had experienced discrimination in the housing process in either 16:13:47 applying to or during their housing experience, what we're 16:13:50 seeing is that likely our numbers weren't consistent with 16:13:53 what was coming into the culturally specific agencies with trusted relationship 16:13:56 relationships and community. And so that's where 16:14:00 we started to think, like, it does appear that 16:14:03 our numbers related to what's getting 16:14:06 reported to us are likely underreporting related to race 16:14:09 and national origin, which makes sense when we look at historical 16:14:13 harm. And what has happened 16:14:16 public policy wise, institutionally with 16:14:19 institutional racism and has happened in terms of dis PHRA*EUS 16:14:26 displacement or impacted communities of color. 16:14:29 It makes sense folks are hesitant to have less access to report 16:14:32 incidents based on race and national origin. So I 16:14:35 think that's part of what led us to want to try to address the 16:14:38 issue and to ensure partnership with culturally specific agencies 16:14:41 where there are those trusted relationships. I'll also 16:14:44 share that I think as for 16:14:47 differing reasons, last year after the murder 16:14:50 of George Floyd and the protests, we did see an 16:14:53 increase in reporting to our office of race-based 16:14:56 discrimination, particularly neighbor on neighbor harassment. 16:14:59 And we spoke to attorneys in the employment realm who similar 16:15:02 ly said that they were seeing an increase in reporting 16:15:07 and heard from folks that was because they felt stronger 16:15:11 about reporting or having more access to do so with the 16:15:14 issues being raised. I think it does ebb and flow a bit 16:15:17 more. And the relationship with cultural 16:15:20 ly specific agencies is really crucial. Allan 16:15:24 , are there pieces or historical parts to that you could add 16:15:26 ? >> I think that's great, Kirsten. 16:15:29 I appreciate that. I'll give a brief answer because I know 16:15:32 we're getting up against time. The other thing I would 16:15:35 say is as you said, it's not necessarily that 16:15:39 more discrimination might be happening in one protected class 16:15:41 or another, but for instance in some of the protected classes, 16:15:45 it's easier to tell when discrimination has occurred for people 16:15:48 that are living with disabilities very often it is a 16:15:51 question about an assistance animal 16:15:54 or something like that that's been actually denied. And we 16:15:57 can actually have a housing provider that 16:16:00 will -- we can see that discrimination happening. 16:16:03 Or families with children. They've been denied -- we just heard 16:16:07 a story about that. Based on having children 16:16:11 . So we don't very often these days see 16:16:14 folks that say we're not going to rent to you because you're black 16:16:17 or because you're Hispanic or Latinx 16:16:20 . It becomes much more difficult to actually know that 16:16:24 that's happened to you which makes something 16:16:27 like match pair testing an 16:16:30 important opportunity to gather evidence like that. 16:16:33 >> Great. Thank you. I'm just going to put 16:16:37 a pause on this real quick and we can jump back 16:16:40 in. It may not be too long. We did not 16:16:44 have anyone registered for the public 16:16:48 comment period that was pre-registered for the meeting. 16:16:51 However, there may have been folks that joined us that did 16:16:54 not register, so I do want to take a moment to 16:16:57 pause here and offer that up as it is our scheduled 16:17:00 time. 16:17:06 Feel free to unmute or you can put something in the chat, any 16:17:09 members of the public that would like to provide comment 16:17:14 . 16:17:23 >> This is Mara. I have a 16:17:26 public comment on behalf of someone who provided information to me and just 16:17:29 wanted to forward. I had encouraged them to come to 16:17:32 this meeting, but they decided not to. I've been having folks 16:17:35 with visual disabilities basically test out all the 16:17:38 different housing applications that pop up online and we've been seeing a 16:17:41 lot of improvements to that and folks are now able to more 16:17:45 independently complete their own housing applications. We saw it happen with 16:17:49 the Washington County housing choice that 16:17:52 just opened. It's some good news to see that community is 16:17:55 doing a little bit more included in the affordable housing 16:17:59 process. I just wanted to put that out there to some -FPT folks on this 16:18:02 of the folks on this 16:18:05 call. >> Does anyone else have any public comments 16:18:10 to share? 16:18:16 Okay. Then 16:18:19 we are now ahead of the agenda. Good news for us. 16:18:21 I'll return back. Does anybody have any further 16:18:25 questions or, Barbara, did you want to jump back in and provide 16:18:28 any follow-up to the answers provided by Allan and Kirsten 16:18:31 ? Or anything else related to 16:18:36 fair housing 16:18:40 ? 16:18:47 No one? Okay 16:18:51 . I think we can go ahead and move on 16:18:54 there. I did make some notes, but I do want to 16:18:57 talk about next steps. And kind of return 16:19:00 back to the beginning of the meeting. We were talking about 16:19:03 the guidance and the new interim rules. 16:19:06 We have Matthew here to talk us through that 16:19:10 and the implications, so Matthew, I will hand it 16:19:13 over to you. We can do some discussion 16:19:16 or questions after that, but it looks like 16:19:19 we maybe will end the meeting about 10 minutes early 16:19:22 . >> Hey, everybody. My update 16:19:26 should be pretty quick. 16:19:30 So I guess just to take a step back to make sure that we're all 16:19:35 working off the same foundation 16:19:38 of information, under the Trump Transportation, 16:19:41 administration, the requirements under the H 16:19:45 UD's affirmatively furthering 16:19:48 fair housing guidance were rolled back and what had been the 16:19:51 analysis of impediments and what was becoming the assessment of 16:19:55 fair housing was no longer a requirement for jurisdictions around 16:19:58 the country. And kind of if 16:20:01 you want to PW-PBG it 16:20:04 think about it in two components, 16:20:07 it's an assessment process that any jurisdiction can take 16:20:10 to affirmatively further fair housing. 16:20:13 The requirement to do the assessment of fair housing which 16:20:16 is the new process under the Obama administration, that requirement went 16:20:19 away. In its place a self- 16:20:22 local certification form needed to be 16:20:24 completed and that was the requirement. 16:20:27 So I think many people on F 16:20:30 HAC will recall when we talked about this 16:20:34 last year, FHAC said regardless we want to go 16:20:37 ahead and pursue some sort of assessment of 16:20:40 fair housing in Portland and/or Multnomah County and then 16:20:43 we want to come up with our own recommendations 16:20:47 for some fair housing actions that could be pursued in 16:20:50 response to that assessment 16:20:53 . And going through that process, the bureau we said that 16:20:57 we would support you in that effort and we would help to staff that 16:21:01 and provide any sort of data analysis and research work that 16:21:04 you needed to develop those recommendations for the city of port 16:21:07 City of Portland. What has happened 16:21:11 as Niki mentioned at the beginning of the meeting, 16:21:14 we now have the Biden administration interim rule which does 16:21:18 not require an analysis of impedimentses or 16:21:21 an assessment of fair housing, but it has 16:21:24 reprovided the guidance for jurisdiction 16:21:27 s around the country. It has reproduced some 16:21:32 of the data mapping tools, data analysis tools that 16:21:36 had been removed and is reinstituting its technical 16:21:39 assistance for jurisdictions in completing either the analysis of 16:21:43 impedimentses or the assessment of 16:21:46 fair housing for those that choose to do 16:21:50 so and we do anticipate or are hoping the Biden 16:21:54 administration is moving in the direction to reestablish that 16:21:57 requirement. So because of that, 16:22:00 the bureau is preparing to put together a team, a 16:22:03 project team at the bureau in order 16:22:07 to kind of map out a scope and a timeline 16:22:10 to complete an assessment and develop action 16:22:14 items 16:22:17 . We do not have the -- we don't have the capacity to 16:22:20 do an FHAC 16:22:25 process freight from an agency process to do different 16:22:28 assessments and two different action T developments 16:22:30 . It makes sense to do it together. 16:22:34 And so the update we wanted to provide is that we will be coming back 16:22:37 at your next meeting to share with 16:22:40 you our draft 16:22:44 plan to put together an assessment and 16:22:47 then fair housing actions that the city can commit 16:22:50 to that will also -- the 16:22:53 draft plan will include how we're involving the community in 16:22:56 this process, how we're involving agencies in that 16:23:00 process as well as some thoughts that we have 16:23:03 on how FHAV is involved in 16:23:06 that process in terms of completing reviews 16:23:09 of various components of work we're going to be developing and 16:23:12 developing recommendations for the 16:23:16 assessment part of the process and the action plan part of the process 16:23:19 . So I know it's been a bit of a kind 16:23:22 of unclear and stagnant year 16:23:26 because of the changes in administration, so I just want to first 16:23:29 say thank you to everyone for hanging in there, but now that 16:23:32 we're starting to see the federal guidance move 16:23:35 , we are preparing locally and so FH 16:23:38 AC will be a part of that process as we do 16:23:43 that work at the housing bureau. So I'm happy to answer any 16:23:47 questions. It does a little bit mean that this affects 16:23:50 your work plan. Hopefully that's okay with folks, but I think in 16:23:53 the end we'll get a better product, a better set 16:23:56 of recommendations. Yeah. With that, that's 16:23:59 all the time I need. 16:24:09 Lots of thumbs up from Zoomed out people 16:24:13 . Great. >> Well, if anyone does have 16:24:17 any questions regarding that slight change in direction, feel 16:24:20 free to reach out. It is 16:24:24 4:24. So it is 16:24:28 a bit earlier than 5:00, but I think we made 16:24:31 it through all the agenda items and had some good discussion in 16:24:34 there. So unless somebody has anything 16:24:37 else that they would like to discuss or bring to the attention of the committee, 16:24:40 I will just have a few reminders and 16:24:44 sinus off. Mara, I see a hand up? 16:24:46 >> Sorry. I apologize. 16:24:49 I was wondering about -- I'm excited 16:24:53 for guidelines and clarification, but also 16:24:56 just want to make sure this committee is going to have some space to 16:24:59 make some decisions on our own about things we may want 16:25:02 to support or push forward or that kind of thing, or is it 16:25:05 more like this will really tell us what we're going to do and 16:25:09 what we need to focus on? >> 16:25:12 I'll answer that one 16:25:15 . It is -- FHAC will 16:25:19 definitely have the opportunity to say great, we see the city's 16:25:22 assessment and we think also we need to be looking at these 16:25:25 data points or these sets of 16:25:28 anal sees 16:25:31 an-- this 16:25:34 body may say we see that the bureau is proposing 16:25:38 or the city is proposing they commit to on 16:25:41 action items, but also bureau and 16:25:44 city council FHAC is recommending -- or potentially not 16:25:48 recommending some things, but FHAC is recommending 16:25:51 in addition to what is being committed to in this plan 16:25:54 at the bureau and the city have developed, the city should 16:25:58 pursue these additional things. And we will take that 16:26:01 to council with the assessment and 16:26:04 action items. 16:26:07 >> That makes complete sense. Thank you so much 16:26:11 . >> I just wanted 16:26:14 to express appreciation, Matt, for where you all are 16:26:18 headed. I think this is -- given 16:26:21 the winding road we're been on, I think this is the place that we 16:26:24 were hoping we would end, right? I appreciate the city's and the bureau 16:26:27 's commitment to all of that and the commitment for the 16:26:31 work of this group here. I 16:26:34 think that's something that this group can mirror back to the 16:26:37 bureau in being committed to really looking at 16:26:40 what elements of the plan are and the action plan 16:26:44 are important to members of the communities that we all work with 16:26:47 . So we're looking forward to that process. 16:26:50 But I think that's the direction that we were all headed 16:26:53 and hope to be heading down the line here. 16:26:56 So let's hope we don't see any more turns 16:26:59 in the road coming up, but we think the future is ahead 16:27:02 of us. 16:27:08 >> Great. Well, just a few reminders, then 16:27:11 then, to please keep an eye out for the event invite with 16:27:15 the Zoom details that will be coming from Ryan 16:27:18 . Please also keep an eye out for information on 16:27:21 recruitment for a new committee member that I will be sending out to 16:27:25 you folks and push that forward to your networks. 16:27:28 For things that you can send me, if you feel so inclined 16:27:32 to volunteer for the chair or the vice 16:27:35 chair position, please shoot me a quick email special let me know 16:27:39 that you're interested and then I can follow-up with you on next 16:27:42 step there is. Also, if you have any suggested 16:27:45 organizations or specific contacts that you would like 16:27:48 to ensure are included in the