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