15:25:38  housing units we have in the city.
It's just
15:25:41  
15:25:45 1.4%, but I think when you started looking at these numbers a
15:25:49  little
15:25:52  bit closer after grouping them by income level, the
15:25:55  realization hits you 81% of these units
15:26:00  are occupied by extremely low, very low
15:26:03  and low income households so we're already talking
15:26:06  exacerbated
15:26:11  housing situation.
So this one
15:26:14  is, and the effort is when we
15:26:17  started doing this 
15:26:21 analysis, you look at this same number of
15:26:24  units of a household, close to 
15:26:28 96,000 households that face one problem or the other, but then
15:26:31  you group them in different ways and data people, we
15:26:34  find it so fascinating.
It's like now we start
15:26:37  looking by tenure,
15:26:41  occupied -- owner occupied versus
15:26:44  renter occupied.
It's clear,
15:26:47  just under one-half of renter occupied
15:26:50  households, they're one housing problem or the other, and part
15:26:53  of this is a consequence of we don't
15:26:56  have that data but it's attributable to the
15:27:00  housing cost burden, and I was looking at some of
15:27:03  the other AIs from nearby jurisdictions.
15:27:06 
Pretty much all along the west coast and
15:27:09  even places on the east coast, it's the housing
15:27:13  cost burden that really contributes
15:27:17  to housing problems.
So this one is by income
15:27:20  level and tenure.
The blue bars are owner
15:27:24  occupied and the green ones are renter
15:27:27  occupied, and along the Y axis,
15:27:30  you see -- X axis, you 
15:27:34 have, is it income?
Income 
15:27:37 levels.
See?
So much for my new glasses.

15:27:40 On the X axis you have these percentages but clearly
15:27:43  a very high proportion of extremely low,
15:27:46  very low and low-income renter occupied
15:27:50  households have one housing problem
15:27:54  or the other.
This slide is
15:27:58  looking at housing problems and grouped them by race and
15:28:01  ethnicity, and the three bars,
15:28:05  the green is
15:28:08  renter occupied and the beige
15:28:12  is all occupied units.
The disproportionate housing 
15:28:15 need, if you look at the bars on the African-American 
15:28:20 community, the Hispanics, the Pacific Islanders the disproportionate
15:28:23  housing need really stands up, really high proportion
15:28:26  of households that belong to these race or
15:28:30  ethnic groups do have one or
15:28:33  more of the housing
15:28:37  problems.
Next.
So this slide, and we
15:28:41  always struggle with -- we don't like maps but
15:28:44  it's hard to explain it, but it's
15:28:47  clear, on one hand, you have these
15:28:50  owners with housing problems.
There's spatial distribution and what
15:28:53  you see are these census drives which are the
15:28:56  building blocks for the city of Portland, and then you have
15:29:01  renters.
Clearly on the renter side you see
15:29:07  a lot more dark census, which really means
15:29:10  this is where you find especially
15:29:13  towards the east side high proportion of
15:29:18  renter households who have one or more housing problems.
The owner occupied
15:29:21  it's a little bit more checkered but still
15:29:24  here also there are owner households
15:29:28  that have really high, you know, there's
15:29:32  a spatial concentration of
15:29:35  households that have one or more housing problems and the concentration
15:29:38  seems to be more towards the 
15:29:41 east.
These are the spatial distribution of households that
15:29:44  have one or more housing 
15:29:47 problems, and next slide, please.
15:29:50 
So I'm going to
15:29:55  hand this over to Bimal to talk
15:29:58  about city housing problems.
>> Thank you.
When I
15:30:01  talked about the
15:30:06  numbers [ indiscernible ]
15:30:09  to present really exciting, it's a good
15:30:12  start.
So thank you.
Uma talked about the housing
15:30:15  problems in general, but I'm going to talk about the
15:30:19  city housing problems.
So there are as
15:30:22  Uma said four different criteria, one for plumbing, one
15:30:25  for kitchen facilities and overcrowding
15:30:29  and the cost burden.
The difference with the
15:30:32  one Uma described earlier for the housing problem
15:30:35  is pretty much for the increasing cost burden.
15:30:39 
When I say the city has a severe housing
15:30:42  problem, all the criteria plus the 15% cost
15:30:45  burden.
So these are more severe, right?
So what
15:30:50  we find is that all of the
15:30:55  units -- all of the occupied
15:30:58  units are like
15:31:03  20%, and there
15:31:07  [ indiscernible ] and 30% for renter occupied
15:31:10  units.
So emphasizing again what is greater
15:31:13  is one-third of renter occupied units within the
15:31:17  City of Portland have severe
15:31:20  housing problems, and this essentially is
15:31:26  driven by the problem
15:31:29  of cost burden of 50% and
15:31:32  also substandard housing.
Next slide, please.
Here we
15:31:36  are looking at the units with severe housing problems by
15:31:39  income level, and this slide
15:31:42  pretty much follows the slide Uma presented.
So very high
15:31:45  proportion of
15:31:49  extremely low, very low and
15:31:52  low-income households with a high percentage of units with
15:31:55  more severe housing problems, whether they be renters or
15:31:58  owners, but
15:32:01  it's more skewed towards
15:32:05  renters which are high and severe, and
15:32:09  owners do also have on the low-income,
15:32:12  you have some higher severe
15:32:16  housing problems, because more likely the
15:32:20  owner starts and more likely
15:32:23  to be [ indiscernible ].
Next
15:32:28  slide, please.
15:32:32 
Similar to the housing problems we saw in general, the
15:32:36  pattern we see is
15:32:40  pretty much 
15:32:43 similar, so the various groups by race and
15:32:47  ethnicity, African-American, his uponic, Pacific
15:32:51  Islander have severe housing problems.
So
15:32:55  they face
15:32:58  disproportionate housing needs.
So it's
15:33:01  
15:33:05 disproportionate.
Next slide, please.
15:33:09 
This is the map showing the distribution of households with
15:33:13  severe housing problems and on the right side is a renter household and on the
15:33:16  left is the owner
15:33:21  households.
The rental households,
15:33:24  similar housing problems are more on the east side and far east
15:33:29  side and also pockets of areas with severe housing
15:33:32  problems in the different tracts in north Portland
15:33:36  and northeast Portland and
15:33:40  some areas in the southwest Portland.
Looking
15:33:44  at the owner households you'll
15:33:47  see that the owner households
15:33:50  are actually less, their percentage is
15:33:53  less than renter households but
15:33:57  [ indiscernible ] all over the city [ indiscernible ],
15:34:00  they are more concentrated
15:34:03  [ indiscernible ].
The last slide, and at this
15:34:06  point,
15:34:10  I'm actually switching to another segment of the data.
15:34:15 
We're not looking at severe housing problems but
15:34:18  elderly households with
15:34:21  housing problems.
So we are
15:34:25  looking at the cost burden of
15:34:28  30%, not 50%, and you see
15:34:32  in this chart that the one in the far left is
15:34:35  for owners and renters
15:34:40  with a household having no one older than 
15:34:43 62, and the one in the middle
15:34:48  shows the household having household members between the age of
15:34:51  62 to 75, and
15:34:56  extreme right is the household having one
15:34:59  of the members at least the age of 75.
So you can
15:35:02  see whether they be renter or
15:35:06  owner, the older households seem to have a
15:35:10  higher proportion of households with
15:35:14  housing, severe housing problems, and if you look
15:35:19  at the households with severe
15:35:24  housing, the household with one person at the age of 75 has
15:35:27  a higher 
15:35:31 proportion of housing problems.
15:35:34 
That's the last
15:35:39  slide I have.
So I'm turning it to Niki to summarize some of the findings.

15:35:42 >> Thank you, Bimal.
This slide may look 
15:35:45 familiar.
We put it at the last, in
15:35:48  the last parts of the analysis for low-income households.
15:35:51 
On the left is the box with
15:35:55  definitions.
We just want to keep
15:35:58  returning to this as we go through this planning process, because we are
15:36:01  using definitions of barriers, and
15:36:04  impediments so I have that there for your reference
15:36:07  as you look through this again and then on the right we have the
15:36:10  high-level points that Bimal and Uma would
15:36:13  like us to take away from the presentation today.
Being
15:36:16  severely housing cost burdened, which is paying more than
15:36:20  50% of household income on housing costs, or cost
15:36:23  burdened, defined as paying more than 30% of your household income on
15:36:26  housing costs S primarily driving
15:36:29  what is the housing problem as defined by
15:36:32  HUD, experienced by extremely low, very low,
15:36:36  and low-income households.
A 
15:36:39 disproportionate housing need exists for African-Americans, Hispanics,
15:36:42  and Pacific Islander
15:36:45  households in Portland.
15:36:49 
While only a small fraction of the City of Portland's
15:36:53  housing stock is classified as substandard, just over 
15:36:56 80% of this stock is occupied by extremely low,
15:37:00  very low and low-income households and finally, elderly
15:37:03  owner and renter households that contain at least
15:37:06  one household member aged 7 aor more experience a very high
15:37:09  incidence of the housing problem.

15:37:12 5 or more experience a very high incidence of the housing problem.
 or more experience a very high 
15:37:13 incidence of the housing problem.
or more experience a very high incidence of the housing problem.

15:37:19 Next steps, we will be reviewing
15:37:23  these prior summary points and bringing them up again when
15:37:27  we start to have policy
15:37:31  conversations and representations and also
15:37:34  look at dissimilarity and analysis.
15:37:37 
In the housing plan we'll move through the identified
15:37:41  analysis which was constructed
15:37:44  loosely on the standard analysis of impediments by 
15:37:47 HUD, and that concludes today's presentation.
I'll give it back to Dr. 
15:37:51 Holt so we can collect your comments and feedback.
>>
15:37:54  Thank you very much.
Great information.
Hopefully you have it
15:37:57  in your inbox as well so you can
15:38:00  refer to it.
I will begin by going to those who are with
15:38:03  us remotely and give you an opportunity for
15:38:06  feedback and/or question, if
15:38:11  you do have one.
I will have you
15:38:15  indicate by hand raise, that way we don't 
15:38:22 overspeak one another.
15:38:27 
Christina?
>> Thank you.

15:38:30 Thank you, Bimal, Uma.
Nice to see
15:38:33  you again.
That was really great information.
I had a quick question
15:38:36  in terms of how are we determining the number
15:38:39  of substandard housing units?
That seems like a really
15:38:43  small number, and I just think I know from personal experience that
15:38:46  the number is much larger than that so I'm wondering if
15:38:49  it's relying on BDS reported inspections
15:38:50  or where we're getting that number from.
Thanks.

15:39:00 >> Great question.
>> So Christina, I'm not
15:39:03  entirely sure how the collection occurs at the
15:39:06  local level, but the data
15:39:09  is based off of regular census
15:39:14  data, and my guess is because it's tied to the housing
15:39:19  condition, it's not ACS, probably
15:39:22  it's called American Housing Survey
15:39:27  which takes into account policy and probably they're getting a sample
15:39:30  and putting together this
15:39:35  tabulation, but then please also note the definition for substandard
15:39:38  is really 
15:39:41 specific.
It's just
15:39:45  incomplete kitchen
15:39:48  and/or incomplete plumbing.
15:39:51 
Probably this number doesn't resonate close to the
15:39:54  truth is likely true but this is the best we have to work 
15:39:58 with, and we can always kind of go back to the
15:40:01  age of the
15:40:06  housing and the assumption the multifamily we'll build more and
15:40:09  more in the recent decades and those are
15:40:14  much better quality.
Probably the number is high, but it may
15:40:17  not be that high.
>> Can I just ask
15:40:20  a follow-up question?
15:40:24 
Sorry to nit-pick on 
15:40:28 this.
Is the assumption these were not provided with lack of a
15:40:31  complete kitchen or complete plumbing at the time of rental or that
15:40:34  it could have fallen into that state because of failure
15:40:37  to make routine repairs and maintenance?
>> It is at
15:40:40  the time of data collection, so it has nothing to do
15:40:43  with who provided 
15:40:46 what.
>> Thanks.
>> Thank you.

15:40:50 Allan?
>> Thanks, Dr. Holt.
Thanks
15:40:53  for the presentation.
A couple
15:40:57  pieces, one is I
15:41:02  think particularly with the fair housing aspects of pieces that we're looking at
15:41:05  here, I think it's helpful for us to 
15:41:08 cross-tab the data and the demographics and
15:41:11  this is a less demographic one, one example is in
15:41:14  the severe housing problems that shows the
15:41:18  bars, and Bimal, you pointed this out in the little caption it points
15:41:21  it out but we could also
15:41:24  potentially use stack bars to illustrate in that 30%, right, as
15:41:27  you said, most of that is made up of the
15:41:30  issue around cost burden, rather than the other 
15:41:34 disproportionate housing needs, right?
Those I'm
15:41:37  assuming are smaller percentage so we could see that the issue there is
15:41:40  cost burden.
We could see that through I
15:41:43  stacked bar potentially.
The other place I think where 
15:41:47 cross-referencing some of the demographics might be helpful is we
15:41:50  sort of know this intrinsically about
15:41:53  the demographics geographically and spatially
15:41:56  but where we show a spatial distribution of households
15:41:59  again with the housing problems, we might also be
15:42:04  able to show with cross-hatching or something the areas that
15:42:07  have the demographics related to race and ethnicity which we
15:42:10  know are also focused on the eastern part of the city, so
15:42:13  that we see the darker areas that have the housing 
15:42:16 problems, and also see a darker 
15:42:20 cross-hatching illustrating those are areas with higher concentrations
15:42:23  of communities of color generally speaking.
So again, I think we know
15:42:26  it sort of inuively and we can narrate 
15:42:29 it.
We might also show it
15:42:33  visually.
>>
15:42:37  I agree with
15:42:40  you.
[ Indiscernible ]
15:42:52  
In terms of stacking 
15:42:55 data, it's very likely, it's possible to
15:42:59  get the data from what we have gotten.
We only know we
15:43:03  had one of the four housing problems but we don't really know the
15:43:07  breakdown of those four
15:43:10  housing problems.
That data can be more
15:43:17  likely [ indiscernible ] but I don't think [ indiscernible ].
>> So we're just
15:43:20  making an assertion though then that it's, that the
15:43:23  higher proportion problem
15:43:26  is the cost burden?
Not necessarily the underlying
15:43:30  data, okay.
>> For the housing problem, the difference between
15:43:33  the housing problem is the cost burden,
15:43:42  so you know, that's the main
15:43:45  difference [ indiscernible ].
>>
15:43:49  Okay, thank you.
>> 
15:43:52 Dung?
>> Hi.
Let me just
15:43:56  lower my hand.
Thank you for the 
15:44:02 presentation.
I just have some things as we were going over the
15:44:06  data I had curiosity about that might
15:44:09  kind of overlap
15:44:12  with some other questions, cross-sectional information that we
15:44:16  can look at.
Some things that sparked my interest were
15:44:19  especially around the elderly households, the
15:44:23  75 and up, something that I don't know that
15:44:26  we would be able to pull information from if we have
15:44:30  access to that is whether they were, because I think the way
15:44:35  it was phrased was households with somebody
15:44:38  in certain age category, 75 and up and
15:44:41  65 and up but not
15:44:45  including 75 and up.
I was curious about if it
15:44:49  has any impact.
I would imagine so,
15:44:53  if the household is a person who for example
15:44:58  is 75 and alone rather than a part of
15:45:02  a household, just being on the hotline, you hear
15:45:07  about a lot of times people having a hard time advocating for themselves
15:45:10  especially if they're alone and don't have a
15:45:14  safety network or
15:45:17  community supporting them and also I don't know if this would
15:45:20  really, I think part of this information kind of in
15:45:23  the background of
15:45:26  it would be the households with an elderly person in it
15:45:29  could be like multigenerational
15:45:34  households that are often
15:45:37  publicly different cultural
15:45:40  backgrounds, and then also some
15:45:46  curiosity around this often kind of is intersectional but
15:45:50  the elderly households and
15:45:53  people with disabilities, so just as I was looking at
15:45:56  the information, I was thinking about what are the barriers
15:46:00  that they would come across and how do they
15:46:04  access services and how do they 
15:46:08 prevent, you know, the substandard
15:46:11  conditions from happening?
Although those categories had to do
15:46:14  more with the general categories of housing problems
15:46:17  for owners, so that kind of captures like
15:46:21  the 
15:46:25 overcrowding and the income, the ability to pay the rent
15:46:28  as well as like the other substandard housing conditions, but
15:46:31  yeah, just
15:46:34  some thoughts and some questions that came to mind as
15:46:38  I was listening to the presentation.

15:46:42 >> Thank you very much for that feedback.
15:46:43 
I don't know if anyone wants to respond.

15:46:46 >> I wanted to say thanks for the feedback.
That's
15:46:50  great.
Actually it was a breakdown
15:46:55  of the data by [ indiscernible ]
15:46:59  
not specifically by race.
I'm not sure if that makes
15:47:03  sense at this point by race and ethnicity.

15:47:12 >> Dung, it's good to see 
15:47:16 you.
How we are thinking about
15:47:20  the household types and
15:47:24  it's about are -- because this is tied into the household and are
15:47:27  there other people, and it's just that we'd
15:47:30  have to go back to our source, 
15:47:34 ACS and cross that with household types and a
15:47:37  lot of these much older
15:47:40  households, those are 
15:47:44 single-person households.
I don't have the data with me
15:47:47  but especially in the city there's a
15:47:50  significant portion of elderly households who are
15:47:57   single-person households and this comes up to being tied to
15:48:00  fixed income and the taxes are high.
If
15:48:04  there is interest we could detail the household
15:48:07  types by age.
>> Thank you.
Great comment.

15:48:12 I see no other hands.
I'll give a moment for those
15:48:18  who are in our remote
15:48:22  meeting space.
Excellent.
I will go to
15:48:25  the committee members who are in the room.
Barbara, any
15:48:27  comments?
>> No.
>> Jesse?

15:48:30 >> No, I don't have anything to add that wasn't
15:48:34  covered.
>> Push your button so we can capture it.

15:48:38 >> There we go.
No, I don't have anything to add
15:48:41  that wasn't covered.
Thank you.
>> Okay,
15:48:45  excellent.
Well, without any further 
15:48:49 discussion, thank you, presenters, for the
15:48:54  information that was covered and the interaction and dialogue.
The next
15:48:57  item on our agenda is the space
15:48:59  for public comment.
Do we have anyone signed up for public comment?

15:49:15 Okay.
Let me start with Jane
15:49:18  Hubbard.
Are you present?
15:49:27 
Joan Moore?
Kathleen Swift?

15:49:41 Well, I think we have gone through the agenda for the day.

15:49:47 Great for us to be together on this sunny
15:49:50  afternoon in July.
Any closing comments?

15:49:56 >> I will follow up with an updated
15:50:00  version of the presentation.
We have a few final 
15:50:03 edits, as well as a follow-up information that Uma
15:50:06  and Bimal want to add on, and other than 
15:50:10 that, I would just say our next meeting is
15:50:12  scheduled in October, and we will be sending out materials for
15:50:17  that shortly.
>> Thanks, everyone.
Have an
15:50:20  incredible afternoon.
Stay well.
Stay