15:05:55  let you know we will be recording this
15:05:59  meeting, so we're ready whenever you are.
Thank you so 
15:06:02 much.
>> Recording in progress.
>> Indeed, today is
15:06:05  Tuesday, October 17th.
15:06:08 
We have officially
15:06:11  transitioned into fall, with the sunshine, I
15:06:14  hope you are experiencing some
15:06:18  greatness from seeing the sun
15:06:24 .
Today, we will work through the 
15:06:28 agenda.
It is my job to move us from A
15:06:31  to B to make sure
15:06:34  you all are heard and I would love to make
15:06:38  sure that all of you feel like you are included
15:06:43  in the conversation, so please, feel free
15:06:46  to raise your hand 
15:06:49 virtually, in the room as well as online to make sure that all
15:06:52  of your voices are heard.
I know you also
15:06:56  generally go through a principle of agreement, but I'd
15:06:59  like to set a foundation when I'm helping to
15:07:02  facilitate a conversation.
I want to make sure
15:07:05  that we are all on the issues and not the
15:07:09  people that we are addressing and collaborating
15:07:13  on the issues moving this
15:07:17  agenda forward, this is the
15:07:20  Fair Housing Advocacy Committee meeting.
Thank you for joining us this 
15:07:24 afternoon.
I'm going to turn it over to
15:07:29  Niki to do the roll call.
>> NIKI:  Thank you for
15:07:33  joining us.
I will go through a roll call, if you are
15:07:36  joining us online,
15:07:39  unmute and indicate that you are here, if you could turn on
15:07:44  your camera, that would be wonderful as well, and your first
15:07:47  name, please confirm
15:07:50  you are here for the record.
Ashley Miller.
>> Here.

15:07:53 >> Hi, Ashley.
Thank 
15:07:57 you.
Fanny 
15:08:01 Adams.
Don't think
15:08:04  I've seen fanny.
15:08:09 
Rachel Nehse.
>> RACHEL:  Present.
15:08:12 
>> Hi, thank you.
15:08:21 
Jae Rutherford.
Jesse Neilson.
15:08:24 
>> JESSE:  Present.
>> NIKI: 
15:08:28  Thank you.
>> Caroline Jackson.
15:08:31 
>> CAROLINE:  Present.
15:08:36 
>> NIKI:  Thank you.
>> Irina Alonso said she would not be
15:08:39  here and I don't see her
15:08:42  joining us virtually.
15:08:46 
Mara Romero.
>> MARA:  Here, and just getting my 
15:08:49 camera set up.
>> NIKI:  No worries.
15:08:53 
Thank you, 
15:08:56 Mara.
Olia Gorelkina.
15:09:02 
Stephanie Grayce.
>> STEPHANIE:  It's
15:09:05  "grace," and I am here.
>> NIKI: 
15:09:08  Sorry about that.
Thank you.
15:09:12 
Holly Stephens.
15:09:18 
Christina Dirks.
>> CHRISTINA:  Good afternoon, 
15:09:21 everyone, I'm here.
Hello.
15:09:26 
>> NIKI:  Thanks,
15:09:31  Christina.
>> And
15:09:34  Dung Ho.
>> DUNG:  
15:09:37 Present.
>>
15:09:40  We are exactly a
15:09:43  quorum, for the record.
15:09:48 
Excuse me one moment.
15:09:57 
To upload the staff
15:10:01  presentation.
15:10:04 
#

15:10:08 
 
>> Thank 
15:10:12 you.
A few quick items to share with you all today
15:10:15  since our last meeting in
15:10:18  July.
The bureau 
15:10:22 updates, there was --
15:10:25 
bureau director is still open and will remain
15:10:28  open until the position is filled.
Since our
15:10:31  last meeting, interim
15:10:35  director Molly Rogers has resigned from the bureau,
15:10:38  and joining us today is our
15:10:41  new interim
15:10:45  director, Michael 
15:10:50 Buoncore.
>> MICHAEL: 
15:10:54  I'm Michael [away from mic] and the
15:10:58  citizens, they were --
15:11:02  
>> NIKI:  Beautiful.
Thanks, Michael.
15:11:06 
I really appreciate it.
Thank you, Michael, for joining us 
15:11:09 today.
We will continue to update you as well as the
15:11:12  advisory body for all the
15:11:16  recruitment process for the new director.
We hope
15:11:20  to have that filled soon.
Next 
15:11:23 update is the update around
15:11:26  affirmatively furthering fair housing proposed 
15:11:29 rule.
As you recall, the proposed rules were
15:11:34  published back in February.
We did talk about that here
15:11:37  in this body.
We had
15:11:40  a public comment that ended on
15:11:44  August 24th and did submit public
15:11:47  comments in many aspects of the
15:11:51  proposed fair housing rules.
15:11:54 
They have not published anything that is finalized
15:11:57  and we will be reviewing those requirements and update you
15:12:00  all on next steps, which will
15:12:03  likely affect our current fair housing
15:12:07  plan projects and analyses that we've been looking at.
Stay tuned
15:12:10  on that front.
I will probably send you an email
15:12:13  too if it happens before
15:12:16  2024.
And finally, a few
15:12:20  general updates about this body, generally, we
15:12:23  filled the vacancy for
15:12:26  committee chair.
Please email me
15:12:29  if you are interested.
Chair selection is made
15:12:32  by the bureau director, we ask for
15:12:36  a brief paragraph of
15:12:39  interest to facilitate meetings as well as agenda 
15:12:43 items.
If you are interested in taking on that position for us,
15:12:47  please let me know.
And finally,
15:12:50  unfortunately, I have to present that
15:12:58  [indiscernible], good news for him, sad news for us, and
15:13:01  I know I personally and many
15:13:04  colleagues have enjoyed working with Allan over the years.
He has
15:13:08  retired, he has also resigned from
15:13:12  FHAC and is no longer with us, not
15:13:15  attending today and not called out on roll call,
15:13:18  so we do have a vacancy on the 
15:13:21 committee, but we want to thank 
15:13:24 Allan.
He has been on various fair housing bodies
15:13:28  for the city for a number of years
15:13:31  and providing a lot of technical assistance in fair housing planning for a very
15:13:34  long time.
I wouldn't venture to guess what
15:13:38  year that started but Allan has been
15:13:41  in the fair housing community and we wish him a wonderful 
15:13:45 retirement.
And that is all I have for staff
15:13:49  updates.
>> ERICKA:  Thank you, Niki.
Any
15:13:52  questions in relation to staff updates before we move
15:13:56  forward in our agenda?
15:14:04 
Congratulations.
Seeing none,
15:14:07  we will move forward and we are on time.
At this time
15:14:11  we are going to have a presentation, an 
15:14:17 FHCO audit report.
>> MATT: 
15:14:20  Good afternoon, everybody.
Can
15:14:23  you hear me all right?
In the 
15:14:26 room?
>> Yes.
So my name is Matt Serres, I'm the 
15:14:29 legal director here at the Fair Housing Council of 
15:14:33 Oregon.
I had the privilege of visiting with you back in the
15:14:36  summer for our last report on testing, but I'm happy to be here
15:14:40  again to give you our final report
15:14:43  on how testing went for June 2023
15:14:47  through July 2024, and
15:14:50  I'm going to share my screen for some of the presentation,
15:14:53  but I may need -- I think I'm going to need access
15:14:57  because the attendees don't have screen
15:14:58  sharing abilities.
Is that something the host can give me?

15:14:59 



15:15:20 
I'm still having trouble connecting the
15:15:23  PowerPoint.
>> ERICKA: 
15:15:26  Sorry, we thought the other
15:15:29  person was doing that.
15:15:40 
>> MATT:  Thank you for your kind words for Allan, I'll
15:15:44  share them with him.
He went to central Oregon
15:15:47  to do some fishing to get his retirement going.
Congratulations to
15:15:51  him, for sure.
All right.
15:15:54 
Okay.
So I think somebody's got the 
15:15:57 presentation running for me.
I
15:16:00  appreciate that.
15:16:04 
So I'm going to run the slides on
15:16:07  my end as well.
15:16:12 
Okay.
So just to get us going today,
15:16:16  we're going to go over some of the basics in terms of
15:16:19  the introductions to the
15:16:23  Fair Housing Council of Oregon, I'll give you some background on the organization.
15:16:26 
I won't spend a lot of time on that.
I'll also do
15:16:29  a brief overview of fair housing
15:16:32  laws and protected classes as well as audit testing, which is what we're
15:16:36  talking about here today, and finally, we'll go over some of the
15:16:39  data from last year's audit test.
15:16:42 
If you could go ahead and advance
15:16:45  the slides, please.
15:16:56 
>> All right.
15:17:03 
I'm having to move things around a little bit on my screen
15:17:06  just because I'm not the presenter here, so please
15:17:10  give me a moment.
15:17:18 
All right.
So the first thing I'm going to talk
15:17:21  about a little bit is some of the different modes of advocacy that the
15:17:25  Fair Housing Council of Oregon engages in.
One is called a fair housing 
15:17:28 Initiatives Program
15:17:32 , there are FHIPS in
15:17:35  Washington, California, and Idaho,
15:17:39  so we're not the only
15:17:43  FHIP in the northwest, but there are some at the Fair Housing Council
15:17:49  of Oregon.
We do information and referral
15:17:53  to other resources,
15:17:56  also, investigation and informal advocacy and this is where
15:17:59  we gather statements and other evidence to
15:18:02  determine whether suspected fair housing violation is an
15:18:06  actual or bona fide complaint.
And we
15:18:09  can help to develop additional evidence as well through
15:18:13  complaint-based testing, and we'll talk a little bit more about that when
15:18:16  I talk about audit testing.
We also share the
15:18:20  results of our investigation with providers as we
15:18:23  attempt to remedy those violations.
Another area of our
15:18:27  advocacy work is
15:18:33  systemic advocacy and policy work as well as
15:18:36  conduct investigations into systemic cases of fair housing
15:18:39  discrimination.
Our audit testing really
15:18:42  does help informal how we target that work
15:18:45  in terms of our systemic investigations.
So it is
15:18:49  an important piece, not only to informing the City of
15:18:52  Portland, but also informing
15:18:55  our own work.
15:19:00 
In terms of systemic -- formal complaints and legal
15:19:03  action, we also do assist tenants in
15:19:07  filing formal fair housing complaints with both
15:19:10  the Oregon Bureau of Labor and 
15:19:13 industries, if it's a state complaint we can go to 
15:19:18 BOLI.
We can also bring claims to BOLI as 
15:19:21 well, and we
15:19:24  have the option of
15:19:27  going to the HUD and legal remedies through
15:19:31  the courts as well,
15:19:34  also usually with
15:19:38  external attorneys and we do education and outreach and this is
15:19:43  a big part of our work where
15:19:46  we give education to tenants
15:19:50  alike and reach priorities populations
15:19:53  with fair housing violations.
For example, here in the City of Portland,
15:19:56  we have a cooperative with legal aid
15:19:59  services of Portland and the
15:20:02  Urban League for some of our
15:20:07  advocacy and services.
If you'd go ahead and advance
15:20:11  to the next slide.
And to the
15:20:16  next one, please.
So
15:20:19  I wanted to do a brief overview of
15:20:22  some of the major fair housing laws that come into play in
15:20:25  our advocacy work.
First we have what's called the
15:20:29  Civil Rights Act of 1866.
This is also referred to as
15:20:32  
15:20:36 42-USC-1982.
This section states in
15:20:39  part that all citizens shall have the same rights to
15:20:42  convey, hold, lease, and
15:20:45  sell real and personal property.
And interestingly,
15:20:48  the Civil Rights Act of 1866
15:20:51  is often an 
15:20:55 overlooked tool in fair housing advocacy.
One of the benefits of this
15:20:58  Civil Rights Act is there are not the
15:21:01  same exclusions or there are not
15:21:04  the same exceptions or exemptions that you would find in the
15:21:08  Fair Housing Act.
So some claims where landlords may
15:21:11  be exempt under the
15:21:15  Fair Housing Act they may find themselves actually liable under the
15:21:18  Fair Housing Act of 1866.
That's an interesting piece of
15:21:22  information that maybe not everyone knew about.
The
15:21:26  Fair Housing Act of 1968 helped set
15:21:29  forth the protections for race, national 
15:21:32 origin, color, and religion, and
15:21:36  over time, additional protected classes were added
15:21:39  to that list, which we'll talk about in a minute.
15:21:42 
At the state
15:21:48  level there are a number of Oregon Revised Statutes that come into
15:21:51  place, 
15:21:57 ORS659A-145, which talks about people with 
15:22:01 disabilities.
Subsection
15:22:04  421 talks about
15:22:11  discrimination based on race,
15:22:14  sexual discrimination, and other classes.
And I want
15:22:17  folks to be aware of this, Oregon state
15:22:20  law has a separate statute that states that we have
15:22:23  the right to pursue disparate
15:22:27  impact litigation or disparate impact
15:22:30  claims under state fair housing laws.
15:22:33 
This would impact claims -- 
interesting tool and useful
15:22:37  tool when trying to target neutral
15:22:40  policies that have a
15:22:44  discriminatory effect on protected classes, 
15:22:48 unintentional discrimination or policies that have an
15:22:51  unexpected but negative effect
15:22:54  on certain population groups.
And 
15:22:58 lastly, ORS chapter 90, has a 
15:23:01 subsection, 449, which talks about survivors of domestic 
15:23:04 violence, sexual assault, or 
15:23:07 stalking.
If you could advance to the next slide, please.
15:23:12 
Just a couple of things on the --
15:23:15  a couple of general statements about fair housing, fair housing is the
15:23:18  right of all people to be free from illegal discrimination in the rental,
15:23:21  sale, or financing of housing.
And rental housing,
15:23:25  these laws cover the application process, tenancy,
15:23:28  and the move-out process.
Generally speaking, when
15:23:32  we're talking about audit testing or 
15:23:35 complaint-based testing, we're usually talking about the
15:23:38  application process or the application
15:23:41  or rental stage of a
15:23:44  lease agreement.
That's because when
15:23:48  in testing what often occurs, the point of testing
15:23:51  where we may be sending in two
15:23:54  testers, one, let's say, for a basic example,
15:23:57  you know, one tester is a person who is white.
15:24:00 
Another tester is a person who is Black, and
15:24:03  they both go to apply for
15:24:07  the same rental unit and if the -- depending on
15:24:11  the interactions with the Black applicant or the
15:24:14  white applicant, it may
15:24:17  reveal some discriminatory factors on the part of the
15:24:20  landlord.
If they don't show it to the Black applicant but they
15:24:23  do show it to the white applicant or if they
15:24:26  give all the documentation
15:24:30  necessary to complete the application to only 
15:24:33 one, that could be signed that
15:24:36  discrimination is afoot.
Advance to the
15:24:40  next slide, please.
So when
15:24:43  we get right down to it, what fair housing is
15:24:46  all about, guarding against treating a
15:24:51  person differently in any housing
15:24:54  transaction because that person is a member of a protected
15:24:57  class.
If you could trance
15:25:01   -- advance to the next slide.
15:25:05 
So looking at who must
15:25:08  comply with with the Fair Housing 
15:25:12 Act, those who touch the market.
So
15:25:15  owners landlords, and housing
15:25:18  authorities, property managers, maintenance staff, homeowners
15:25:22  associations and real estate agents and also
15:25:25  can involve mortgage lenders or financial
15:25:28  institutions, insurers, jurisdictions, like the
15:25:32  City of Portland or other
15:25:35  localities themselves, advertising
15:25:38  media, and also neighbors.
That's also
15:25:41  an overlooked aspect of fair
15:25:45  housing, neighbor on neighbor discrimination
15:25:48  can fall under the
15:25:51  Fair Housing Act if it falls
15:25:55  under discrimination, historical
15:25:58  examples of house burning or
15:26:02  other vandalisms against persons of color to get them
15:26:05  out of neighborhoods, but that is also not
15:26:09  tolerated in the Fair Housing Act.
Next slide,
15:26:12  please.
In terms of the dwellings covered, there are
15:26:16  a number of different types of dwellings such as 
15:26:19 housing, apartments, condos, mobile
15:26:22  homes, retirement homes,
15:26:26  assisted living, nonprofit housing
15:26:29  and shelters and long
15:26:32  term stay and shelters,
15:26:35  that's interesting, because there's often a test that
15:26:38  you have to perform at the shelters as to whether it's
15:26:42  more of an emergency shelter or more of a longer-term
15:26:45  stay shelter.
And it doesn't take a
15:26:49  long stay to get it a threat to the Fair Housing 
15:26:52 Act.
If it's a one night in and one night
15:26:55  out shelter that provides a bed for one night, that would not be under
15:26:58  the Fair Housing Act.
15:27:02 
However, it may still fall
15:27:05  under the ADA title 3
15:27:09  protection where other protections still 
15:27:11 attach.
If you could advance to the next slide, please.

15:27:17 And then the one after that.
So what I want to talk about here,
15:27:20  I want to go over the different federally protected 
15:27:23 classes.
So as I said earlier, those first four
15:27:27  listed there were part of the Fair Housing Act as
15:27:30  it was in 1968.
Those are race, color,
15:27:33  national origin, and 
15:27:36 religion.
The next, sex was
15:27:40  introduced in the 1970s, and finally, in
15:27:43  1988, the last
15:27:47  two categories, familial status, which means families with
15:27:50  children, and disability, or persons
15:27:53  with disabilities were finally included
15:27:56  under the Fair Housing Act as well.
If
15:28:00  you can go to the next slide.
Here, you'll see
15:28:03  a list of our Oregon protected classes.
The
15:28:06  State of Oregon has been above and beyond what
15:28:10  the federal government requires in terms of protecting people from discrimination and
15:28:13  housing.
So we have a number of protected classes here
15:28:16  in our own state, classes that are not under federal 
15:28:19 law, such as marital 
15:28:23 status, source of income, sexual orientation, gender
15:28:26  identity, and other local
15:28:30  protected classes.
15:28:33 
Sexual orientation and gender identity have thankfully
15:28:36  been included under guidance from the
15:28:40  Biden Administration as being part of the federally protected classes
15:28:43  and that's consistent with United States
15:28:47  Supreme Court law consistent with employment,
15:28:50  but the Biden Administration has
15:28:53  made clear that employment context
15:28:56  extends those protections to the fair housing as 
15:29:00 well.
So you can file claims related
15:29:04  to sexual orientation and gender identity with HUD
15:29:07  or BOLI as a result of that.
Okay.
If we
15:29:10  could go to the next slide, please.
So here,
15:29:14  I'm going to just say a bit about the role of audit 
15:29:17 testing.
So go ahead and head to the next slide.
15:29:20 
So one of the roles of
15:29:23  audit testing is to assist local
15:29:26  jurisdictions in their own endeavors to 
15:29:30 research, identify,
15:29:36  impediments to fair housing choices, and ensuring that
15:29:40  people within our community have as much choice when it comes
15:29:44  to housing as possible.
15:29:47 
One of the departments
15:29:50  of the 
15:29:54 rules, propose strategies and actions for
15:29:57  localities, agencies, and private entities
15:30:00  in our jurisdiction to further fair housing to
15:30:03  eliminate, overcome, or
15:30:06  mitigate identified
15:30:10  impediments.
One of the main focuses
15:30:13  of 
15:30:18 AF --
another aim is
15:30:21  to assist in the integration of people with disabilities within
15:30:24  our communities and within our housing.
15:30:28 
And those are a couple of highlights.
And the role
15:30:31  of testing or audit testing is
15:30:34  to help develop some of the data behind
15:30:38  identifying what some of those key impediments are to
15:30:41  fair housing choice in our community.
15:30:44 
So we do audit tests
15:30:48  to rule out which protected classes might be most
15:30:51  negatively impacted by our housing policies or maybe most
15:30:55  in need of attention in terms of how local jurisdictions
15:30:58  come up with fair housing plans.
If you could go to the
15:31:03  next slide, please.
So in the
15:31:06  City of Portland, our audit testing for
15:31:09  this previous period went from a time frame of
15:31:12  July 2022 through June 30
15:31:15  of 2023.
During that window
15:31:19  of time, we performed 20 total
15:31:22  paired audit tests.
15 of those
15:31:25  were with funding for the City of Portland, also
15:31:28  an additional five tests that we included in our
15:31:31  report which were funded by other
15:31:34  state or federal agencies.
But
15:31:38  all out of those conducted in the
15:31:42  City of Portland and through our marching orders from the City of 
15:31:45 Portland, we set to focus on
15:31:49  several specific classes in and those three protected classes
15:31:53  that we focused on included race and color,
15:31:56  national origin, and
15:31:59  source of income.
And so let's take a moment to
15:32:02  look at each of those categories.
But before we
15:32:05  get to that, I want to talk a little bit about the
15:32:08  limitations on the data.
So if we could go to the
15:32:13  next slide, please.
15:32:28 
All right.
15:32:32 
So a couple of things I wanted to mention about the
15:32:35  data that comes from these other
15:32:39  tests is one important feature of
15:32:42  them is that they really are there
15:32:45  to help identify different
15:32:48  treatments in rental transactions.
However,
15:32:51  it's not always clear whether that
15:32:55  different treatment is for sure an indicator
15:32:58  that discrimination has occurred.
15:33:01 
So a lot of times when we perform audit testing, it really
15:33:05  serves as one piece of evidence to conduct further
15:33:08  investigation of a particular housing
15:33:11  provider and that may lead
15:33:15  to more evidence of discrimination.
And
15:33:18  ultimately may help support filing complaints with fair
15:33:22  housing enforcement agencies that I mentioned before like
15:33:25  BOLI and HUD.
The other,
15:33:29  the audit testing is
15:33:32  ultimately driven by housing market vacancies.
In other words, as I was saying
15:33:36  before, we can only perform this testing at the
15:33:39  application stage of a testing -- or excuse 
15:33:42 me, the application stage of the rental market.
Which means
15:33:45  that, you know, we
15:33:48  are only able to target landlords
15:33:52  or housing providers that have actually
15:33:55  vacancies with testing.
15:33:58 
So other landlords may be found to be
15:34:01  violators through other means such as individual
15:34:05  complaints that people bring to us
15:34:09  or denials of reasonable accommodation.
But the only thing
15:34:12  we can test is how landlords
15:34:15  treat their vacant units.
The other thing I wanted to
15:34:18  make clear is that the results that we
15:34:21  get out of our audit testing
15:34:24  is not really intended to be scientific
15:34:27  or statistically significant.
If you're performing 20
15:34:30  tests a year, that's really not enough to
15:34:34  give you an accurate scientific snapshot of discrimination
15:34:37  that's occurring, but it does give you some
15:34:41  idea of areas for further exploration or
15:34:45  areas to focus ethical assistance or training or education or
15:34:49  outreach.
So those are a lot of the things that
15:34:52  we look to recommend as a result of
15:34:55  our audit testing.
15:34:58 
In terms of applicant inquiries, I've already touched on this,
15:35:01  but essentially, you know, what's going on there is that this
15:35:04  data is limited only to applicant and inquiries, as
15:35:08  I mentioned with regard to vacancies, you 
15:35:11 know, where we're not really looking here at people
15:35:14  who have been tenants for a year or a long period of 
15:35:18 time.
So those are some of the
15:35:21  limitations.
Okay.
You can go to the next 
15:35:25 slide.
So some of the types of
15:35:29  discrimination that we are identified through
15:35:32  audit testing, we may find that landlords
15:35:36  are outright refusing to rent, 
15:35:39 sell, or finance people due to race or
15:35:43  disability, also, giving out false
15:35:46  or inconsistent information with one group versus the 
15:35:49 other.
For example, they might
15:35:53  provide a higher security deposit amount on a person with a
15:35:56  disability as compared to a person without a disability,
15:35:59  and that's actually not uncommon in the sense 
15:36:02 that, you know, some landlords try to do that, to recoup
15:36:07  what they anticipate to be potentially additional
15:36:11  damages or other expenses
15:36:14  associated with having a tenant with a disability.
But
15:36:18  that's unlawful.
They may engage in
15:36:21  discriminatory advertising.
We
15:36:24  see if they're applying different terms and 
15:36:27 conditions, policies, rules, or procedures.
That could
15:36:31  be either through the application process.
They might apply different
15:36:34  procedures.
It could also be that they offer different
15:36:37  terms or conditions.
Like I just
15:36:40  mentioned security deposits.
Some examples of different procedures
15:36:43  or policies might be, you know, for example, how
15:36:46  does a landlord
15:36:49  apply its criminal background
15:36:53  screening criteria.
That's an
15:36:56  interesting topic for
15:37:00  systemic investigation for the
15:37:03  Fair Housing Advocacy Committee, are they given two
15:37:06  applicants that are the same criminal
15:37:11  backgrounds, like they have very similar criminal violations in their histories, or are
15:37:14  they more likely to exclude the
15:37:17  Black applicant or the white applicant or the
15:37:20  disabled applicant or the applicant without a disability?
And
15:37:24  that would be a disparate treatment
15:37:27  if you're applying those policies in
15:37:31  an unequal fashion.
And the other thing we
15:37:35  encounter a lot during our rental testing can
15:37:38  be, specifically we won't
15:37:42  encounter outright discriminate
15:37:45 discriminatory statements with
15:37:48  source of income, recipients of
15:37:51  rental assistance and they'll say, no, we don't
15:37:54  section 8, or they'll create
15:37:58  other artificial barriers to processing that 
15:38:01 application.
For example, a landlord might charge
15:38:04  a higher rent to somebody
15:38:07  who has a housing choice voucher than they would somebody
15:38:10  who does not.
Or they might
15:38:13  insist that they disclose the amount of their voucher
15:38:16  before they agree to rent to them, which
15:38:20  is also a discriminatory
15:38:25  in that it chills those applicants from renting
15:38:28  from that landlord.
So if we could go to the data here.
So
15:38:32  let's go to the next slide
15:38:35  here.
So what you're looking at
15:38:38  here are the results from last
15:38:42  year's set of
15:38:45  20 audit tests.
Generally 
15:38:48 speaking, we did not get very
15:38:51  many positive tests this year, so in the category of
15:38:55  race-based audit testing, we only had one positive test
15:38:58  out of eight that we conducted.
In terms of source of 
15:39:01 income, we had one positive test out of four that were conducted.
15:39:05 
And in the area of disability, we didn't have any
15:39:08  positive tests.
So five
15:39:11  negatives and two inconclusives there.
15:39:14 
If we go to the
15:39:18  next slide, please.
You know, so
15:39:21  what we did see, we did see some
15:39:24  evidence of differential treatment based on race or source of 
15:39:28 income.
Those were the two positive tests that we got.
15:39:31 
So they did show some indication of refusal to rent
15:39:34  on the basis of somebody's rental
15:39:37  assistance or a discriminatory terms and conditions as it
15:39:41  related to an applicant of color.
And
15:39:45  from these data points we put forward a few recommendations to the
15:39:49  City of Portland.
One of those recommendations is
15:39:52  that the city collaborate with more 
15:39:57 culturally-specific groups in terms of addressing the differential treatment of persons
15:40:00  of color in the rental market.
We also suggested that the
15:40:04  city engage in more training on the requirement that
15:40:08  all landlords or housing providers must
15:40:11  accept rental assistance.
And
15:40:14  we also suggest that
15:40:17  expanding in-person testing would be another good strategy for the City of
15:40:20  Portland.
I will say that
15:40:23  the fair housing did
15:40:27  encounter some obstacles this year, conducting the
15:40:30  number of tests we wanted to conduct for
15:40:34  the City of Portland, and in
15:40:37  much better position for July 2023 to
15:40:41  June 2024 to meet
15:40:44  some of those thresholds that we
15:40:47  had intended under this grant.
So next
15:40:50  year -- I can't remember the exact number, but I think 70 is our goal for
15:40:53  next year, so we should have much more data
15:40:56  available for the City of Portland as we move in
15:41:00  the 2024 towards July next
15:41:03  year.
And I'm happy to announce, I wanted to
15:41:06  give a shout-out to Mara Romero, who is a member of the committee,
15:41:10  but she is also one of
15:41:13  Fair Housing Council of Oregon's new hires.
So
15:41:17  Mara has joined the
15:41:20  organization and is one of our testing coordinators and
15:41:23  she will be helping us conduct this testing in the
15:41:26  year ahead.
If we could go to the next 
15:41:29 slide, please.
The last thing I wanted to show
15:41:33  you here is that snapshot of some of the
15:41:36  Fair Housing Council of Oregon's hotline data.
So this
15:41:39  is data pertaining to general inquiries that
15:41:43  we get from members of the public relating to housing 
15:41:46 discrimination.
And oftentimes it's this
15:41:50  hotline data coupled with our testing data that gives us the
15:41:53  clearest picture of what types of discrimination are
15:41:57  actually occurring and one of the interesting things about the hotline data is
15:42:00  that for the City of
15:42:03  Portland, it shows that race
15:42:06  and color are a much higher source of complaints than
15:42:09  we see statewide, whereas in the City of 
15:42:12 Portland, it represents 18% of all the
15:42:16  complaints that we receive,
15:42:19  across state, only 12%.
And in
15:42:24  similarly, we get
15:42:31  a lot of national origin complaints, we see 10% of
15:42:34  our complaints for the City of Portland having some
15:42:37  nexus to national origin or connection to national
15:42:40  origin, where across the state we only see about 
15:42:43 3% of those complaints being related
15:42:47  to that protected class.
15:42:51 
class.
With that, I'd be happy to stick 
15:42:54 around and answer questions, but that's
15:42:59  an overview of
15:43:03  Fair Housing Council of Oregon's testing in the last
15:43:07  year and we look forward to
15:43:10  more moving forward.
>> ERICKA:  Thank you
15:43:13  for bringing that important data to this committee.
Are there questions
15:43:18  or comments for Matt?
15:43:29 
There in the chat,
15:43:37  would you like me to read it
15:43:40  aloud?
>> CAROLINE:  When you were talking about the definition of
15:43:44  dwellings, there's been issue and debate
15:43:47  around how many new types of tiny homes,
15:43:50  single-unit shelters, microshelters, that are
15:43:54  covered under the definition of dwelling, particular interest to me
15:43:57  because there's so many models popping up for
15:44:01  these sort of medium-term, sometimes 
15:44:04 longer-term microdwellings, and I'm always curious
15:44:08  if those folks have similar protections or if that's
15:44:11  something that's still being sort of
15:44:15  sussed out in policy.
>> MATT:  It is
15:44:20  conceivable that some of the -- depending on the
15:44:24  different varieties of like say
15:44:27  villages off other types of
15:44:31  small homes or tiny homes, it's
15:44:35  conceivable some might
15:44:39  fall under exceptions in the
15:44:42  Fair Housing Act, less than five dwelling units total
15:44:45  or things of that nature.
But from the general, you know,
15:44:48  I think the primary test that you're
15:44:52  talking about, shelters,
15:44:57  villages that have groups of tiny
15:45:01  homes, how long does the inhabitant get to
15:45:04  stay there?
And it's very rare
15:45:07  for those types of settings to have one night in,
15:45:12  one night out policies.
Most routinely, people
15:45:15  are there for weeks, typically for weeks at a time.
And because of 
15:45:18 that, I would say that almost all of those
15:45:22  settings fall under the Fair Housing Act and
15:45:26  it does have some serious implication for this
15:45:29  program as they're planning their services.
That's a
15:45:33  really good question, though.
15:45:37 
>> ERICKA:  Thank you.
Are there
15:45:40  any additional questions for Matt
15:45:44  in the chat?
15:45:48 
Barbara.
>> BARBARA:  Barbara Geyer here.
15:45:52 
How many incidents there were, as I recall from many
15:45:57  other audits, and there were things like, okay, out of 
15:46:00 ten, we got six adverse reports, that sort of 
15:46:04 thing.
Did you do that for
15:46:07  part of this audit?
>> MATT:  Yeah.
As part of
15:46:10  the audit report, what we saw
15:46:14  was -- some of the data I showed you was that we
15:46:17  had one, you 
15:46:20 know, we had fewer tests
15:46:23  overall compared to previous years.
So we had 20 tests
15:46:26  and in the area of race-based testing,
15:46:29  we had one positive test out of -- 
I think it was eight
15:46:33  performed.
And then out of the source of income testing, I'd have to pull
15:46:36  up the data again.
15:46:39 
Let me take a look.
But it was one
15:46:42  positive test out of four conducted and the disability,
15:46:45  we didn't have any positive tests out of seven conducted.
So I think
15:46:49  that's the information that you're looking for, but let me know if I'm not
15:46:54  answering your question.
15:46:59 
>> BARBARA:  Generally bring this up
15:47:05  -- asked in past presentations about
15:47:09  all of the other types of tendencies
15:47:12  and the other buildings that
15:47:16  don't have -- that were built all under
15:47:20  this audit test program, don't
15:47:23  respond in that way,
15:47:26  generally less -- that they would come up.
15:47:29 
Have you thought of how these buildings might be
15:47:34  tested as well?
15:47:37 
>> MATT:  I think in general you're probably
15:47:41  referring mostly to like affordable housing
15:47:44  programs that are getting federal subsidies or state
15:47:48  subsidies and maintain less of
15:47:51  people who are going to be
15:47:54  potential residents there.
And you can test those --
15:47:57  you can test those types of projects but
15:48:01  assessing how people are placed on to those lists.
15:48:05 
So the question becomes, you know,
15:48:08  how they are assessed whether they're going to be placed on a
15:48:12  wait-list or not, because a lot of times there's an application process just
15:48:15  to get on the wait-list and there
15:48:18  are qualifications or screening criteria just to get on the wait-list.
15:48:22 
So that's the point of contact we can probably test
15:48:25  for, and we do tests re
15:48:28 lated to 
15:48:31 that.
>> BARBARA:  Thank you. 
>> The first is just to
15:48:35  clarify, you did not test for national origin this 
15:48:38 year.
It was only race, color, disability,
15:48:42  and source of income.
15:48:45 
>> MATT:  That's correct.
>> I have a
15:48:48  question about the -- you had
15:48:52  the hotline call data, do you collect
15:48:55  information on the perceived
15:48:59  racial categories that are
15:49:02  targeted with race --
15:49:08  
>> MATT:  In other words, can we disaggregate that
15:49:12  data to show which race categories were being targeted?
Is
15:49:14  that the question?
>> Yes.
>> MATT: 
15:49:18  Yeah, I think it's possible.
Yes.
We 
15:49:21 track, you know, the different -- different
15:49:25  types of races down to 
15:49:28 subtypes, so we can potentially disaggregate that data
15:49:31  and show, you 
15:49:34 know, which types of races are being targeted
15:49:37  more than others.
Yes.
15:49:40 
The answer is yes.
15:49:46 
>> ERICKA: 
15:49:49  Elizabeth [phonetic]?
>> Thank you so much for the presentation, and
15:49:52  not just -- 
and I'm speaking from memory about on
15:49:56  that slide, on the analysis, right, you had
15:49:59  some, you know, positive to negative, things like
15:50:03  that.
My question to you would be,
15:50:06  what's the -- besides the legal data
15:50:09  that you talked about,
15:50:12  inconclusive, not just -- 
looking at that,
15:50:15  it's clear, it's really
15:50:18  hard to decide
15:50:23  [indiscernible], explanation of the market, but what
15:50:27  should be the takeaway and
15:50:30  you're saying --
15:50:34  [indiscernible], if you could integrate that, that would be very
15:50:37  helpful for us.
>> MATT:  I do think
15:50:40  that one of the takeaways, sadly, is
15:50:43  that we need to do more testing to get a better
15:50:46  sampling of data here.
If you're only doing eight
15:50:50  tests related to race and you're
15:50:53  showing one positive test, from my perspective, it doesn't
15:50:58  tell you as much as we could be getting.
That one positive
15:51:01  test may be an indicator that, you 
15:51:04 know, I think with that particular test
15:51:07  it involved a person of color being offered different
15:51:10  terms or conditions related to like a security deposit,
15:51:13  and, you know, it's just -- it
15:51:16  becomes a very isolated sort of 
15:51:20 test.
So I think one of the
15:51:23  takeaways would be for
15:51:26  the future, are these the categories that
15:51:30  we want, as a city, to focus on in terms of our audit
15:51:33  testing.
Are these the only three
15:51:37  categories that we care about testing for is race, source
15:51:40  of income, and disability?
That's
15:51:43  how it's generally written right now.
For the upcoming
15:51:46  year we're going to be focusing on the same categories.
And
15:51:49  that makes a lot of sense in the sense that
15:51:52  the City of Portland does put race forward and puts
15:51:56  it at a very important emphasis on race, but all the other
15:51:59  protected classes that we could also be branching into and
15:52:02  thinking more about, versus
15:52:05  sex discrimination or
15:52:10  -- I'm trying to think about another good
15:52:13  one.
But I'd probably suggest that sex discrimination might be
15:52:16  a good topic to add to our testing
15:52:20  regime for the future.
We've done some 
15:52:24 sex-related testing and like Multnomah County
15:52:27  at large, which has yielded some
15:52:30  results in terms of seeing positive results related to
15:52:34  how landlords are treating survivors of domestic 
15:52:37 violence, and I think that's a gap here I
15:52:41  see how we do
15:52:44  our City of Portland testing,
15:52:47  we're not getting that data
15:52:50  that might be directed towards any
15:52:54  survivor of domestic violence.
>> Thank you.
>> I just
15:52:57  wanted to read in a
15:53:00  comment that 
15:53:04 Christina said, in regards to the definition
15:53:08  of a dwelling unit, defines
15:53:11  dwelling for purposes as any building, structure or
15:53:15  -- occupied as or
15:53:19  designed for occupancy by one or more
15:53:22  entities, by definition, these new structures,
15:53:25  relating back to the comment,
15:53:29  would likely qualify.
15:53:34 
>> Thank you for that comment.
I'm going to give one
15:53:38  more opportunity and then I'm going to move us in our
15:53:41  agenda because we're behind.
So 
15:53:44 Mara, I'll go to you.
>> MARA:  Thank you.
I'll
15:53:48  be quick.
I wanted to chime in really 
15:53:51 fast, so thank you for that for
15:53:54  letting folks now that I joined the
15:53:58  Fair Housing Council.
I'm really excited to be a part of the
15:54:01  enforcement team that Matt has been building up and
15:54:05  is committed to and we have a sharp team so
15:54:08  I'm looking forward to the future of the
15:54:11  Fair Housing Council and I'm excited just from the things that got brought up in
15:54:14  this meeting.
I was like taking
15:54:18  notes and really excited to be taking some of the
15:54:21  stuff I learned as a housing advocate and
15:54:24  this professional space.
Excited.
For example, when
15:54:28  someone was talking about like disaggregating
15:54:32  the data, it's interesting, what we might do in testing, we
15:54:35  get a report of potential race discrimination, we may
15:54:39  test, right, just generally around that issue,
15:54:42  but if we notice that there's maybe a nation of
15:54:46  origin issue or a disability-related issue, we
15:54:49  could kind of tip it and sometimes apply a different test
15:54:52  or look at the test differently or all sorts of
15:54:55  little things like that.
So I'm really
15:54:58  looking forward to figuring out
15:55:02  how we can get data that's going to speak to us a little bit better
15:55:05  about what's going on out there.
Thanks, 
15:55:08 everyone.
>> MATT:  Thanks for that, Mara,
15:55:11  and something else I wanted to highlight, our
15:55:15  audit testing is designed for generating data and
15:55:18  research, but a whole nother aspect
15:55:21  here at the fair hougz
15:55:27   -- Fair Housing Council of
15:55:30  Oregon, if you are experiencing individual
15:55:33  experiences of being denied an application or getting housing and you
15:55:37  think it might be
15:55:42  related to their protected class, we
15:55:46  can respond directly to those by sending 
15:55:49 testers.
Those are complaint-based tests.
15:55:52 
But literally, it helps us,
15:55:55  testing does help lay the ground
15:55:58  work for court filings or
15:56:01  filings with a person agency because the tests themselves
15:56:05  are evidence in court and that's a very important ask of
15:56:08  what we do
15:56:11  as well.
>> ERICKA:  Thank you so much
15:56:14  for presenting that information.
Mara, congratulations on
15:56:17  your position.
We are going to move
15:56:20  forward in our agenda.
15:56:25 
There is an opportunity for public comment a little later in our
15:56:29  agenda for those who avail themselves to signing up.
Thank you.

15:56:32 I wanted you to know that I did see your 
15:56:36 hand.
At this time, we are going to
15:56:39  move forward.
Portland Fair
15:56:42  Housing plan,
15:56:46  we have Dr. 
15:56:51 Uma Krishnan from the Portland
15:56:54  Housing Bureau and
15:56:57  Bimal RajBhandary and unfortunately,
15:57:01  Bimal is not able to join us today,
15:57:04  but we have myself here
15:57:08  and Dr. 
15:57:15 Krishnan, the Fair Housing Plan, we'll
15:57:18  cover the state of affordability in
15:57:22  the city with the
15:57:26  forecasted.
We wanted to start off, centering the
15:57:29  fact that the Portland housing has continued
15:57:33  to be a long-standing concern in the city, as
15:57:36  we all know, in a variety
15:57:39  of different spaces.
And we'll
15:57:42  be talking about it again
15:57:46  today.
From the 
15:57:49 2022 Portland insight survey, sent out to
15:57:53  all of Portland to rate the issues, minority issues that
15:57:56  they see important for the city to address
15:57:59  and you can see affordable housing and
15:58:02  homeless services, 
15:58:06 49.5% of respond depths.
So just to
15:58:09  highlight the significance of this issue overall as we move forward
15:58:12  to talking about it in
15:58:15  fair housing context.
15:58:19 
This presentation is intended to share with you all the following
15:58:22  information.
What is the state of housing affordability
15:58:25  in Portland, what is the current level
15:58:28  of housing production?
How many units and what types of units?
15:58:32 
What are the future housing needs by number and unit
15:58:35  types to meet the demands of existing and
15:58:38  forecasted households by income group and what is the
15:58:41  implication of
15:58:46  magnitude of fair housing or needed housing?
With that,
15:58:49  I'll pass it to Dr. 
15:58:54 Krishnan.
15:58:59 
>> DR. KRISHNAN:  I have promised him in good faith that
15:59:02  I will cover his slides and then we
15:59:06  cover the slides that
15:59:11  --
15:59:15  
highlight and again and
15:59:18  again and it hasn't changed and is
15:59:22  as sobering as ever,
15:59:25  one of the affordability 
15:59:28 challenges, housing affordability, rental
15:59:31  and the owner.
And then
15:59:34  the 
15:59:37 presentation, it's the same thing
15:59:40  in different parts, really
15:59:46  communicates the need to have -- housing 
15:59:49 market, affordability crisis, both for owners and
15:59:52  renters, more so for the
15:59:56  renters.
So the first slide we
15:59:59  have is tied to the
16:00:03  median household income, and it's a central 
16:00:07 point, right, half the
16:00:10  incomes -- and the green are that you see
16:00:13  is the median income, the
16:00:17  blue ones go to the
16:00:21  rented household and the
16:00:24  homeowners have twice median
16:00:27  income as the renters
16:00:30  and includes the renters
16:00:34  -- someone who may be
16:00:37  a homeowner and then on the side you see the
16:00:41  median household income by race and ethnicity.
16:00:45 
Again, there's a wide gradation,
16:00:48  looking at white households that make
16:00:52  $77,000 and the -- you don't see it there,
16:00:57  but the city median
16:01:01  household is close to $131,000,
16:01:04  something like that, and Asians,
16:01:07  but if you look at the bottom, the Black
16:01:10  households just making over 
16:01:13 $36,000.
Which is not -- which is --
16:01:17  you know, less than --
16:01:20  and
16:01:23  white households are making twice as much as the Black households
16:01:27  and the renters,
16:01:31  extreme disadvantage.
So the next
16:01:35  slide has to do with the
16:01:38  asking rents, and
16:01:41  the rents -- how you think
16:01:46  -- the rents are high to begin with, even if you
16:01:49  go as far back at 
16:01:53 2013, we are beginning to see 
16:01:56 $1,000 a month and now get
16:01:59  nothing for that amount and
16:02:03  find something that's actually decent in the city 
16:02:06 level, we are close to -- it gets like 
16:02:09 $1600 or $1500 a month and then you look at
16:02:13  the median household income, these rents
16:02:16  are like way above someone's
16:02:20  reach.
And that makes
16:02:23  a house burden --
thank 
16:02:26 you, Niki.
16:02:30 
Hear me out, the median sale price, continue
16:02:34  to climb and climb and climb, and
16:02:37  you're talking the median
16:02:40  home, value,
16:02:43  half a million dollars and that's a lot of 
16:02:46 money.
And which means, you know,
16:02:50  the mortgage payments are high,
16:02:54  and so many impediments that make someone who is not making
16:02:57  as much money to become a homeowner.
And
16:03:00  all this in the last, you know,
16:03:04  in the last 
16:03:07 decade.
Climbing
16:03:10  up from $300,000
16:03:13  and how we get --
16:03:16  to become a homeowner,
16:03:19  talking one needs to have a means of -- one needs to
16:03:23  get to that pipeline of
16:03:26  half a million dollars to become
16:03:29  a homeowner.
So these
16:03:32  -- and the easiest way to
16:03:36  get the message is the once who have
16:03:40  affordability and these are broken down by race
16:03:44  and ethnicity and
16:03:49  every -- you know, and
16:03:53  these are households on 
16:03:56 affordability.
Explain white households, but then right next
16:03:59  to it, the black
16:04:02  households, it's true, none of these --
16:04:06  you look at the 
16:04:09 city, in the
16:04:13  neighborhood areas and housing cannot afford to
16:04:17  live in any of these
16:04:20  neighborhoods.
And Latinx
16:04:23  is slightly better,
16:04:28  affordability, same with Pacific
16:04:31  Islander, and then for the Asian
16:04:35  household, and I think the median
16:04:39  household income, but rental
16:04:42  affordability is a serious issue and divided
16:04:45  by race, it's really clear that
16:04:49  some race versus others.
16:04:54 
So this is the homeownership
16:04:57  affordability, and this is -- 
our neighbors
16:05:03  in the city, more applicable to white
16:05:06  households as well, Black households, whether
16:05:09  you're renting or owning, it's the same.
They just can't
16:05:13  afford to live in any of these 
16:05:16 neighborhoods.
The household -- it could
16:05:19  be -- 
Native American 
16:05:23 households, none of the neighborhoods -- and
16:05:27  Asian households, these
16:05:30  tell the story of what
16:05:33  -- the price of affordable housing is.
So
16:05:37  these are some slides that
16:05:43  sum up the housing analysis
16:05:48 , and in Matt's presentation, he talked
16:05:52  about the price being too high and the
16:05:55  needs being -- this huge 
16:05:58 gap, and it's hard for 
16:06:01 renters, hard for home buyers.
But
16:06:04  the next slides, he
16:06:09  -- 
Housing Needs Analysis and forecasted
16:06:13  supply and looking at the demand side
16:06:16  of the housing market.
And this is -- 
16:06:20 and, again, it's the top concern for
16:06:24  the stakeholders, but the community at
16:06:28  large.
So this one -- the leadership
16:06:32  from PHB,
16:06:35  the planning 
16:06:38 committee, and they are presented as a council
16:06:41  and there was a really healthy 
16:06:45 discussion, you know, acknowledgement of
16:06:48  surprises and how we can -- and this
16:06:51  is not even from those -- 
we're
16:06:55  talking about fair housing,
16:06:58  having you know, just
16:07:01  -- expecting this demand, asking
16:07:04  ourselves why.
16:07:09 
So it actually tries to communicate that the
16:07:13  state market, the housing
16:07:17  Needs Analysis
16:07:21  and housing is --
16:07:24  and then you have the whole
16:07:28  [indiscernible], I can't see that well from here, but
16:07:32  basically -- all the houses,
16:07:37  common boundary, and we need to
16:07:40  make sure that we have [indiscernible],
16:07:43  so jurisdictions that are within the 
16:07:47 city, inventory there, in the capacity, so it's not
16:07:51  just vacant land, but then, you know, the
16:07:54  things like the land and --
16:07:59  
build things that they can and then it goes
16:08:02  -- not just the level -- to be assured
16:08:06  that we can have the housing by having these
16:08:09  things -- and the highest point
16:08:13  and the density of the
16:08:16  existing and expended households.
So it's a 
16:08:20 well-intended goal and consequently -- and this -- we
16:08:23  did all this and did a Housing Needs Analysis
16:08:27  and the conference of 2025 was
16:08:31  adopted back in 2016, I think, and
16:08:34  that is looking to 2035
16:08:37  and now the
16:08:42  [indiscernible], methodology and needs to be
16:08:45  updated every six years.
16:08:48 
And then but the analysis
16:08:52  a floating document for the next
16:08:55  comprehensive plan and then the planners are
16:08:59  already looking to 
16:09:02 2045, thinking 20 years
16:09:05  in the future.
And
16:09:08  this categorization, as
16:09:11  a consequence of the last needs analysis, what came to mind when
16:09:16  I look at the 
16:09:19 zoning, mix-use
16:09:22  and multidwelling zones, sacred, going
16:09:25  in, can't increase it,
16:09:29  really -- the concerns and
16:09:31  there was this long, 
16:09:35 drawn-out process.
16:09:38 
It was -- [indiscernible], the good
16:09:43  news for us, and in a lot of
16:09:46  the others jurisdictions,
16:09:49  fair housing analysis,
16:09:53  allowed for smaller units and little housing.
16:09:57 
So it's a good -- building it, 
16:10:00 but, you know, there is some value
16:10:04  in analysis and
16:10:07  impediments we identified.
So
16:10:10  this is looking at the
16:10:13  -- the level land analysis and the
16:10:16  good news for us as a consequence of all the --
16:10:22  you know, the residential zoning
16:10:26  and the other commercial zone changes and I think they're not even called --
16:10:29 
mix-use zones.
So you
16:10:32  might think be out of
16:10:36  space, that's not the
16:10:39  case.
We're at capacity
16:10:44  [indiscernible] units of good and
16:10:47  I believe it's twice the
16:10:50  -- 
and
16:10:53  mixed use and multidwelling
16:10:57  zones and the capacity for 33,000
16:11:02  units of middle housing and the position of the middle
16:11:06  housing, but the idea
16:11:09  that -- 
it's those types
16:11:13  of units which would be affordable
16:11:16  to rent or to own
16:11:19  and talking about --
16:11:25  use things like that.
16:11:28 
So this one
16:11:31 , looking towards 2045 and needed housing and 
16:11:34 housing, when you say needed housing, you're
16:11:38  talking about household and then
16:11:42  -- the changes and the
16:11:45  ideas, housing --
16:11:48  take away from this, we have a
16:11:52  forecasted number of households,
16:11:55  100,000, and as a change in
16:11:58  methodology, now, this
16:12:01  is -- actually translates into about 
16:12:05 8,000, a little over 8,000 house
16:12:08  olds and a second home
16:12:11  which doesn't function as the primary residence,
16:12:15  so we are actually
16:12:18  looking at 
16:12:21 106,571 needed new housing units
16:12:24  and a lot are
16:12:27  needed by 2025, and then they
16:12:30  added the underproduction
16:12:34  because every year, I remember -- 
16:12:37 [indiscernible], all of them, and
16:12:43  2008, I still remember that,
16:12:47  so then the production and the
16:12:50  actually done pretty good.
Then
16:12:54  the household shows we
16:12:57  have at least 
16:13:00 4600 people without shelter.
So
16:13:05  all this, it looks like by 
16:13:08 2045, we're going to need 
16:13:12 120,000, that many housing units, and you're talking
16:13:15  units.
And this will translate to an annual
16:13:18  protection of 
16:13:21 5,242 units.
And
16:13:25  it's my understanding that
16:13:29  you're looking at -- looking all the way to 
16:13:32 2045 to get the next ten years, I'm hoping
16:13:35  that we can
16:13:38  add 55,000 new units
16:13:42  and get caught up.
And every
16:13:45  time we bring these slides,
16:13:49  we -- draw the
16:13:52  connections to the protected class,
16:13:55  and get excited about the analysis, whatever.
So this
16:13:59  is actually the demographic, demographic
16:14:03  changes.
And what we can expect
16:14:06  in the future in terms of
16:14:09  households he.
So the demand,
16:14:15  of course, 13% increase
16:14:18  in elders, one is 65 or
16:14:22  older.
An increase of 22% are households with
16:14:26  a person with a disability.
The
16:14:29  households with children is expected
16:14:33  to go down.
The homeowners are expected to go
16:14:36  down.
And households with one or two people
16:14:40  at 70%, that's static.
So we can
16:14:45  expect some households,
16:14:49  drastic changes, and these are significant.
As we
16:14:53  look towards building new
16:14:56  units and in terms of, you know,
16:15:00  subsidies or other 
16:15:04 grants, these priorities
16:15:08  for us.
The next 
16:15:11 one, this was a slide that we ended up
16:15:15  having, the council getting a lively discussion,
16:15:18  and it's clear, right, you're talking
16:15:21  125,000 units and of
16:15:24  these, 
16:15:28 53%, 63,405 units have
16:15:31  to be affordable units and these are
16:15:35  households that make between 50
16:15:39  to 80% that potentially will
16:15:43  -- we have to build 120,000 households,
16:15:46  but more than half of them have to be
16:15:49  affordable.
And then this is so
16:15:54  great, the good news, we have this information
16:15:58  and we can work towards -- there was
16:16:01  a lot of discussion around that and
16:16:04  then there was --
16:16:08  listening, the
16:16:11  belief that so many of these
16:16:14  new units need to be
16:16:18  affordable.
This
16:16:22  map kind of brings us back to the supply side, but
16:16:27  how we are producing units the
16:16:30  past years, since 2000.
So you look at 2008,
16:16:33  such a drop.
But then we've done
16:16:36  really well since 2010
16:16:39  to now and then you see
16:16:42  a spike between 2016 and
16:16:45  before 2018 and being
16:16:49  added inclusion housing, a huge rush
16:16:52  to get in.
And not all of them have necessarily been
16:16:57  built.
And then we reach
16:17:01  [indiscernible].
But I think the average
16:17:04  production has been around 5,000
16:17:08  and we'll
16:17:11  keep up the momentum,
16:17:18  we have the capacity and the good
16:17:22  idea what it costs and the
16:17:25  task force asked us to make
16:17:28  sure they get built
16:17:32  and increase the housing
16:17:36  project, and especially the
16:17:40  -- specialty units
16:17:43  on primary lots
16:17:46  [indiscernible].
16:17:51 
>> NIKI:  Thank you, Dr. 
16:17:54 
Dr. Krishnan.
16:17:58 
This lovely slide, how
16:18:01  does the city influence housing development?
There are
16:18:04  three primary molds we
16:18:08  see, and you can see them, the category of
16:18:11  income, come in, regulated affordable 
16:18:14 housing.
So the one way in which
16:18:17  the city can influence housing is by
16:18:20  providing funding.
This happens
16:18:23  for the 60% of
16:18:28  households, the housing bonds,
16:18:31  finance the districts set 
16:18:34 aside and use those funds to build the buildings
16:18:37  and build the units to house folks
16:18:40  in affordability.
The second method is to
16:18:43  offer incentives, so this can be a variety of different
16:18:46  tools, such as tax
16:18:50  exemptions.
We -- a
16:18:53  specific development charge,
16:18:56  zoning bonuses, loans for
16:18:59  finances, attached to financing
16:19:02  and 0% to 120%
16:19:06  AMI.
So a little 
16:19:10 bit, considered the low income affordable.
And
16:19:13  the next is adopt regulations, zoning
16:19:17  and other development codes, not just
16:19:20  affordable housing.
Zoning and
16:19:23  other development codes, like
16:19:27  just referenced.
16:19:30 
The requirements for charges and in
16:19:33  general, infrastructure.
And three primary ways
16:19:36  that we would influence that.
It's not reflected
16:19:40  here too, but ties back into a lot of these
16:19:43  outfits that we've worked at as
16:19:47  well as the presentation given by the
16:19:51  Fair Housing Council of Oregon, things we can do
16:19:54  around prioritization, policies that
16:19:57  landlords-tenant, the loan regulations
16:20:01  that we have like our
16:20:06  -- screening criteria, income
16:20:10  requirements that can all affect access to housing and spend
16:20:13  goes up.
Another extension of that policy, 
16:20:16 in-house development, but in regards to
16:20:19  how people are actually able to get into those 
16:20:23 units.
Finally, we have a summary slide that
16:20:26  we've been doing for these last few 
16:20:30 analyses.
On the left-hand side we have the
16:20:34  reminder of the definition of what is considered a 
16:20:37 barrier, what is considered an impediments, and
16:20:40  that's the language that we use when we bring these fair
16:20:43  housing plans.
I will not read them again.
16:20:47 
It is there for you all.
And then on the right-hand side, we
16:20:50  are looking to identified
16:20:55  those, the analysis summary points that
16:20:58  were drawn for us, and continues
16:21:01  to be a crisis and concern for area 
16:21:04 residents, and this is for African 
16:21:07 Americans, Hispanics, and Pacific Islanders.
The
16:21:12  median household income for homeowners is
16:21:15  just over double of that
16:21:19  renters and as far as the Housing Needs Analysis and
16:21:22  the compliance, this is the --
16:21:26  
5,000 units by 2032, in the next decade.

16:21:29 Over the next 20 years, we'll need over
16:21:32  60,000 units affordable to households earning
16:21:36  between 20 and 80% median household income.
If we
16:21:39  look towards the future, expected needs that will take
16:21:43  us over, we have
16:21:46  118,500 households that renters and/or
16:21:50  owners that fall into the spectrum of 
16:21:55 low-income households.
So today, and then we
16:21:58  will circle back next meeting to review
16:22:02  this once again and starting adding
16:22:05  those policy recommendations conversations
16:22:09  because we have looked at 
16:22:12 this, tied back into the
16:22:16  previous analysis that we -- public comment time.
Never 
16:22:19 mind.
I will leave it there and pause,
16:22:22  so we can respect public
16:22:25  comment time.
Thank you.
16:22:32 
>> ERICKA:  Thank you for those who have indicated they
16:22:36  would like to give public 
16:22:39 testimony.
I have a list of
16:22:44  -- I will ask you to
16:22:47  unmute as I call your name and
16:22:52  give your public testimony.
16:22:55 
First would be Shaun 
16:22:59 Irelan.
16:23:06 
Mr. Irelan, are you with
16:23:09  us?
>> SHAUN:  In the dialogue, in the 
16:23:12 text, I'm not sure if
16:23:15  they would apply to just
16:23:19  the legal department or my goal is to just kind of get a
16:23:22  handle or a feel for moving forward in the next
16:23:26  couple of years with housing and
16:23:30  particularly I'm a publicly housed
16:23:33  tenant, just what kind of
16:23:36  existing support analysis would be available to help
16:23:39  streamline policy or to better improve service 
16:23:43 delivery.
Because there is some service delivery issues that I've experienced, but, you 
16:23:46 know, I want to be a positive advocate and just
16:23:50  see this -- on that interest
16:23:53  moving forward.
Thank you.
>> ERICKA:  Thank you
16:23:58  so much for your comment.
16:24:01 
The next person indicated they would like
16:24:04  to give public testimony is Allison
16:24:08  Sadr Strom,
16:24:12  Allison, if you would please
16:24:15  unmute.
Allison, in the public space.
>> 
16:24:18 Okay.
I see that Allison is not with us tonight.
16:24:23 
So we'll move forward.
16:24:26 
Jay Hubbard.
Feel free, if you're in the
16:24:29  virtual space with us today to 
16:24:32 unmute and give your public
16:24:35  comment.
16:24:40 
At this time, we have no additional people who
16:24:43  indicated they would like to give public
16:24:47  testimony.
And so I wonder if
16:24:50  there's an opportunity, 
16:24:53 quickly, for any questions in regards to the
16:24:57  presentation that we just received.
16:25:00 
I'll start with those in the room and then we can go to
16:25:04  those online.
16:25:07 
Barb?
>> BARBARA:  Hi.
16:25:11 
You -- the number of
16:25:17  [indiscernible] households in Portland versus
16:25:21  white households --
16:25:25  
>> DR. KRISHNAN:  I don't have it here in
16:25:28  my head, but --
16:25:32  
households, [indiscernible] 
households
16:25:36  and the rest of the households
16:25:40  -- and we had over 
16:25:43 70,000 households.
I can get you the 
16:25:48 data.
>> BARBARA:  Thank you.
>> ERICKA:  A
16:25:51  question?
>> Thanks.
I guess what
16:25:54  I'm thinking about,
16:25:57  affordability, what comes to mind is
16:26:01  segregation.
And when you have the zoning
16:26:04  capacity by the slide, having
16:26:08  --
capacity,
16:26:12  whether we can foster --
16:26:15  or if -- the distribution -- 
16:26:20 displace in the future,
16:26:27  distribution of -- so zoning
16:26:30  capacity and foster increasing -- is that something that's
16:26:34  been
16:26:37  analyzed or --
16:26:40  
>> DR. KRISHNAN:  Great question.
16:26:43 
Actually, [indiscernible]
16:26:49  some other places to have the
16:26:53  -- 
colored 
16:26:57 households. 
>> We did.
>> DR. KRISHNAN:  Yes, but
16:27:01  the -- changed and dispersed everywhere, so
16:27:04  the household is trying
16:27:08  to do -- bring back
16:27:12  [indiscernible], which was -- 
and
16:27:16  the zoning, zoning capacity
16:27:21  this issue, who -- what kinds
16:27:24  of houses -- that -- all
16:27:28  about where people Biltmore and
16:27:31  they could built in Central City, they
16:27:34  could build here, these places, and
16:27:38  the mixed-use zones are all over the 
16:27:42 city, and then the other thing that
16:27:45  has been happening, definitely adds to
16:27:48  the cost of how much -- 
subsidized
16:27:51  on the ground is our location policy
16:27:55  and now
16:27:58  it's a high opportunity 
16:28:02 area, schools and --
16:28:05  so the
16:28:08  segregation in this analysis is
16:28:11  like not a useful -- helpful but
16:28:14  as we think about the 
16:28:18 future, but I think we combine that
16:28:21  with the insights we
16:28:24  get from the
16:28:27  -- 
because that's how to the actual market.

16:28:31 So I think these two things could go
16:28:34  together really well.
In the
16:28:37  future.
>> Thanks.
>> ERICKA:  Thank you.

16:28:40 I see a hand from
16:28:43  Mara.
>> MARA:  Thank you.
Yeah.

16:28:46 I was going to chime in.
I do some work on the
16:28:49  affordable housing side of things as well.
Like
16:28:53  I'm on the Metro bond
16:28:57  housing oversight committee and how that is being 
16:29:00 spent, $700 million in affordable housing that we
16:29:03  approved in 2014 and that is probably
16:29:06  where some of the numbers are coming from in the last ten years in terms of 
16:29:09 production, and that's like a really strategic, like 
16:29:13 30-year plan almost that's been put
16:29:16  into plan to even create those units.
16:29:19 
So that's why it is heartbreaking to think
16:29:22  about this strategy that goes in to convincing property
16:29:26  developers to build affordable 
16:29:29 housing, and how much it takes,
16:29:32  like a weird policy gymnastics and lots 
16:29:35 of, you know, handouts, for
16:29:39  lack of a better word, to get people to come
16:29:42  here to build.
And then to stay affordable over
16:29:45  a period of time.
And I'm just going to
16:29:48  chime in and say, one of my mentors taught me a
16:29:52  long time ago, no matter how much I resisted is that
16:29:55  poverty is not a protected class in and of itself, right?
16:29:58 
And I think that's something that really sits
16:30:02  with me because we know that a lot of
16:30:05  the actual protected class do sit in poverty or they're really
16:30:08  impacted when something like the housing 
16:30:12 market, you know, implodes or becomes catastrophic and it's
16:30:15  like -- that's what I really am looking forward to
16:30:19  and what I see here is this new
16:30:22  way of trying to hold people accountable for the
16:30:26  systemic, you know, impact and as part of my
16:30:29  onboarding of fair 
16:30:33 housing, they actually had me read a
16:30:36  book, "the Color of 
16:30:39 Law," these are policies that are intentional, they were put in 
16:30:42 place, and they did the job that they were designed to do, and
16:30:46  now we have to design policy to get ourselves
16:30:49  out of this mess.
We're not going to rent
16:30:52  our way out.
We're not going to test our way out.
16:30:55 
We have to change the system itself to stop
16:30:59  segregating people by their housing which then
16:31:02  segregates them by class and all sorts of other
16:31:05  things.
So anyway, just chiming in there.
But I'm
16:31:08  looking forward, hopefully, to the future of
16:31:12  fair housing in Portland and in our state, so I hope
16:31:15  we can really take a look at all --
16:31:18  
especially, too, Mr. Irelan, talking about
16:31:22  affordable housing, that certainly is an area that's ripe
16:31:25  because that's $700 million was just spent and so
16:31:28  a lot of that is for new developers
16:31:32  coming into our area that have never
16:31:36  built here before and those folks should be monitored and watched to
16:31:39  make sure they are following the law as well as producing
16:31:43  lots of units for us, right?
16:31:47 
Lots of boxes but also follow the laws
16:31:50  once you build them.
I'll stop there.
16:31:54 
>> ERICKA:  Thank you so much for those 
16:31:57 comments.
16:32:01 
Stephanie Grayce.
>> STEPHANIE:  I'm
16:32:04  a staff attorney for the law clinic
16:32:07  at Lewis & Clark and one issue I'm seeing over
16:32:11  and over is sort of the intersection here, and I posted a
16:32:14  comment in the chat.
The data on this
16:32:17  is consistently clear that we're talking
16:32:20  about a lot of incentives that are fantastic and I think
16:32:24  they're spot-on, but seeing the implementation 
16:32:27 and, you know, I think Mara articulated
16:32:31  it well that poverty is not a protected class.
But
16:32:34  we start looking
16:32:39  at, you know, which communities are most impacted by poverty, and I'm
16:32:42  going to step into sort of my realm, which is the
16:32:45  formerly incarcerated community, and we
16:32:49  know that that is a disproportionate impact on
16:32:52  our BIPOC communities and people of color, so we start to see
16:32:56  the trickle down impact of
16:32:59  that.
For a lot of people formerly
16:33:03  incarcerated, buying is their only option because they're not a protected
16:33:06  class when it comes to renting.
Even if we have
16:33:09  the protections in place that landlords can only look
16:33:13  back five years within an agreement with the
16:33:16  City of Portland, it doesn't exist everywhere in Oregon, so
16:33:20  they're looking at buying, and then they can't.
16:33:23 
We can talk to their access to employment and other
16:33:26  things, but we have things intersecting where
16:33:29  they are protecting -- 
they are affecting people
16:33:33  of color in ways that, you know, we can't
16:33:36  get at specifically but indirectly.
And I think
16:33:39  we need to start having that conversation
16:33:43  of how that permeates all of
16:33:46  these avenues and how do
16:33:49  we better address that
16:33:52  because the issue is just compounding
16:33:55  because we have all the research and we have
16:33:59  all these suggestions and the implementation
16:34:02  isn't happening yet and what we're seeing
16:34:05  is more and more people becoming
16:34:08  affected and a disparate impact and people without the
16:34:11  resources that they need.
And I would like for us
16:34:14  to figure out -- this is my big,
16:34:18  hairy, audacious goal, to figure out how we
16:34:21  do this better so that we find ways to
16:34:25  bring us out of this
16:34:28  system that have oppressed so
16:34:31  many Oregonians for so long.
16:34:34 
>> ERICKA:  Thank you so much for the work that you do, 
16:34:39 Stephanie, and for your comments today.
Are there
16:34:42  any additional comments in the
16:34:45  chat?
16:34:49 
I would agree that there is a joint
16:34:52  responsibility, not just housing,
16:34:56  but the opportunity to address the income
16:34:59  issues that we have.
It's ironic that we're talking about
16:35:04  housing for a city where hundreds of
16:35:07  folks in the Black community were
16:35:10  raised which
16:35:13  minimizing generational wealth and
16:35:17  those families that Black families cannot
16:35:20  afford to live where their
16:35:24  grandmothers owned property.
I hope that our bureau and leadership in
16:35:27  the state and the city are thinking about ways that
16:35:30  we can coordinate efforts so thank 
16:35:34 you, Stephanie, for your comments.
Are there
16:35:37  other thoughts or any questions around
16:35:40  the presentation that we just heard?
16:35:44 
Yes.
16:35:48 
>> DR. KRISHNAN:  I've been thinking about it and
16:35:51  I don't want to -- with my
16:35:54  friend, she
16:35:57  is listening, but I thought -- 
come
16:36:00  your way and she shared
16:36:03  this, that most of
16:36:06  us sitting --
16:36:11 
really becoming -- they are not 
16:36:15 unaffordable yet, they are
16:36:18  -- 
and the [indiscernible]
16:36:22  Tokyo, and I thought
16:36:25  -- it interested me because
16:36:28  I believe affordability is not an issue in the 
16:36:32 city, speaking from memory, and I could share the
16:36:36  link, it's just that they build and they
16:36:40  build.
But they don't give up -- 
willing
16:36:43  to give up a cultural shift,
16:36:46  they would [indiscernible].
And I'm not
16:36:49  sure we could go there, but it's like
16:36:53  -- if we could talk
16:36:56  about it and
16:36:59  -- not only changes but
16:37:03  a cultural shift that
16:37:06  we just --
16:37:09  and then you have others where I believe
16:37:12  the -- most of the units are
16:37:16  closed to some and --
16:37:19  but it really got me thinking that if we need --
16:37:23  we're going to need 120,000 units,
16:37:26  you know, we really need [indiscernible].
>> ERICKA:  I 
16:37:29 agree.
Indeed.
Thank you
16:37:32  all so much.
Barb, one additional 
16:37:36 comment?
>> BARBARA:  A very quick comment.
I need
16:37:40  to bring into this again the role
16:37:43  of the real estate agents and which I've been a part,
16:37:47  licensed for over 20 
16:37:50 years, finally licensed in
16:37:53  [indiscernible] and Oregon.
16:37:58 
We don't look at numbers
16:38:01  straightforward, real estate has been -- for decades
16:38:04  in how to put people in housing where there's a will, and we
16:38:08  work with people.
And it's
16:38:11  such a huge section of the population,
16:38:14  soap I just wanted to
16:38:17  say, again,
16:38:21  active with the community in
16:38:24  real estate.
I've been meeting --
16:38:27  what they're doing with what
16:38:31  they need to -- in our
16:38:34  discussions.
My opinion.
And
16:38:37  -- thank you.
>> ERICKA:  All right.
With that, they're going to
16:38:41  move forward.
We just have about 20
16:38:44  minutes for our last agenda item.
I want to bring
16:38:47  to your attention, we are going to
16:38:51  enter into a discussion around this
16:38:54  committee and how it continues to function as we move
16:38:57  forward, so I just want to
16:39:01  share just a brief background in regards
16:39:04  to in the fall of '22,
16:39:08  this group voted to create
16:39:11  two subcommittees that would focus
16:39:14  on particular groups of work relevant to
16:39:17  fair housing.
The committee were
16:39:22  the policy and best practices.
The committee consisted of
16:39:25  only three members.
Those folks
16:39:28  were interested in policy options and fair
16:39:31  housing best practices.
The second committee was
16:39:34  the community engagement committee.
Currently, two 
16:39:38 members, with a focus on community
16:39:42  engagement and since the inception of
16:39:46  both of those
16:39:49  committees in '22, a lack of a
16:39:53  quorum and participation and really developing a strategy, a work
16:39:56  plan for the function and scope of those
16:40:00  two committees.
And as of this
16:40:03  year, one member of the community
16:40:07  engagement subcommittee has submitted their resignation.
16:40:10 
So we are looking
16:40:13  to have a
16:40:18  recommendation from the body, the
16:40:21  public Housing Bureau
16:40:26 , asked us to move forward with or without the
16:40:29  subcommittees, but we wanted to offer an opportunity to
16:40:33  this committee to have a discussion
16:40:36  around potential
16:40:40  sun setting around those two subcommittees.
Did you have anything
16:40:44  you wanted to add before we entered our 
16:40:47 discussion?
>> I will open the floor
16:40:50  if there are potential questions
16:40:54  or there are comments.
I would
16:40:58  love to hear from others
16:41:01  on the FHAC who
16:41:04  have not contributed to the conversation today, so
16:41:08  if you have an opportunity to turn on your video and engage with
16:41:12  us, your voice matters in this
16:41:15  conversation.
16:41:22 
Thank you so much.
Any thoughts
16:41:24  from councilmembers?



16:41:33 

Mara, we'll go to you first.

16:41:37 >> MARA:  I don't want to take up too much space, but yeah, I just wanted
16:41:40  to say I was on one of the previous subcommittees and I liked
16:41:43  the idea of them.
They were created
16:41:47  because there were a lot of energetic period during that
16:41:50  iteration of FHAC that wanted to get to 
16:41:53 work, but then we kind of fell out because of the changes that were
16:41:56  going on around the goals of like fair housing 
16:41:59 federally, I suppose.
So I am excited to maybe do
16:42:02  some subcommittees moving forward, especially with all the new members
16:42:06  that we have.
It just seems like
16:42:09  our committee work was -- we went into it thinking that we'd
16:42:12  come up with the idea once we got 
16:42:15 there, but I love the idea that we could come up with something together
16:42:18  as a new team.
I'm definitely open to
16:42:21  the idea of
16:42:24  subcommittees in the future.
>> ERICKA:  Absolutely.
16:42:28 
It makes a lot of sense to create the strategy
16:42:31  around the scope of the group to determine where your
16:42:34  needs are as we move forward.
That's a great 
16:42:37 thought.
Thank you, Mara.
Caroline,
16:42:41  I see your hand.
>> CAROLINE: 
16:42:44  That sort of answers my question.
I was wondering if there was
16:42:47  any documentation or subcommittee charters available
16:42:50  to see what was originally formulated and also, I'm particularly
16:42:53  interested in the policies and best practices
16:42:56  subcommittee, particularly thinking about how many other
16:43:00  cities are going to through some similar affordability challenges
16:43:03  and wondering what resources -- and I'm sure
16:43:08  there's plenty of staff in the PHB that has
16:43:11  looked into it, but if there's
16:43:14  any investigation of ongoing best practices work in
16:43:17  partner cities that we could, you know, not have to
16:43:20  reinvent the wheel around, that would be really interesting to
16:43:24  work on.
But I'm not sure if that's falling in with
16:43:27  the intentional scope.
So my question is
16:43:31  whether there's any past minutes
16:43:35  or documents for records.
16:43:40 
>> NIKI:  Yes, it's essentially going to say a
16:43:43  quick blurb about what you 
16:43:47 said, to investigate around policies
16:43:50  and best practices out in other
16:43:54  areas that would then get incorporated back
16:43:57  to community 
16:44:00 engagement, you know, much further than
16:44:04  the community engagement around fair
16:44:07  housing.
At this time, when these
16:44:10  were created, kind of
16:44:14  indicated, had the fair housing plan
16:44:17  outlined as alternative analysis.
I can send
16:44:20  those to you.
I have some old survey results and some meeting
16:44:23  notes that I can send to you.
But they did
16:44:26  not get formal charters in their
16:44:29  establishment.
They weren't able to
16:44:32  clarify in that statement.
16:44:37 
>> CAROLINE:  Thank you.
>> ERICKA:  From all of the things I 
16:44:40 have read the last few months and engaging
16:44:43  the strategy and the subcommittee work, there hasn't
16:44:47  been enough focus, I think, with the
16:44:50  collective wisdom and passion, as
16:44:54  Mara stated, of the
16:44:57  whole body that there's productivity in
16:45:00  the work moving forward.
I'm sure many of you are
16:45:04  functioning in several areas and being
16:45:08  thoughtful and considerate of your time and efforts and creating a path
16:45:12  that leads to the best collaboration and
16:45:15  information.
Are there other
16:45:18  thoughts?
Any thoughts?
>>
16:45:22  I guess I just -- to me, it's like
16:45:25  -- it's something that's interesting to
16:45:28  me, but I don't feel,
16:45:31  right now, I don't have the sense
16:45:36  that --
16:45:40  
[indiscernible], it's just something
16:45:42  that's not -- you know, independent
16:45:46  of other committees throughout the
16:45:49  city or something that's
16:45:54  needed, it's great, and 
16:45:58 needed.
I just don't -- I don't know if that's the 
16:46:02 case.
>> ERICKA:  Very
16:46:06  fair, thank you.
16:46:11 
>> BARBARA:  Unfortunately, we
16:46:15  did have a lot of -- didn't have a lot of information that came
16:46:18  out of -- the meeting, so I -- 
but
16:46:21  I did want to report to the larger 
16:46:26 body, I worked with --
16:46:29  I am confused -- well, first of 
16:46:33 all, my opinion, this should not have a subcommittee,
16:46:36  frankly, but I disagree
16:46:40  with the premise that
16:46:43  was proposed and wanted information and
16:46:47  turned into a different situation for
16:46:50  me [indiscernible].
So
16:46:53  I was thinking, the larger body
16:46:56  really feel with some decision
16:46:59  that I am confused because of what
16:47:03  fair housing is.
Is around fair housing.
16:47:06 
Are we talking about affordability?
Is
16:47:10  that what it is?
Are we
16:47:13  talking about preventing
16:47:16  -- mentioning people of 
16:47:19 color, like myself, from
16:47:25  integrating?
That isn't necessarily 
16:47:28 affordability.
That's just no one wants to take
16:47:31  my offer because I'm a person of color.
16:47:35 
It's very different being able to 
16:47:38 afford.
So I would really hope
16:47:42  we could establish what we are talking about when
16:47:45  you say fair housing.
[Indiscernible] that's my understanding.
16:47:48 
>> ERICKA:  That's a very strong statement, you feel as
16:47:51  though your opinion is not taken because you're a person of
16:47:56  color.
That's a strong 
16:47:59 allegation, and I'm sorry, I
16:48:02  apologize, with my understanding
16:48:05  and have been
16:48:11  [indiscernible].
I wonder, though, in reviewing what the
16:48:15  purpose of this particular committee
16:48:19  stated, this committee is tasked to review the
16:48:23  regional fair housing planning process
16:48:26  and implementation of the fair housing plan and give
16:48:29  recommendations in regards to that, to 
16:48:33 PHB.
So I'd like your -- 
16:48:36 again, if based on your
16:48:39  comment, where kind of these
16:48:42  ideas and, you know, great
16:48:45  passion, where they fit within
16:48:49  the scope of what this committee is for.
It
16:48:52  sounds like there might be a little bit of a 
16:48:55 disconnect, but that doesn't mean there can't be a 
16:48:59 pivot, but it seems there needs to be some
16:49:02  work around the continual scope of
16:49:05  this committee and how it views recommendations to PHB
16:49:09  in regards to the fair housing plan.
16:49:12 
Are there other thoughts
16:49:16  online?
I see several
16:49:20  FHAC members in the meeting.
Again, your contribution to this
16:49:23  meeting is important so we have the collective brain trust
16:49:27  of all of you.
Are there others online who would
16:49:30  want to give their thoughts
16:49:33  in regards to
16:49:40  sun setting the committees and rethinking,
16:49:43  restructuring scope and how you
16:49:46  move forward?
16:49:55 
>> DUNG:  I'll just pop in.
This
16:49:59  is Dung, FHAC member.
16:50:02 
I did not participate in the 
16:50:06 subcommittee, so I feel like I don't have a strong
16:50:09  opinion as far as whether they should continue or not.
I think that
16:50:13  there is a place for them as the
16:50:16  need arises and it seemed
16:50:19  there was, you know, some
16:50:23  challenges with, you know, with what the
16:50:26  focus was for the subcommittees.
But,
16:50:30  again, as someone
16:50:33  had mentioned earlier, there's newer members,
16:50:36  fresh energy, new perspectives.
So that could
16:50:39  revive either some new subcommittees or the two
16:50:46  subcommittees that are already in existence, and I think it could
16:50:50  go either way.
I'm open to it.
And also, I think we
16:50:54  all kind of mentioned that before just a matter
16:50:57  of different people's
16:51:00  capacities and ability to
16:51:03  participate and so that might be something
16:51:06  that is reconsidered, again, as well, you know, what
16:51:09  are the time expectations and
16:51:13  commitments for the subcommittees and so -- yeah, that's my
16:51:16  opinion for now.
Thanks.
>> ERICKA:  Thank 
16:51:19 you.
Is there any others,
16:51:22  any other FHAC members online
16:51:26  with thoughts or comments?
I will
16:51:29  tell you, again, sitting
16:51:32  in the role of facilitator,
16:51:35  mediator, I'm hearing this may need to be an 
16:51:39 adjustment, right, at least to what would be
16:51:43  a recalibration of skill
16:51:46  assessments and thinking about the things that
16:51:50  are important to this group, scope and function and the
16:51:53  role that PHB
16:51:56  has forward for this group
16:52:00  and reassessing.
That's what I'm hearing from many
16:52:03  of you.
If there aren't any further questions,
16:52:06  I wonder, again, that is what I'm hearing,
16:52:10  a consensus from this group, of course, open to --
16:52:13  if they think it is necessary and if there is
16:52:16  a need and if there's an
16:52:19  opportunity for clearer definition of
16:52:22  scope of work.
16:52:34 
Well, with that, we have done well, and
16:52:37  we are just about eight minutes shy
16:52:40  of our time, and we can give that back to you
16:52:45  all.
Thank you for your investment, for your
16:52:49  advocacy.
Thank you for calling to the attention
16:52:52  of what really is fair housing and how we help
16:52:55  our city leaders, how
16:52:59  we help our government to --
16:53:02  how we do better.
And not create
16:53:06  further harm in our 
16:53:09 city.
So I want to bid you a good 
16:53:12 night.
Thank you for your investment of time, and