HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet - 2025-07-15 07/11/2025 Agenda Items 7.2 and 7.3 have been added to Council Business
reconsidering Ordinances 2958 and 2961 enacted on 07/01/2025
AGENDA
r‘c"-
OCITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING
�� Tuesday, July 15, 2025
3:00 p.m.
O City Hall Council Chamber- 3rd Floor
p4EGO2 380 A Avenue, Lake Oswego, OR 97034
Staff Contact: Kim Vermillion, kvermillion@lakeoswego.city
Virtual Access ADA Accommodation Requests Translation Services
This meeting will be held in lakeoswego.city/accommodation Traduccion o interpretacion
person.To participate remotely, 503-635-0282; Relay 711 i* M i
please email the City Recorder by Please allow four business days to €ems
noon the day of the meeting. process your request. 503-534-5738
This meeting will be livestreamed on the City's YouTube Channel and at lakeoswego.city.
The meeting will also be broadcasted live on Tualatin Valley Community TV;check tvctv.org for details.
1. CALL TO ORDER, CITY COUNCIL
2. ROLL CALL
3. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
4. PUBLIC COMMENT
The purpose of Public Comment is to allow community members to present information or raise an
issue regarding items not on the agenda or regarding agenda items that do not include a public
hearing.A time limit of three minutes per individual shall apply. Public Comment will not exceed
thirty minutes in total, unless changed by the Mayor. If you are unable to attend the meeting and
prefer to provide public comment in writing, by phone or electronically, please email the City
Recorder by noon the day of the meeting.
5. CONSENT AGENDA
The Consent Agenda allows the City Council to consider items that require no discussion.
An item may only be discussed if it is pulled from the Consent Agenda.
The City Council makes one motion covering all items included on the Consent Agenda.
5.1 Resolution 25-36, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego
Authorizing an IGA with Broadband User Groups.
Respect, Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 25-36.
6. ITEMS REMOVED FROM CONSENT AGENDA
7. COUNCIL BUSINESS
7.1 Resolution 25-37, Authorizing the Execution and Delivery of the WIFIA Loan with
the EPA for the Wastewater Treatment Facility Project in an Amount not to exceed
$123,480,000.
Motion: Move to authorize the Execution and Delivery of the WIFIA Loan with the
EPA for the Wastewater Treatment Facility Project in an amount not to exceed
$123,480,000.
7. 2 Ordinance 2958, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel
Consisting of 0.44 acres at 5450 Kenny street; Declaring City of Lake Oswego
Zoning of R-10, Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(a-c); and Removing the Territory from
Certain Districts (AN 25-0001).
Motion: Move to Reconsider.
7. 3 Ordinance 2961, An Ordinance Annexing to the City of Lake Oswego One Parcel
Consisting Of 0.55 Acres At 6210 Lakeview Blvd; Declaring City of Lake Oswego
Zoning of R-10, Pursuant to LOC 50.01.004.5(A-C); and Removing the Territory
from Certain Districts (AN 25-0002).
Motion: Move to Reconsider.
8. STUDY SESSION
8.1 Fair Housing Policy and Education (LU 25-0001)
8.2 Polling Update on South Shore Fire Station
9. INFORMATION FROM COUNCIL
10. REPORTS OF OFFICERS
11. ADJOURNMENT, CITY COUNCIL
Respect, Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 3
12. CALL TO ORDER, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (LORA)
13. BOARD BUSINESS
13.1 North Anchor Update
14. ADJOURNMENT, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY (LORA)
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO Box 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
5.1
,A,A E 0 COUNCIL REPORT
vii111111 o
OREGO\-\
Subject: Resolution 25-36, Authorizing the City Manager to sign the revised
Intergovernmental Agreement for the Broadband User's Group (BUG)
Meeting Date: July 15, 2025 Staff Member: Megan Phelan, Assistant City Manager
Report Date: June 11, 2025 Department: City Manager's Office
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑ Motion ❑ Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑X Resolution ❑X Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments:
❑ Council Direction
❑ Consent Agenda
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 25-36, Authorizing the City Manager to sign the
revised Intergovernmental Agreement for the Broadband User's Group (BUG)
Recommended Language for Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 25-36
Project/ Issue Relates To: Not Applicable.
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): Does City Council want to continue
participating in the Broadband User's Group?
❑Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑X Not Applicable
BACKGROUND
The Broadband Users Group (BUG) is a collaborative partnership among local governments and
public agencies designed to enhance digital infrastructure, streamline technology services, and
share resources more efficiently. By working together, participants gain access to shared
expertise, reduce costs through joint investments, improve service reliability, and ensure
equitable access to broadband and technology tools across communities. This cooperation
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
empowers agencies to respond more effectively to evolving public needs, leverage collective
bargaining power, and support long-term regional connectivity goals.
The City of Lake Oswego has been a participant of BUG since it started in 1996. Current BUG
participants include the Cities of Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City,
Lake Oswego, North Plains, Sherwood, Tigard, Tualatin and Banks Fire District, Clean Water
Services, Metropolitan Area Communications Commission,Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreation
District,Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue District, Washington County Consolidated
Communications Agency, and Washington County.
DISCUSSION
The BUG partnership intended to use the Public Communications Network (PCN) that was
defined in the existing cable television franchise to facilitate the connectivity. The term
"Broadband" in the name was a reference to the technology at the time built into the cable
modems for providing data connectivity, and not the more current use of the word that is
commonly used to refer to high speed internet to homes and businesses. The BUG is not
involved in providing internet connectivity to anyone but the partner agencies.
Over the years the services shared by the group have evolved. In addition to the original core
connectivity and internet access, the group now also facilitates cooperation in use of
geographic information systems (GIS) and the data related to GIS.
The partnership continues to provide better services at lower costs than the partners could
achieve on their own. The majority of the benefits of BUG are intangible—chief among them
are reliability, redundancy, and resiliency.
ALTERNATIVE
The City could withdraw from the BUG by giving at least 180 days' notice and procure IT
services on its own, but we would lose the redundancy and benefits of being in a cooperative
arrangement for security and internet services.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City's BUG fees for 2025-26 are approximately $33,000 a year. This covers both our
connectivity share and our participating in the GIS coordination.
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt Resolution 25-36, Authorizing the City Manager to sign the revised Intergovernmental
Agreement for the Broadband User's Group (BUG)
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 25-36
2. Exhibit A
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
RESOLUTION 25-36
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER TO SIGN AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT WITH THE BROADBAND USERS GROUP
WHEREAS,the Cities of Banks, Beaverton, Cornelius, Forest Grove, Hillsboro, King City, Lake Oswego,
North Plains, Sherwood, Tigard,Tualatin and Banks Fire District, Clean Water Services, Metropolitan
Area Communications Commission,Tualatin Hills Parks and Recreation District,Tualatin Valley Fire and
Rescue District,Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency, and Washington County, are
parties to an intergovernmental agreement known as the Broadband Users Group Intergovernmental
Agreement ("Agreement") which is currently scheduled to termination on December 31, 2025; and
WHEREAS,the parties to the Agreement desire to replace the Agreement with a revised Broadband
Users Group Intergovernmental Agreement in order to continue to enjoy mutual benefits to
collaboration and cooperation in the areas of information technology.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED,that the City Manager is authorized to execute the new
intergovernmental agreement with the Broadband Users Group, attached hereto as Exhibit A
Approved and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego at a regular meeting held on the
15th day of July, 2025.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
EXCUSED:
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kim Ono Vermillion, Interim City Recorder
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney
EXHIBIT A
INTERGOVERNMENTAL AGREEMENT
This Intergovernmental Agreement ("Agreement") is made by and between the City of Banks,the
City of Beaverton, the City of Cornelius,the City of Forest Grove, the City of Hillsboro, the City of
King City, the City of Lake Oswego, the City of North Plains, the City of Sherwood, the City of
Tigard, the City of Tualatin, Banks Fire District, Clean Water Services, Metropolitan Area
Communications Commission,Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District,Tualatin Valley Fire and
Rescue District, Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency, and Washington
County, referred to individually as a "Party," and, collectively, as the "Parties" to this Agreement.
RECITALS
Whereas, the Parties agree that there are mutual benefits to collaboration and cooperation in
the areas of information and technology;
Whereas, the Parties have established a history of successful cooperation in these areas; and
Whereas, the Parties desire to continue this cooperation.
Therefore, the Parties agree as follows:
TERMS AND CONDITIONS
1. START AND END DATES.
The effective date of this Agreement is January 1, 2026 ("Effective Date"). The term of
the Agreement shall begin on the Effective Date and end on January 1, 2031. ("Term")
The Term of the Agreement may be terminated earlier or extended as provided in this
Agreement.
2. PURPOSE
2.1. The purpose of the Agreement is to foster collaboration between the Parties
related to the use of information and technology. The collaboration may include
sharing technology infrastructure, technology services, or expertise related to
technology. Nothing in this Agreement is intended to create an
intergovernmental entity described in ORS 190.010(5).
3. DEFINITIONS
3.1. Charter: A document defining the purpose, authority, and membership of a Work
Group.
3.2. Full Partner: A Party that is a voting member of the Governing Body.
3.3. Governing Board (GB): The board that fulfills the responsibilities set forth in
section 5 of the Agreement.
3.4. Lead Administrative Partner:The Party that maintains and operates shared assets
and manages the administrative and financial functions associated with this
Agreement.
Page 1 of 14
3.5. Member Agency: A Party that is a non-voting member of the Governing Board.
Member Agencies are typically smaller agencies who benefit from the
collaboration provided by the agreement but lack the financial or operational
resources to be a Full Partner.
3.6. Work Group: A group that oversees the development and operation of specific
services provided to the Parties. Work Groups may be formed permanently to
provide ongoing services or may be temporary to complete a specific task or
purpose.
3.7. Written Notice: A notice sent via mail or email that is required to be sent under
the Agreement.
4. GOVERNING BOARD
4.1. The GB shall be composed of the chief executive officer or designee of each Full
Partner and Member Agency. Only representatives from Full Partner may vote on
matters related to the implementation of the Agreement.
4.2. The GB is responsible for:
4.2.1. Providing strategic guidance and direction.
4.2.2. Approving the budget including fees and dues to be charged to the Parties.
4.2.2.1. Proposed budgets should be made available to Parties with
sufficient time to review before the decision is to be made.
4.2.2.2. Budgets should be sufficient to cover the expenses associated with
the services provided to Parties and develop a reserve sufficient to cover
replacement costs of BUG owned equipment. The Lead Administrative Partner
shall serve as fiscal agent for the reserve fund created
4.2.3. Approving the addition or expulsion of a Party.
4.2.4. Approving the selection of the Lead Administrative Partners.
4.2.5. Forming Work Groups and approving the charters of Work Groups.
4.2.6. Supporting and empowering Work Groups to:
4.2.6.1. Deliver the services provided to the Parties.
4.2.6.2. Complete other duties as assigned by the GB.
4.3. The GB will adopt rules governing how it fulfills its responsibilities including if and
how those responsibilities may be delegated.
4.4. Approval of budget, fees, special assessments, rules, procedures, and
responsibility delegation will:
4.4.1. Require a majority vote of Governing Board members representing Full
Partners.
4.4.2. Be presented with sufficient notice for Parties.
Page 2 of 14
5. RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE PARTIES.
5.1. The responsibilities of the Parties under this Agreement include:
5.1.1. Participating in GB and Work Groups as appropriate.
5.1.2. Paying all fees and dues in a timely manner.
5.1.3. Abiding by any rules, policies, or guidelines developed and approved by
the Work Groups tasked with providing services related to this Agreement.
6. COMPLIANCE WITH APPLICABLE LAWS.
Each Party shall comply with all applicable federal, state and local laws; and rules and
regulations on non-discrimination in employment because of race, color, ancestry,
national origin, religion, sex, marital status, age, medical condition or disability. In
addition,each Party agrees to comply with all local,state and federal ordinances,statutes,
laws and regulations that are applicable to the responsibilities provided under this
Agreement.
7. RECITALS.
The recitals above are incorporated herein as if fully set forth.
8. TERMINATION, WITHDRAWAL, EXPULSION, AND OWNERSHIP.
8.1. Each Party owns an undivided common interest in assets including equipment and
software purchased and installed for common use after January 1st, 2026, and in
all unexpended and unencumbered funds held by the Lead Administrative Partner
related to this Agreement.
8.2. A Party may withdraw from the Agreement by giving at least 180 days written
notice of its intent to withdraw to the Lead Administrative Partner ("Withdrawing
Party"). The written notice must include a transition plan developed by the
Withdrawing Party to allow the orderly and coordinated ending of all related
services. The Withdrawing Party is responsible for the transition plan that must
include: 1) an inventory listing each related interconnectivity requirement with
certification that each is addressed prior to disconnection, 2) a written summary
of a meeting with the Lead Administrative Partner to review termination
requirements, and 3) a timeline for withdrawing based on that meeting with the
Lead Administrative Partner.
8.3. The 180-day notice begins upon receipt of the complete written notification by
the Lead Administrative Partner. After the notice period, the withdrawal will not
be effective until the Withdrawing Party has paid the full fee for the entire fiscal
year in which its request becomes final. Upon withdrawal,the Withdrawing Party
is not entitled to a refund of any amounts for start-up, maintenance, or continuing
costs, whether or not any amount is unencumbered or unexpended. Upon
withdrawal, the Withdrawing Party has no financial obligations to the other
Parties for future dues but forfeits any claims for goods or services purchased (or
held for future purchases) under this Agreement.
Page 3of14
8.4. A Party may withdraw without written notice or payment of the full fee as
provided in sections 9.2-9.3 only with the written consent of all other Parties.
8.5. A Party's membership may be terminated for default if any Party fails to (a) pay
dueswithin 90 days of being assessed; or (b) acts in any manner inconsistent with
the duties and obligations of a Party, which include violating the rules and
procedures outlined by a Work Group or GB and does not act to correct the
violation in a timely manner ("Defaulting Party").The GB may consider and decide
that a Defaulting Party will be terminated for default if one or more of the above
conditions are met.The GB's decision shall specify the reasons for the termination
for default. Upon the GB deciding on termination, the GB, upon not less than 10
days' written notice to the Defaulting Party, which includes a copy of the decision,
shall hold a meeting, special or general, to consider whether or not termination
will best serve the interests of the other Parties. At such meeting, the Defaulting
Party shall be provided an opportunity of not less than 30 minutes to address the
GB and respond to the allegations. A vote to terminate for default under this
section requires 75% of the Partner GB members. The Defaulting Party will be
excluded from the 75%calculation. A termination pursuant to this section shall be
effective immediately, and the Defaulting Party that was voted to be terminated
shall be treated as a Withdrawing Party as defined in section 9.2 for all other
purposes.
8.6. This Agreement may be terminated upon mutual agreement of all Parties. At the
time of termination, all Parties are entitled to a share of the proceeds of the sale
of shared assets including equipment and software and any unexpended and
unencumbered funds held for use under this Agreement in the proportion as set
by the GB at the time of termination.
9. CHANGES.
Modifications to this Agreement are valid only if made in writing and approved by 75% of
the Parties.
10. INDEMNIFICATION.
Subject to the limitations of liability for public bodies set forth in the Oregon Tort Claims
Act, ORS 30.260 to 30.300, and the Oregon Constitution, each Party agrees to hold
harmless, defend, and indemnify each other, including their officers, agents, and
employees, against all claims, demands, penalties, actions and suits (including the cost of
defense thereof and all attorney fees and costs, through all appeals) arising from the
indemnitor's performance of this Agreement where the loss or claim is attributable to the
acts or omissions of that Party or its officers, employees or agents.
11. ACTION, SUITS OR CLAIMS.
Each Party shall give the others prompt written notice of any action or suit filed or any
claim made against that Party that may result in claims or litigation in any way related to
this Agreement.
Page 4 of 14
12. INSURANCE.
Each Party agrees to maintain insurance levels or self-insurance in accordance with ORS
30.282, for the duration of this Agreement at levels necessary to protect against public
body liability as specified in ORS 30.269 to 30.274.
13. NO THIRD-PARTY BENEFICIARIES.
Except as set forth herein, this Agreement is between the Parties and creates no third-
party beneficiaries or obligations. Nothing in this Agreement gives or shall be construed
to give or provide any benefit, direct, indirect or otherwise to third parties unless such
third parties are expressly described as intended to be beneficiaries of its terms.
14. REMEDIES, NON-WAIVER.
The remedies provided under this Agreement shall not be exclusive. The Parties shall also
be entitled to any other equitable and legal remedies that are available. No waiver,
consent, modification or change of terms of this Agreement shall bind the parties unless
in writing and signed by all parties. Such waiver, consent, modification or change, if made,
shall be effective only in the specific instance and for the specific purpose given. The
failure of a Party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver
by a Party of that or any other provision.
15. OREGON LAW, DISPUTE RESOLUTION AND FORUM.
This Agreement shall be construed according to the laws of the State of Oregon, without
regard to conflict of law principles. The Parties shall negotiate in good faith to resolve any
dispute arising out of this Agreement. If the Parties are unable to resolve any dispute
within fourteen (14) calendar days, the Parties may pursue any available legal remedies.
Any litigation between the Parties arising under this Agreement or out of work performed
under this Agreement shall occur, if in the state courts, in the Washington County Circuit
Court, and if in the federal courts, in the United States District Court for the District of
Oregon located in Portland, Oregon. The Parties consent to personal jurisdiction of the
courts identified in this section.
16. ASSIGNMENT.
No party shall assign its rights or obligations under this Agreement, in whole or in part,
without the prior written approval of the other Party or Parties.
17. SEVERABILITY/SURVIVAL OF TERMS.
If any provision of this Agreement is found to be illegal or unenforceable, this Agreement
nevertheless shall remain in full force and effect and the provision shall be stricken. All
provisions concerning indemnity survive the termination of this Agreement for any cause.
Page 5of14
18. FORCE MAJEURE.
In addition to the specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by any Party shall
not be in default where delay or default is due to war, insurrection, strikes, walkouts,
riots, floods, drought, earthquakes, fires, casualties, acts of God, governmental
restrictions imposed or mandated by governmental entities other than the Parties,
enactment of conflicting state or federal laws or regulations, new or supplementary
environmental regulation, litigation or similar bases for excused performance that are not
within the reasonable control to the Party to be excused.
19. INTERPRETATION OF AGREEMENT.
This Agreement shall not be construed for or against any Party by reason of the authorship
or alleged authorship of any provision. The section headings contained in this Agreement
are for ease of reference only and shall not be used in construing or interpreting this
Agreement.
20. INTEGRATION.
This document constitutes the entire agreement between the parties on the subject
matter hereof and supersedes all prior or contemporaneous written or oral
understandings, representations, or communications of every kind on the subject,
including the Broadband User's Group Intergovernmental Agreement.
21. OTHER NECESSARY ACTS.
The Parties shall execute and deliver to each other any and all further instruments and
documents as may be reasonably necessary to carry out this Agreement.
22. NOTICE.
Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, any communications between
the Parties hereto or notices to be given hereunder shall be given in writing. Any notice
given by one Party to the other Party shall be deemed given and delivered (a) two days
after being mailed by U.S. mail, postage prepaid; (b) one day after being sent by email,
read receipt confirmed; or (c) when received, if personally delivered to the Party at the
Party's physical address.
For the City of Banks
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
Page 6of14
For the Banks Fire District
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Beaverton
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Cornelius
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For Clean Water Services
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Forest Grove
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Hillsboro
Contract Administrator Name, Title: Greg Mont, CIO
Address, City, State and ZIP Code: 150 E Main St, Hillsboro, OR 97123
Telephone: 503-681-5401
Email: greg.mont@hillsboro-oregon.gov
For the City of King city
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
Page 7 of 14
For the City of Lake Oswego
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For Metropolitan Area Communications Commission
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of North Plains
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Sherwood
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the Tualatin Hills Park and Recreation District
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Tigard
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For the City of Tualatin
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
Page 8 of 14
For Tualatin Valley Fire and Rescue
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For Washington County
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
For Washington County Consolidated Communications Agency
Contract Administrator Name, Title:
Address, City, State and ZIP Code:
Telephone:
Email:
Page 9of14
23. COUNTERPARTS.
This Agreement may be executed in two or more counterparts, each of which shall be
deemed an original, but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
instrument.
All of the aforementioned is hereby agreed upon by the parties and executed by the duly
authorized representatives of the parties signing on the next page.
FOR CITY OF BANKS FOR BANKS FIRE DISTRICT
Signature Signature
Name (Printed) Name (Printed)
Title Title
Date Date
FOR CITY OF BEAVERTON FOR CITY OF CORNELIUS
Signature Signature
Name (Printed) Name (Printed)
Title Title
Date Date
Page 10 of 14
FOR CLEAN WATER SERVICES FOR CITY OF FOREST GROVE
Signature Signature
Name (Printed) Name (Printed)
Title Title
Date Date
FOR CITY OF HILLSBORO FOR CITY OF KING CITY
Signature Signature
Name (Printed) Name (Printed)
Title Title
Date Date
Page 11 of 14
FOR CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO FOR METROPOLITAN AREA
COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Signature
Signature
Name (Printed)
Name (Printed)
Title
Title
Date
Date
FOR CITY OF NORTH PLAINS FOR CITY OF SHERWOOD
Signature Signature
Name (Printed) Name (Printed)
Title Title
Date Date
Page 12of14
FOR TUALATIN HILLS PARK AND FOR CITY OF TIGARD
RECREATION DISTRICT
Signature
Signature
Name (Printed)
Name (Printed)
Title
Title
Date
Date
FOR CITY OF TUALATIN FOR TUALATIN VALLEY FIRE AND
RESCUE
Signature
Signature
Name (Printed)
Name (Printed)
Title
Title
Date
Date
Page 13 of 14
FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY FOR WASHINGTON COUNTY
CONSOLIDATED COMMUNICATIONS
AGENCY
Signature
Signature
Name (Printed)
Name (Printed)
Title
Title
Date
Date
Page 14 of 14
7.1
O
F �s� COUNCIL REPORT
—�
OREGO�
Subject: Resolution 25-37, Authorizing the execution and delivery of the WIFIA Loan with the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
Meeting Date: July 15, 2025 Staff Member: Stefan Broadus, PE
Director of Special Projects
Report Date: July 3, 2025 Department: Public Works - Engineering
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑ Motion ❑ Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑X Resolution ❑ Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments:
❑ Council Direction
❑ Consent Agenda
Staff Recommendation: Adopt Resolution 25-37 as presented.
Recommended Language for Motion: Move to adopt Resolution 25-37 authorizing the
execution and delivery of the WIFIA loan with the EPA for the Wastewater Treatment Facility
project in an amount no to exceed $123,480,000.
Project/ Issue Relates To: Collaborate with the City of Portland to make a financially and
environmentally responsible long-term investment in a wastewater treatment facility.
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question):
❑X Council Goals/Priorities EAdopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable
BACKGROUND
The existing Tryon Creek Wastewater Treatment Plant (TCWTP) was built in 1964 and is owned
and operated by the Portland Bureau of Environmental Services (BES). The plant is reaching the
end of its useful life cycle and needs to be upgraded or replaced.
On December 6, 2021, the United States' Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) selected Lake
Oswego's Wastewater Treatment Facility (WWTF) project to apply for a low-cost, long-term loan
under the Water Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (WIFIA). On February 15, 2022, the
Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service,
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
City Council approved submitting the formal application for the loan. The WIFIA loan was to be
executed by EPCOR Foothills Water Partners (EWFP) as a means to reduce the monthly payment
installments(and therefore overall cost)from the City in the P3 agreement. Essentially,the public
financing would reduce the amount of private equity required which was at a higher rate. When
the City decided not to pursue the Project Agreement with EWFP on January 30, 2024, it became
necessary for the City to reapply for the WIFIA loan as the loan-holder if that was still going to be
part of the project's funding plan.
DISCUSSION
While considering the separation from EWFP, the City evaluated the impact of removing the
private equity and replacing it with public funding. The City's available fund balance is not nearly
sufficient to pay for the capital cost of the new plant. However, using a combination of available
funding sources (utility revenue, City of Portland cost share payments, and System Development
Charges) as well as public financing creates a funding plan that minimizes utility rate increases.
The public financing mechanism would include Lake Oswego Municipal Bonds as well as the
WIFIA Loan. Based on that analysis, City staff submitted a revise application for the WIFIA loan
on December 31, 2024 with the City named as the loan-holder. Over the past several months,
the project team has coordinated with WIFIA staff to develop the financial details of the loan.
In terms of next steps,the project team will continue to collaborate with Jacobs Engineering over
the next several months as they prepare their proposal for the Design-Build-Operate-Maintain
Project Agreement. The City will not begin to draw from the WIFIA loan until the Project
Agreement is executed which is anticipated in early 2026. This approach defers fees and interest
accrual on the WIFIA loan for as long as possible and until the project actually requires the funds.
FISCAL IMPACT
The maximum WIFIA loan amount is based on 49% of allowable expenses which include
construction, land acquisition, and professional services, among a few other minor categories.
Based on current cost estimates as well as eligible expenses to date,the WIFIA loan amount was
calculated at just under $123,480,000. Executing this loan is the most cost-effective means for
the City to deliver this much needed project. Without the WIFIA loan, utility rates would need to
rise faster to accumulate needed capital to pay for construction.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Approve Resolution 25-37 authorizing the execution and delivery of the WIFIA loan with the
EPA for the Wastewater Treatment Facility project in an amount not to exceed $123,480,000.
Respect. Excel'ence. Trust. Service,
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
RESOLUTION NO. 25-37
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF LAKE OSWEGO, OREGON, AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND
DELIVERY OF A LOAN AGREEMENT IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO EXCEED $123,480,000 (EXCLUDING
CAPITALIZED INTEREST) WITH THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND RELATED
DOCUMENTS TO FUND A PORTION OF A WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY PROJECT FOR
THE CITY AND FOR PAYMENTS OF COSTS OF ISSUANCE; PLEDGING THE CITY'S FULL FAITH AND
CREDIT TO THE PAYMENT OF SUCH LOAN AGREEMENT; DESIGNATING AUTHORIZED
REPRESENTATIVES AND DELEGATING AUTHORITY; AND RELATED MATTERS.
WHEREAS,the City Council (the "City Council") of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon
(the "City"), a municipal corporation of the State of Oregon,finds that it is financially feasible and
in the City's best interest to finance (1) a portion of the costs of the design, development,
acquisition (including acquisition of land), construction, equipping and improvement of a
Wastewater Treatment Facility of the City(the "Facility") and related facilities, and (2)the related
financing and issuance costs (collectively, the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the City is authorized pursuant to Oregon Revised Statutes ("ORS")
Section 271.390 (i) to enter into financing agreements, lease-purchase agreements or other
contracts of purchase for any real or personal property that the City Council determines is needed
and to provide for the issuance of certificates of participation in the payment obligations of the
City under such financing agreements, lease-purchase agreements or other contracts of purchase
and (ii) to pledge lawfully available funds to payment of such financing agreements, lease-
purchase agreements or other contracts of purchase; and
WHEREAS, after consultation with its financial advisor and bond counsel, the City
finds it is in the best interests of the City to authorize the execution and delivery of a loan
agreement (the "WIFIA Loan Agreement") with the United States Environmental Protection
Agency, acting by and through the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency("EPA")
through the loan program authorized by the Water Infrastructure Finance and Improvement Act
("WIFIA") in an amount not to exceed $123,480,000 (excluding capitalized interest) (the "WIFIA
Loan"), which loan shall be evidenced by an obligation executed and delivered to EPA(the "WIFIA
Bond"); and
WHEREAS, the City adopts this Resolution (i) to authorize the execution and
delivery of the WIFIA Loan Agreement, the WIFIA Bond and any other related agreements,
certificates and documents (collectively, the "WIFIA Financing Documents"), (ii) to designate
certain officials and employees of the City as authorized representatives to take action on the
City's behalf and (iii) to delegate to such representatives the authority to negotiate and execute
the WIFIA Financing Documents.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City, as follows:
Section 1. Authorization of the Obligations and Related Agreements. The City
hereby authorizes the WIFIA Loan and the execution and delivery of the WIFIA Financing
Documents. The proceeds of the WIFIA Loan received by the City pursuant to the terms of the
WIFIA Loan Agreement shall be used to pay a portion of the eligible project costs of the Project.
The remaining terms of the WIFIA Financing Documents shall be established as provided in
Section 4 hereof.
Section 2. Authorized Representative. The City authorizes and directs each of the
City Manager, the Assistant City Manager, the Finance Director or the designee of any of them
(each acting individually or collectively, an "Authorized Representative") to act on behalf of the
City and execute and deliver the WIFIA Financing Documents and to determine the remaining
terms of the Obligations to be established as set forth in Section 4 hereof.
Section 3. Security. The WIFIA Loan shall be secured by and payable from the City's
general non-restricted revenues and other funds that are lawfully available for that purpose,
including revenues from an ad valorem tax authorized to be levied under the City's permanent
rate limit under sections 11 and 11b, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution, and revenues derived
from other taxes, if any, levied by the City in accordance with and subject to limitations and
restrictions imposed under applicable law or contract, that are not dedicated, restricted or
obligated by law or contract to an inconsistent expenditure or use. The City pledges its full faith
and credit and taxing powers to the payment of the WIFIA Loan as contemplated by ORS
287A.315, or any successor statute. The registered owner of the WIFIA Bond will not have a lien
on or security interest in the Project or any other property financed or refinanced with the
proceeds of the WIFIA Bond.
Section 4. Delegation for Establishment of Terms and Sale of the Obligations. Each
Authorized Representative is hereby authorized and directed, on behalf of the City without
further approval of the City Council to:
(a) negotiate the terms of the WIFIA Financing Documents, including provisions
related to capitalized interest;
(b) make any covenants or agreements necessary or desirable to obtain favorable
financing terms for the WIFIA Financing Documents, including without limitation, a pledge of the
City's full faith and credit and, if desirable, a pledge of other amounts available to the City
including net revenues of the City's wastewater system;
(c) obtain ratings on the WIFIA Bond if determined by the Authorized Representative
to be in the best interest of the City and expend WIFIA Bond proceeds to pay for such ratings;
(d) enter into covenants regarding the use of the proceeds of the WIFIA Bond received
by the City pursuant to the WIFIA Loan Agreement;
(e) approve, execute and deliver the WIFIA Financing Documents;
(f) execute and deliver a certificate specifying the actions taken pursuant to this
Section 4, and any other certificates, documents or agreements that an Authorized
Page 2-Resolution No.25-37
Representative determines are desirable to execute, deliver and administer the WIFIA Financing
Documents and otherwise to sell, deliver and administer the WIFIA Bond in accordance with this
Resolution.
Section 5. Appointment of Special Counsel and Financial Advisor. The City hereby
appoints Orrick, Herrington &Sutcliffe LLP of Portland, Oregon, as special counsel to the City with
respect to the WIFIA Financing Documents, and PFM Financial Advisors LLC, as Financial Advisor
to the City with respect to the WIFIA Financing Documents.
Section 6. Resolution to Constitute Contract. In consideration of the purchase and
acceptance of the WIFIA Bond by those who shall own the same from time to time (the "WIFIA
Bond Owners"),the provisions of this Resolution shall be part of the contract of the City with the
WIFIA Bond Owners and shall be deemed to constitute a contract between the City and the WIFIA
Bond Owners pursuant to ORS 287A.315 and ORS 287A.325, or any successor statute. The
covenants, pledges, representations and warranties contained in this Resolution, and in the
WIFIA Financing Documents, including without limitation the City's covenants and pledges
contained in Section 3 hereof, and the other covenants and agreements herein set forth to be
performed by or on behalf of the City shall be contracts for the equal benefit, protection and
security of the WIFIA Bond Owners,all of which shall be of equal rank without preference, priority
or distinction except as expressly provided in or pursuant to this Resolution.
Section 7. Effective Date. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its
adoption by the City Council.
//Signatures on Page 3 of 4
Page 3-Resolution No.25-37
Considered and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lake Oswego, Oregon, at a regular
meeting held on the 15th day of July 2025.
AYES:
NOES:
EXCUSED:
ABSTAIN:
Joseph M. Buck, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kim Ono Vermillion, Interim City Recorder
Approved as to Form:
Ellen Osoinach, City Attorney
Page 4-Resolution No.25-37
8.1
O
F �s� COUNCIL REPORT
—�
OREGO�
Subject: Fair Housing Policy and Education (LU 25-0001)
Meeting Date: July 15, 2025 Staff Member: Erik Olson, Long Range Planning
Manager
Report Date: June 26, 2025
Department: Community Development
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑ Motion ❑ Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable
❑ Information Only Comments: Fair Housing Policy and Education was
❑X Council Direction identified as a near-term strategy in the City's
❑ Consent Agenda Housing Production Strategy.
Staff Recommendation: Direct staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a City housing policy, consistent with the City's Housing
Production Strategy.
Recommended Language for Motion: n/a
Project/ Issue Relates To: Council Initiative to, "Begin implementation of the near-term
strategies in the Housing Production Strategy Report, including... amending the
Comprehensive Plan to adopt a fair housing policy."
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question): How to amend the Comprehensive Plan to
explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a City housing policy.
❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑X Comprehensive Plan ❑Not Applicable
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The purpose of this study session is to receive a general overview of Affirmatively Furthering
Fair Housing (AFFH) policy from Shyle Ruder, Education and Outreach Director at the Fair
Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO), and for Council to provide direction on the approach
proposed by staff to amend the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a City housing
policy, consistent with the City's Housing Production Strategy (HPS).
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
BACKGROUND
Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act, also known as the federal Fair Housing Act (codified at 42 U.S.C.
3601-3619), was enacted by the United States Congress in April of 1968 and has been further
clarified by the Federal Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) in subsequent
rules (FHCO Website). Generally speaking, the law, "makes equal access to housing regardless
of one's race, color, national origin, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and gender
identity), familial status (the presence or absence of children under the age of 18 in the
household), or disability the law of the land" (Attachment 2, p. 3).
Additionally, the state of Oregon has adopted multiple laws and administers a land use system
intended to help increase the housing options available to Oregonians and promote more
inclusive communities (Attachment 2, p. 25-29). These laws are intended to continue to apply
and support AFFH policies regardless of any changes to housing policy at the federal level.
On November 19, 2024, the City Council approved Resolution 24-36 to adopt the HPS as a
component of the Comprehensive Plan to meet the requirements of ORS 197.296 and OAR 660-
008-0050 [Oregon House Bill 2003 (2019)]. The HPS identified Fair Housing Policy and Education
as a strategy for near-term adoption, including both the adoption of legislative amendments to
the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make AFFH a Housing Policy as well as education and
other actions to increase access to fair housing information.
Per the HPS, the Fair Housing and Education strategy (Strategy 13) is intended to benefit
priority populations—including low-income households, people of color, people with
disabilities, seniors, and other state or federal protected classes— by:
• Formalizing the City's commitment to fair housing goals;
• Facilitating a better understanding of fair housing issues in the community; and
• Educating City staff, housing stakeholders, and community members about fair housing
laws and residents' rights.
Though the City is required to comply with state and federal fair housing laws regardless of
whether an AFFH policy is formally adopted, the strategy is nonetheless anticipated to provide
additional protections against housing discrimination and bolster the City's focus on prioritizing
housing equity and affordability in its housing programs and investments.
AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING FAIR HOUSING OVERVIEW
The federal Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful to discriminate against people seeking to obtain
housing, and covers a wide range of housing-related activities including renting, selling, lending,
zoning and providing insurance. The law includes provisions related to AFFH, requiring, "entities
who receive federal funds to use a fair housing lens in viewing all their activities — including
zoning, land use, code enforcement, and sustainability planning" (FHCO Website). The intent is
to ensure that none of these activities will have a negative impact on protected classes,
diversity, and inclusion, while also eliminating any remaining patterns of housing
discrimination.
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 3
Per the FHCO Website, AFFH includes taking steps to:
• Address significant disparities in access to community assets;
• Overcome segregated living patterns and support and promote integrated communities;
• End racially and ethnically concentrated areas of poverty; and
• Foster and maintain compliance with civil rights and fair housing law.
Protected Classes
Fair Housing laws protect individuals in "protected classes" from housing discrimination. Per
Attachment 2, protected classes in Oregon include:
• Race; • Familial Status;
• Color; • Disability;
• National Origin; • Marital Status; and
• Religion; • Source of Income.
• Sex (including sexual orientation and
gender identity);
The City could also choose to add additional protected classes, such as ancestry, ethnicity, or
occupation.
Types of Discrimination
Per Attachment 2, p. 9, fair housing law protects against the following types of discrimination:
• Direct Evidence:Actively and openly limiting access to housing options based on an
individual's protected class status, such as the presence of a disability or national origin.
• Unequal Treatment: Treating people differently based on their protected class status,
like charging a household with children a higher security deposit than an adult-only
household.
• Disparate Impact: Taking actions or adopting policies that have a disproportionate and
negative effect on a protected class group while appearing to treat everyone the same.
• Institutionalized or Systemic: Discrimination that is widespread and deeply embedded in
values, policies, and practices. Systemic discrimination can be hard to recognize because
it feels "normal,"simply the way things are. For example, policies that support the
perpetuation of segregated neighborhoods are embedded in land use codes throughout
the US. It takes a conscious effort to see how those laws foster racial, ethnic, and
economic segregation and to change them.
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 4
Disparate Impact and Land Use Laws
Per Attachment 1, p. 9, "a practice does not need to be intentionally discriminatory for it to be
in violation of fair housing laws":
One of the complicated realities of American culture is that discriminatory practices—
practices that have disproportionately negative effects based on protected class—have
occurred for decades before fair housing laws were adopted. Discriminatory practices
are so deeply imbedded in our institutions, traditions and ways of doing business that it
can be hard to identify and isolate them. We continue those institutions and practices,
unwittingly perpetuating their negative effects.
In addition, the concept of disparate impact can often affect neighborhood quality through
zoning ordinances and land use practices. Again, per Attachment 1, p. 9:
In the past, deed restrictions were used to prohibit the sale of homes in certain areas to
people of color and, in some cases, people from specific national origins. Upheld as legal
by a Supreme Court decision in 1917(Buchanan v. Warley, 245 U.S. 60 (1917)), such
restrictions are now null and void by virtue of the Fair Housing Act of 1968.
Despite the fact that zoning standards that have a disproportionately negative effect on
protected classes are no longer lawful, there are still numerous contemporary examples of
disparate impact in housing policy. One such example is described in Attachment 1, p. 9:
A recent example of disparate impact and jurisdictional involvement is the Mount Holly
v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action, Inc., in which the Township of Mount Holly
planned to tear down existing housing to build higher-end housing. The citizens who
lived in the existing housing protested, saying that they would not be able to afford to
live in the new housing and this would have a disparate impact on the township's
minority population. The citizen group sued the jurisdiction under the Fair Housing Act,
citing disparate impact. The case was settled in favor of the citizen group before it
reached the Supreme Court.
Free Speech and Public Decisions
Fair housing laws also apply to public decisions about housing developments by prohibiting
such decisions to be made based on the race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status,
or disability of the residents. Fair housing laws also prohibit, "public decisions and policies that
have a disproportionate impact on members of one or more protected classes" (Attachment 1,
p. 10).
It is important to note that, while community members have a free speech-protected right to
express their opposition to a project based on any factor (as long as it does not constitute illegal
intimidation), "land use and other public decisions may not be made on the basis of concerns
based upon discriminatory assumptions" (Attachment 1, p. 11). Effectively, this means that
local officials and staff are solely allowed to make their decisions based on, "fact-based, non-
discriminatory factors".
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 5
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENTS
As mentioned above, as part of the HPS the City has committed to amending its Comprehensive
Plan to explicitly make AFFH a housing policy by the end of 2025, with other implementation
actions related to outreach and education expected to be completed over the long-term.
Staff notes that City policies related to housing have evolved significantly since the last time the
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan was updated (in
2014). This chapter should eventually be updated to reflect numerous updates in City housing
policy in recent years— including code amendments to allow middle housing (LU 22-0007), the
findings of the 2023 HNA, and the strategies the City committed to as part of the HPS. While
these Comprehensive Plan amendments would not effectively change the policies or
procedures the City is currently pursuing with respect to housing, they would nonetheless
ensure consistency between the Comprehensive Plan, Community Development Code (CDC),
and other supplemental City plans, allowing all recent housing policy changes to be listed in one
place for easy reference.
With this in mind, staff notes that it is likely that additional state mandates will continue to
impact City housing policies for the foreseeable future. Most notably, rules governing the new
statewide Oregon Housing Needs Analysis (OHNA) are still being developed by the state
Department of Land Conservation and Development (DLCD), with adoption by the Land
Conservation and Development Commission (LCDC) anticipated before the end of 2025. These
rules are expected to significantly modify the processes cities are required to use to develop an
HNA and determine their housing needs, including linking local HNAs to a statewide allocation
of needed housing, as well as changes to the methodologies to inventory buildable lands and
calculate housing capacity. As such, staff recommends taking a more surgical approach to adopt
a fair housing policy as a Comprehensive Plan amendment in the near-term and to conduct a
more thorough update to the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter when more is
known about the revised OHNA methodology.
Staff has compiled Comprehensive Plan language from other cities in Metro Portland in order to
better understand the range of potential approaches for incorporating fair housing policy into a
Comprehensive Plan document (Attachment 3). While several cities took a relatively minimal
approach to adding fair housing language to the housing chapters of their Comprehensive
Plans, some cities took a more holistic approach that addressed the numerous different facets
of what cities do to affirmatively further fair housing.
Staff recommends that the City adopt a relatively simple version of AFFH policy—using a
"surgical" or more minimal approach—prior to the end of 2025, and to pursue more thorough
amendments to the Complete Neighborhoods and Housing chapter of the Comprehensive Plan
in 2026, once the OHNA rulemaking process concludes. If Council agrees with this
recommendation, staff would then discuss draft Comprehensive Plan amendment language
with the Planning Commission at work session on July 28, prior to bringing the amendments
forth to a PC hearing on September 8 and a subsequent Council hearing on November 4.
Example language of a more minimal approach to adopt AFFH as a City housing policy is
provided, below, for Council consideration, shown in bold and underlined:
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 6
City of Lake Oswego Comprehensive Plan
Complete Neighborhoods and Housing
///
8. Housing Choice and Affordability
8-1. Provide and maintain zoning and development regulations that allow the
opportunity to develop an adequate supply and variety of housing types, and that
accommodate the needs of existing and future Lake Oswego residents.
8-2. Provide and maintain land use regulations that allow secondary(accessory)
dwelling units, subject to standards that ensure compatibility with existing residences
and residences on adjoining lots.
8-3. Provide and maintain land use regulations and standards consistent with state law
that allow opportunities for siting of special needs housing in all zones where residential
uses are allowed.
8-4. Preserve and enhance the habitability of existing housing through code inspection
and enforcement, and with housing safety programs.
8-5. Employ strategies to affirmatively further fair housing by fostering inclusive
communities, overcoming disparities in access to community amenities, and enhancing
housing choice for people in protected classes.
///
PROJECT SCHEDULE
The proposed project schedule to adopt Comprehensive Plan amendments to explicitly make
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a Housing Policy is included below:
Overview of Affirmatively Furthering Planning Commission Work Session#1 Jan 27, 2025
Fair Housing Policy
City Council Study Session#1 Jul 15
HPS Implementation Overview Planning Commission Work Session#2 May 28
City Council Study Session#2 Aug 5
Review of Draft Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Work Session#3 Jul 28
Amendments
Adoption of Comprehensive Plan Planning Commission Public Hearing Sep 8
Amendments
Planning Commission Findings Sep 22
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 7
City Council Public Hearing Nov 4
City Council Findings Nov 18
Effective Date: Dec 18, 2025
Per the Implementation Timeline in the HPS, the educational component of the Fair Housing
Policy and Education strategy is scheduled to begin and be completed in the medium-term
(approximately 2027-2028).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Council provide direction on the approach proposed by staff to
amend the Comprehensive Plan to explicitly make Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing a City
housing policy.
ATTACHMENTS
1. FHCO Guide for Elected Officials— Finding Common Ground Inclusive Communities
Toolkit, 07/2014
2. FHCO Guide for Elected Officials— Building Inclusive Communities, Winter 2024
3. Comprehensive Plan Fair Housing Policy Research —Other Metro Cities, 06/23/2025
Additional Information for Reference Only:
FHCO— Policymakers and Planners website: https://fhco.org/get-involved
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
11
■ ■■■ 1111
■ ■■■ IIIItt ■ 11111
111
■ ■■■ 2 1111
� . _
T ■■ ft � nil :-
. i . , oN\4
ok
A- w II* ..
• .
I
w il'-r
h Xe jP.
gt
1
•
�li�l4 -
,%ID % .1,
; .,. __ n •
L. l� ##
P it
jUi.
. 1 a
W*III8p* em 4w Ar--k A 4
Common
Ground
Inclusive FAIR
GUIDE for - Communities COUNCILHOUSING
ED OFFICIAL Toolkit OFOREGON
July 2014
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 1 OF 36
FAIR
HOUSING
COUNCIL
OF OREGON
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The Fair Housing Council of Oregon would like to express our gratitude for the generous assistance
provided by these additional contributors. This work would not have been possible without their
expertise,counsel,and wisdom.
• Lisa Bates, Professor, Portland State University Urban Studies Department
• Bill Carpenter, Chief Information Officer, Oregon Housing and Community Services
• Karen Clearwater, Regional Advisor to the Dept.,Oregon Housing and Community Services
• Alyssa Cudmore, Former FHCO Equity Specialist
• Tom Cusack,Oregon Housing Blog publisher
• Gordon Howard, Urban Planning Specialist,Oregon Dept.of Land Conservation and
Development
• Ellen Johnson,Attorney,Oregon Law Center and Housing Land Advocates member
• Beth Kaye, FHCO board member and land use policy expert
• Leon Laptook,Affordable housing advocate
• Sue Lind, Housing developer
• Jenny Logan, Community Alliance of Tenants and Housing Land Advocates member
• Deb Meihoff,AICP, Communitas LLC
• Nancy Murray, FHCO board member and community development lawyer
• Bob Rindy,Senior Policy Analyst,Oregon Dept.of Land Conservation and Development
• Yesenia Sanchez, Housing Developer, Community Action Team (serving Columbia,Tillamook,
and Clatsop Counties)
• Ed Sullivan, Land use attorney,Garvey Schubert Barer,and Housing Land Advocates member
This Guide was prepared for the Fair Housing Council of Oregon by Andree Tremoulet, Ph.D.,of
Commonworks Consulting. For further information, see www.commonworksconsulting.com or
contact andree@commonworksconsulting.com.
Design work for this guide was developed by Dana Visse, Design and Consulting.
The work that provided the basis for this Guide was supported by funding under a grant with the
U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. The substance and findings of the work are
dedicated to the public. The authors and publisher are solely responsible for the accuracy of the
statements and interpretations contained in this Guide. Such interpretations do not necessarily
reflect the views of the Federal Government.
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 2 OF 36
UI .
### •'••''•'' COMMON
GROUND
GUIDE for
ELECTED OFFICIALS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
July 2014
THE BASICS
SECTION 1.
• An introduction to fair housing and inclusive
communities
FAIR HOUSING, AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND
HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
2 An introduction to the two types of housing
SECTION developments where concerns around fair housing are
especially likely to surface
INFORMATION FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
SECTION 3. How to engage constructively and stay on the right
side of the law
/`L
RESOURCES
SECTION 4. �O: Information about other guides and key resources
JJ for those who wish to go deeper
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 3 OF 36
INTRODUCTION
This GUIDE IS FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS, When changes are planned for a
including elected officials, planning neighborhood, whether it is a single house, a
commission members, planners and other new apartment complex or a new institution
staff for cities and counties in Oregon such as an assisted care facility, sometimes
who seek to understand their role in neighbors object. They may not oppose the
addressing neighborhood conflicts over
residential uses related to fair housing. proposed project per se, but they may object
When such conflicts arise, public officials to its location in their neighborhood. They
often find themselves in the middle, may believe it belongs somewhere, as long as
acting informally as arbiters or more it is somewhere else.
formally as decision-makers. This guide
is intended to help you understand your Sometimes opoosition is based on non-
role and stay on the right side of the discriminatory factors—fact-based concerns
law. While there is no "app" for creating about traffic, for example—that do place an
inclusive, welcoming neighborhoods that undue burden on a neighborhood. However,
are safe places to live and raise families, opposition can also represent a desire to
new knowledge and understanding avoid having to deal with people who are
can help build a strong foundation for
productive engagement. This guide aims viewed as being "different." Sometimes
to provide that information. external impacts like traffic and parking
problems masquerade as rationales for
From our ancient roots as hunters and opposition when the real motivation is a
gatherers, we human beings are hard-wired desire for social exclusivity.
to be wary of situations that are unfamiliar
and people who seem different from us. We While supporting the development of an
also have a sense of territory. Instinctually, we inclusive community is an art, not a science,
feel an impulse to exert control over areas we there are some clear rules, based in federal
consider belong to us. and state law, which govern what is lawful
and what is not. This guide provides guidance
Fortunately, we're also hard-wired to want on those fair housing rules.
to live in a community. The communitarian
impulse supports our efforts to figure out This GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS is
how to get along and to seek benefit from one of a series of three guides that provide
associating with those who have abilities and practical, experience-based information to
insights different from ours. It takes hard stakeholders who may become involved
work to navigate our differences and reach with local opposition to new housing or new
solutions that provide an acceptable level of neighbors. The other two guides are:
personal security for everyone. The first step • GUIDE FOR NEIGHBORS
starts with communication. • GUIDE FOR HOUSING PROVIDERS
4\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 4 OF 36
iriiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii
THI -4 GUIDE HAS
FO R SECTIONS
/Nk
1 . 2. 3. ' a 4. ipto
THE BASICS FAIR HOUSING, INFORMATION FOR RESOurcL.Ez
ELECTED OFFICIALS
An introduction to fair AFFORDABLE Information about
housing as it relates to HOUSING AND How to engage other guides and key
inclusive communities HOUSING FOR constructively and resources for those
PEOPLE WITH stay on the right side who wish to go deeper
DISABILITIES of the law
An introduction to the
two types of housing
developments where
concerns around fair
housing are especially
likely to surface
Interspersed throughout
SOURCING are MYTHS AND FACTS
This guide draws extensively from guides produced + STORIES FROM THE
for other states and audiences. For ease of reading, FIELD that use examples
we have elected to not cite specific sources in the
body of this guide, but included them in the list of of things that actually
resources that forms the final chapter. We wish to occurred in Oregon to
thank and recognize the many sources whose work illustrate the main ideas.
provided the foundation for this guide.
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/5
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 5 OF 36
1 . THEBASICS
,,, 0
This section of the guide provides an FAIR HOUSING AND
introduction to fair housing concepts PROTECTED CLASSES
and touches on some of the most The purpose of fair housing laws is to
common rules that come into play provide access to housing choice by
when a new housing development everyone, free from discrimination. The
or a change in use of an existing federal Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful
residential use sparks concerns in a to discriminate against people seeking to
community about the kinds of new obtain housing. A wide range of housing-
neighbors who may move into the related activities are covered by fair housing
area. law, including renting, selling, lending,
zoning and providing insurance. Under
INTRODUCTION national fair housing laws, it is illegal to
Neighborhoods are changing all the time. deny access to housing to people because
Neighbors move in and out and businesses of their race, color, national origin, religion,
come and go as well. For some, change can gender, familial status (the presence of
be challenging and can make people feel children in a household) or disability.
uneasy or conjure up fears of the unknown. These seven characteristics are called the
But change can also be an opportunity. This federal protected classes. In Oregon, it
guide focuses on the opportunity to channel is also illegal to discriminate in housing
change in a way that fosters inclusive transactions based on a person's marital
communities. status, source of income (including, as of
July 1, 2014, Housing Choice/Section 8
Fair housing laws ensure access to housing Vouchers), sexual orientation (including
opportunities for all, regardless of their
gender identity) or status as a domestic
backgrounds, beliefs or abilities. In effect, violence victim—Oregon's protected classes.
fair housing laws help identify which issues Some cities and counties have identified
can be legally addressed when community additional local protected classes that apply
concerns arise, and which infringe upon within their boundaries.
the rights of others not yet living in the
neighborhood. Neighborhood activists, Being a member of a protected class does
public officials, city staff and developers not give someone the right to engage in
all need to understand the law. The law unlawful activities. For example, if someone
helps to achieve a balance between existing who is disabled or a person of color
neighbors' concerns and the right of all commits a robbery, he/she is subject to
people to access a range of housing options arrest and prosecution just like anyone else.
and neighborhoods. The Fair Housing Act affords no protections
6\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 6 OF 36
ir
DEFINITION
in•clu•sive
adjective \in-'klu-siv, -ziv\
: open to everyone : not limited to certain people
com•mu•ni•ty
noun \ka-'myu-ne-te\
: an interacting population of various kinds of
individuals in a common location
Source:
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary 16111
t• individuals who present a direct threat PROTECTED CLASSES
• others. Determining whether someone
•oses such a direct threat must be made
on an individualized basis, however, and FEDERAL
•annot be based on general assumptions or • race
-peculation about a group of people or how • color
ndividuals who are part of that group (such • national origin
.:s people with mental health disabilities) • religion
ight act. • gender
• familial status
Nor do fair housing laws (with one e presence o c I .ren in a ousehold)
exception, special accommodations for • disability
people with disabilities, discussed in a
later section) convey special privileges STATE
or rights to an individual based on his or • marital status
her membership in a protected class. The • source of income
intention of federal, state, and local fair • sexual orientation
housing laws is to require that all individuals • status as a domestic violence survivor
be given the same treatment, the same
services, and offered an equal opportunity to
live in a home of their choice.
fi4i Ni COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/ 7
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 7 OF 36
THE BASICS i jb"t
0 ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
FAIR HOUSING AND TYPES OF
DISCRIMINATION it
Fair housing law protects against three kinds
of discrimination:
Direct Evidence: Actively and openly THE FAIR HOUSING ACT
limiting access to housing on the basis
of protected class. An example of direct Title VIII of the Civil Rights
evidence would be the refusal to rent to Act of 1968 (Fair Housing
someone solely because he was born in Act, codified at 42 U.S.C.
Saudi Arabia and is Muslim. That would 3601-3619), as amended,
represent discrimination on the basis of prohibits discrimination in the
national origin and religion. sale, rental, and financing of
dwellings, and in other housing-
Unequal Treatment: Treating people related transactions, based
differently based on protected class on race, color, national origin,
status; for example, requiring a renter religion, sex, familial status
with two children to pay twice the (including children under the
security deposit of a renter without age of 18 living with parents
children is discrimination on the basis of or legal custodians, pregnant
familial status. women, and people securing
Disparate Impact: Having a custody of children under the
discriminatory effect on a protected class age of 18) and disability. At the
while appearing to treat everyone the urging of President Lyndon B.
same. For example, giving preference to Johnson, Congress approved
renting to households with people who the Civil Rights Act of 1968, and
don't work in the local fish cannery would it was signed into law one week
have a disparate impact on the Latino after the assassination of Dr.
Martin Luther King, Jr.
population if the vast majority of cannery
workers are of Hispanic national origin.
•
11111111100.01111111°111.1....mlimmitf:,
lb
L
8\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 8 OF 36
DID YOU KNOW? •
• A
•
Deed restrictions were used to prohibit the
sale of homes in certain areas to people
of color and, in some cases, people from �
specific national origins. Such restrictions
are now null and void by virtue of the Fair i'•
Housing Act of 1968.
DI :PARATE IMPACT AND national origins. Upheld as legal by a
L A ND USE LAWS Supreme Court decision in 1917 (Buchanan v.
It i. important to note that a practice does Warley, 245 U.S. 60 (1917)), such restrictions
n.t need to be intentionally discriminatory are now null and void by virtue of the Fair
f.r it to be in violation of fair housing laws. Housing Act of 1968. A more contemporary
•ne of the complicated realities of American example of a policy that would have a
f ulture is that discriminatory practices— disparate impact is requiring an applicant
practices that have disproportionately seeking to build a single-unit house for
negative effects based on protected class— five unrelated people who have disabilities
have occurred for decades before fair (a protected class) to undergo additional
housing laws were adopted. Discriminatory hearings, reviews or community meetings
practices are so deeply imbedded in our that are not required for a single-unit
institutions, traditions and ways of doing house for any other group of five unrelated
business that it can be hard to identify and individuals.
isolate them. We continue those institutions
and practices, unwittingly perpetuating their A recent example of disparate impact and
negative effects. jurisdictional involvement is the Mount Holly
v. Mount Holly Gardens Citizens in Action,
One *hat the co pt of Inc, in which the Township of Mount Ho
disparate impact affects neighborhood planned to tear down existing housing to
quality is through zoning ordinances and build higher-end housing. The citizens
practices. Fair housing laws prohibit land who lived in the existing housing protested,
use regulations, restrictive covenants and saying that they would not be able to afford
conditional or special use permits from to live in the new housing and this would
imposing special conditions that have the have a disparate impact on the township's
effect of limiting housing choice based on minority population. The citizen group sued
protected class status. In the past, deed the jurisdiction under the Fair Housing
restrictions were used to prohibit the sale Act, citing disparate impact. The case was
of homes in certain areas to people of color settled in favor of the citizen group before it
and, in some cases, people from specific reached the Supreme Court.
0 COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/9
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 9 OF 36
THE BASICS jb"l
REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION
FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WHAT DOES
As mentioned above, people with disabilities DISABILITY MEAN?
do have an extra privilege under fair housing
to ensure that they can access equal housing There are many different
opportunity. The Fair Housing Act requires definitions of disability. The one
housing providers respond to requests for relevant to fair housing is the
reasonable accommodations. These are one included in the Fair Housing
exceptions to rules, policies, practices or Act, which states that someone
services to enable people with disabilities to is disabled if he or she has a
live in the residence. This includes physical physical or mental impairment
modifications to make the residence which substantially limits one
accessible. Local officials are also required or more major life activities,
to consider reasonable accommodations to including having a record of or
zoning, building codes and ordinances. being regarded as having such
impairment (42 U.S.C. 3602 (h)).
Local jurisdictions are required to make
case-by-case determinations about what
is reasonable based on the facts of the
particular case under consideration. For FREE SPEECH AND
example, the accommodations required to PUBLIC DECISIONS
assist people with mobility impairments may Fair housing laws require that public
be different from those needed to assist
people with loss of hearing. In neither case decisions about housing developments
not be based on the race, color, religion,
could basic health and safety precautions be
set aside, nor could the general nature of the
sex, national origin, familial status or
disability of the residents. It also prohibits
zoning of the neighborhood be changed.
public decisions and policies that have a
disproportionate impact on members of one
or more protected classes.
Community members have the right, under
First Amendment free speech protections, to
express their opposition to projects on any
10\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 10 OF 36
r '
basis as long as it does not constitute illegal
inti 'dation). However, land use and other
publ c decisions may not be made on the
basis of concerns based upon discriminatory CONFRONTING EMBEDDED
ass mptions. Local officials, including DISCRIMINATION?
sta , may only make their decisions based
on act-based, non-discriminatory factors.
Fu thermore, the law prohibits the public
Stella Adams, a fair housing
fr.m asking for information about the extent consultant from Durham, North
Carolina, compares deeply
or type of disability an individual or group of imbedded discriminatory practices
in•ividuals may have. from the past that continue into
ONCLUSION the present to sour dough starter
he creation of safe, inclusive communities— that incorporates some toxic yeast.
places where people from a variety of When new loaves are made from
the starter, the bad yeast is baked in
backgrounds and abilities can thrive—is more to the new loaves, even though the
of an art than a science. It involves achieving baker had no idea that toxic yeast
a delicate balance among many different was present. Furthermore, the bad
pairs of opposing forces, such as: yeast is incorporated into the dough
• The desire of longstanding residents to left over to make new starter for
control their community's future vs. the the next batch of loaves. Getting
desire of newcomers to have housing rid of the bad leavening requires
choices a conscious choice and hard work
to create a fresh, clean batch of
• The need to apply laws equally to all vs. "mother" sourdough starter.
the requirement to be flexible around-.he
margins if so requested by someone with
a disability (reasonable accommodation).
u COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/11
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 11 OF 36
2 . FAIR HOUSING
Fair housing issues may arise with THE OVERLAP BETWEEN
respect to any kind of housing FAIR HOUSING AND
development and in any kind SUBSIDIZED HOUSING
of neighborhood. For example, In most communities, the majority of people
opposing a mosque's efforts to who need subsidized housing are also
partner with a developer to create people whose access to housing choice
a new apartment complex in the is protected under fair housing law. For
neighborhood would likely be a fair example, in many communities, a greater
housing violation if the objection share of people of color (race, national
based on not wanting people who origin and color) may need subsidized
practice Islam to move into the housing than the majority population;
neighborhood. A city that refuses to thus, in this community, the rejection
permit the development of a high- of subsidized housing would have a
end assisted living facility for adults disparate impact on people of color. The
with Alzheimer's disease based on reasons for this are complex and have
the complaints of neighbors who deep historical roots related to decades
don't want to live next door to "crazy of discriminatory practices that impacted
people who wander" would also the life opportunities of people of color
likely be a violation of fair housing and other groups, as well as contemporary
laws based on disability.
patterns and institutional practices that
While fair housing issues may have a disparate impact. The diagram below
arise in many different kinds of illustrates the overlap, or nexus, between fair
situations, there are two kinds housing and subsidized housing.
of housing developments where
both neighborhood resistance and
fair housing issues may surface:
subsidized/low cost/low income/
affordable housing (it goes by AFFORDABLE FAIR+ FAIR
HOUSING AFFORDABLE HOUSING
many names) and projects serving HOUSING
people with disabilities (also called
special needs housing). This chapter
considers both in some detail.
12\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 12 OF 36
Rejec ing a housing project on the grounds
that t will serve low income people is, in
mos instances, a violation of fair housing MORTGAGE DENIAL RATES
because that decision would have the effect
of . scriminating against people on the DIFFER IN 0 R EG 0 N BY RACE
bass of their membership in a protected AND ETHNICITY
cla••s, regardless of whether or not the
dis rimination was intentional. In other In Oregon's rural communities,
w.rds, that decision would have a disparate blacks and Hispanics with incomes
i pact on minority populations protected above $75,000 per year had
u der fair housing laws. much higher denial rates for home
purchase mortgage applications
hile the nexus between fair housing and than their white counterparts.
.ffordable housing is a key principle, it is In 2004 - 2008, the denial rate
also important to remember that people for home purchase mortgage
who are not low-income can also experience applications for whites was 17.0%;
housing discrimination. For example, during during the same period, the denial
the housing crisis of the last decade, people rate for blacks was 30.1% and for
of color in some cities tended to be offered Hispanics was 25.6%.
riskier home mortgages (with higher interest Source: 2011-2015 Oregon Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
rates and, in most cases, a greater likelihood Choice(Non Entitlement Areas),p.42,Table III-6.
www.oregon.gov/LCD/flocs/publications/i ntroductory_guide_to_land_
of default) than the majority population with use_planning_in_oregon.pdf
similar incomes. While these homebuyers
►•�
of color were not low income, they likely
ncecLdiscriminatory_practices in the
mortgage lending market.
14•
101111/1111111111
A--fg
Fi • COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/13
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 13 OF 36
FAIR HOUSING PROTECTIONS the population. People cannot use fair
FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF housing as an excuse for breaking the law.
AFFORDABLE HOUSING Furthermore, fair housing does not protect
Fair housing laws affecting the development people who pose a direct threat to people
of affordable housing revolve around a few or property. The law requires that such
essential principles: determinations be based on objective proof
of a threat by specific individuals and not
• Housing that serves people who are
members of protected classes (minority generalizations about a population.
populations) cannot be put through HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WITH
extra steps or be required to pay DISABILITIES
extra fees or meet criteria that are not Another category of housing that often
required of housing that serves the triggers initial opposition is housing that
majority population (everyone else). The serves people with disabilities or special
"minority population" can be defined in needs housing. The reaction is often based
terms of one or more of the seven federal on fear of people who seem "different." The
protected classes or Oregon's protected first step is to recognize the potential for
classes. Thus, it would be illegal for a having a fear-based reaction and make the
jurisdiction to require developers of conscious choice to move beyond it to facts,
multifamily affordable housing to meet understanding, and community.
with neighbors if it did not require
the same of all multifamily housing Since the 1960s, there has been a cultural
developers. (Unequal Treatment) change in the US involving the movement
• It is illegal to have laws that seem away from placing people with disabilities,
neutral on the surface but result a or those recovering from alcohol and drug
disproportionate cost or delay for addictions, into large institutions. As a
housing that serves minority populations. result, an increasing proportion of people
(Disparate Impact) with a wide range of disabilities—physical,
mental health, developmental—live in
• Outright discrimination is also illegal, communities, either in traditional housing or
such as prohibiting the development of in staffed homes with services, depending
affordable housing in the jurisdiction. on the individual.
It is important to remember that people There are many different types and names
in protected classes must follow rules for specialized housing with services for
and regulations that govern the rest of people with disabilities, including supportive
14\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 14 OF 36
i iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii/,hill/ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
■ ■■ ■■■
■ ■■■ inr
■ ■ ■■■
MYTH ••
■ ■ ■ ■■
Affordable housing always lowers property values in the ■ ■
surrounding neighborhood.
FACT
How affordable housing affects nearby properties is complicated.
In 2005, the Journal of Planning Literature published an
authoritative review of seventeen academic studies that occurred
over 40 years regarding the impact of subsidized housing on
neighborhood property values. The author concluded:
• Housing that was acquired and rehabilitated as affordable
housing had a positive effect on nearby property values.
• Subsidized housing had no effect on nearby property values
when it was sited in healthy and vibrant neighborhoods, when
it was dispersed, and when it had responsive, responsible
management. Conversely, negative effects on property
values were more likely to occur when affordable housing was
clustered and located in declining neighborhoods.
• When negative effects do occur, they were relatively small,
especially compared to other factors that affected property
values.
Source:Nguyen,M.T.(2005).Does affordable housing detrimentally affect property values? A review of the literature.
not:101177/0885412205277069
1111L--
•
•
4At -13.•.0***
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/15
LU 25-0001 I -
FAIR HOUSING
housing, group homes and community FAIR HOUSING PROTECTIONS FOR
residential facilities. Examples include: THE DEVELOPMENT OF HOUSING
• Group homes for persons recovering from FOR PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES
alcohol or drug addiction In addition to the protections for affordable
housing described above, there are several
• Residential treatment facilities for persons additional principles that underlie fair
with a mental illness housing as it applies to the development of
• Adult foster homes for older adults housing for people with disabilities, including:
needing assistance with activities of daily • REASONABLE ACCOMMODATION:
living As discussed in Chapter 1, the Fair
• Group homes for adults or children with Housing Act requires local governments
developmental disabilities to make minor modifications to local
regulations (including zoning and land
In addition to these clear-cut examples, there use regulations) if so requested, if doing
are a variety of other living arrangements so affords equal housing opportunity to
which may not, on the surface, appear to people with disabilities. For example, a
house people with disabilities, but which developer might request an exception to
do so in fact. One example is transitional a required setback that would enable a
housing for formerly homeless individuals. wheelchair ramp with the proper slope to
While homelessness is not in and of be installed.
itself considered to be a disability, many • NO QUOTAS: The Department of Justice
individuals who are homeless may have one has advised local jurisdictions that setting
or more disabilities. Others may be members
quotas on the number or share of housing
of a protected class in Oregon by virtue of units that serve people with disabilities
being a survivor of domestic violence. A
within a geographic area is a fair housing
disproportionate share of homeless youth are violation. The only time that jurisdictions
gay, bisexual, lesbian, transsexual or queer, may consider issues related to the
and sexual orientation and gender identity concentration of people with disabilities
are protected classes in Oregon. Thus, on a within an area is when such concentration
case-by-case basis, fair housing protections may work to the disadvantage of people
may extend to a wide variety of congregate with disabilities.
living situations.
MEMO
■■■■
IIIIIIIIIIIII En..
IIIIIIIIIi1!I E E M O
■■■■
16/ Fair Housing Council of Oregon
a#a at t '
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 16 OF 36
tilik
MYTH
Affordable housing is ugly and will quickly become an eyesore.
FACT
Perceptions about the design and construction of affordable
housing project are often based on memories of old public
housing projects, some of which were, indeed, built cheaply
(by Congressional mandate) and were unattractive. Much
has changed since then; in Oregon, the emphasis has been
on building sturdy, attractive and highly functional housing
for many years now. Nonprofits and public agencies that
build affordable housing are in it for the long haul; it makes
sense for them to use durable materials and maintain the
properties, as they are long-term owners and not in this
business to make money and sell the property to a new owner.
Affordable housing developments that are well built, blend
into the neighborhood and well maintained can be among a
neighborhood's assets.
• CONFIDENTIALITY: Just like everyone provide specific protections but are not as
else, people with disabilities have a right broad as federal fair housing law. Thus, it is
to privacy with respect to their medical necessary, but not sufficient, that local codes
information. Housing providers cannot comply with Oregon law.
disclose the nature of the disability that
individuals have. Specifically, Oregon law requires that
jurisdictions make licensed residential
OREGON STATE LAW homes a permitted use in all residential
AND RESIDENTIAL HOMES zones and also in any commercial zone
AND FACILITIES that allows single-family dwellings (ORS
While each jurisdiction has its own zoning 197.660). A permitted use is a one that is
code and other rules that govern the allowed outright in a particular zone and
location and development of housing for does not require additional review to see if it
people with disabilities, Oregon also has meets extra criteria. A classic example of a
adopted laws on this subject with which permitted use is a single-family home in an
jurisdictions must comply. These state laws area zoned for single-family residences.
fIa'' COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/17
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 17 OF 36
FAIR HOUSING ,,,,,,,,
A licensed residential home is defined as a review, hearings or meetings or impose
home that is licensed by the state and serves additional standards on the group home.
no more than five individuals with mental
health disabilities or addictions (residential Oregon state law also requires jurisdictions
treatment homes) or developmental to make licensed residential facilities—
disabilities (residential training homes). It facilities licensed to serve six or more
also includes adult foster homes that serve individuals with physical, mental health or
five or fewer adults needing residential care developmental disabilities (defined in ORS
in a homelike environment (ORS 443.400). 443.400)—a permitted use in any zone
The licensing agencies are the Oregon where multifamily housing is a permitted
Health Authority, the Oregon Department of use. They must also be either a permitted or
Human Services and the Oregon Department conditional use in zones where multifamily
of Human Services or Health Authority for housing is a conditional use (ORS 197.667).
treatment homes, training homes and foster
homes, respectively. KEY CONCEPTS
In general, people who need subsidized
Fair housing laws provide even greater housing are also people whose access
protections than the state protections for to housing choice is protected under fair
residential homes. Many different types of housing law.
homes with disabled persons are not and do • There are many myths surrounding
not need to be licensed. Many people that affordable or subsidized housing and the
fall under the Fair Housing Act's definition people who reside there.
of "disabled" have a high degree of self-
care, and, while they may not need the level Affordable housing does not
of service provided in a licensed home or automatically lower property values
facility, they may find group living situations on the properties in the surrounding
beneficial. Permitting and zoning restrictions neighborhoods; property values
that directly target these unlicensed group depend on the current health of the
homes or group living situations are a neighborhood and a host of other
violation of the Fair Housing Act. factors.
• Affordable housing is more often than
Thus in residential zones, a group home that not attractive and well maintained.
serves five or fewer disabled individuals
must be treated in the same way that a • An increase in the number of low income
single-family home that serves five or fewer people into a neighborhood does not
unrelated individuals would be treated. necessarily translate into an increase in
Jurisdictions may not require additional crime.
18\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
1
ATTACAr:.AGE 1 : • •
,, // ,, , LI/ , , , ,
'( j
MYTH CRIMINAL HISTORY
An increase in the number of people One attribute that is frequently of
who have lower incomes means concern is NOT a protected class:
more crime. involvement with the criminal justice
FACT system. The federal Department of
Justice advises:
That's not what the research says. In The disability discrimination provisions
Memphis Murder Mystery Revisited: of the Fair Housing Act do not extend to
Do Housing Voucher Households persons who claim to be disabled solely
Cause Crime? researchers at New on the basis of having been adjudicated a
York University's Furman Center juvenile delinquent, having a criminal record,
y or being a sex offender. Furthermore, the
tracked voucher holders and their Fair Housing Act does not protect persons
impact on neighborhood crime. who currently use illegal drugs,persons who
Using neighborhood-level data have been convicted of the manufacture
for 10 cities across the nation, the or sale of illegal drugs, or persons with or
without disabilities who present a direct
authors, "refute the notion that threat to the persons or property of others.
rising numbers of voucher holders (Joint Statement of the Department Of
contribute to increasing rates of Justice and the Department Of Housing
neighborhood crime... They also And Urban Development regarding Group
found no association between Homes, Local Land Use,And the Fair
the arrival of voucher holders in a Housing Act).
neighborhood and the incidence of It is important to note that some re-
crime one year later." entry housing developments serve
Source:National Low Income Housing Coalition,http://nlihc.org/article/ people with addictions or other
studies-examine-effects-affordable-housing-crime-patterns disabilities by design, and thus fair
housing protections (such as the
requirement to make reasonable
In Oregon, in residential zones, group homes accommodations if requested)
that serve five or fewer disabled individuals would apply. However, this does not
must be treated in the same way that a mean that the residents may lawfully
single-family dwelling is treated. continue to use illegal substances or
commit any other kind of offense that
In Oregon, jurisdictions are required to make would otherwise be considered a crime.
licensed residential facilities serving six or Source:Joint Statement of the Department Of Justice and the Department Of
more individuals with disabilities a permitted Housing And Urban Development regarding Group Homes,Local Land Use,And
used in any zone where multifamily the Fair Housing Act,www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/final8_1.php
dwellings are a permitted use.
fiat.- COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/19
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 19 OF 36
3 . INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS /•kir,
ir-41
When conflicts arise about land of personal characteristics related to
use issues in neighborhoods, public protected classes.
officials—elected officials, planning
commission members, planners, While these basic ideas may seem
public administrators and other straightforward, the difficulty arises in
staff—often find themselves in the applying them to real situations in the
middle, acting informally as arbiters community. So many decisions involve
or more formally as decision-makers. judgment calls about what constitutes a
On one hand, they are called to reasonable request and what constitutes an
understand the neighbors' wishes effort to make it difficult, if not impossible, to
to manage their surroundings; on develop a new project serving people whom
the other hand, they are called to neighbors view as being somehow different
respect and uphold the rights of from themselves. When in doubt, ask for
those seeking to provide housing for help. The Fair Housing Council of Oregon
some of the community's hardest to welcomes your inquiries. We would much
house residents. In this endeavor, rather help you avoid missteps than seek
public officials must be guided not remedial action in response to a complaint
only by their own judgment, but also from an aggrieved party.
by laws and professional standards
of conduct associated with their FAIR HOUSING COUNCIL OF OREGON
professions. One area of law with i 1 (800) 424-3247
which public officials need to be www.fhco.org
familiar is fair housing. This chapter
addresses how fair housing laws This chapter is especially indebted to the information provided by Tracey
come into play in neighborhood McCartney,Tennessee Fair Housing Council,in her guide NavigatingNIMBY::
A Public Official's Guide to Neighborhood Living for People with Disabilities,
disputes' Summer 2003.www.tennfairhousing.org/resources
z The most recent change to Oregon's protected classes has the effect of
As the introductory chapter indicates, it is making it illegal to discriminate against someone because the source
illegal to deny access to housing to people of their rent is derived from a Housing Choice(Section 8)Voucher,
effective July 1,2014.
because of their protected class status,
regardless of whether that status arises
from federal, state2 or local law. More I " '
proactively, fair housing is about ensuring
1111
that people have access to the full array of
housing's benefits (including resource- and
opportunity-rich neighborhoods) regardless •••
•••
II
20\Fair Housing Council of Oregon V
-0001 -ATTACH 1/PAG I OF 36
TIP
If your jurisdiction uses a land use review committee,
look closely at who serves on the committee.
Less informed citizen members, although well
intentioned, can run afoul of fair housing provisions
and create a potential liability for the jurisdiction.
T ROLES OF PUBLIC OFFICIALS
As a public official, you play an important their choice on the other. Here are some
le-dership role in the community. If you suggestions on how to find that balance:
ar- an elected or appointed public official,
you make important decisions that affect 1. Listen to what neighbors have to say.
tr e welfare of both individuals in your Community members have the right,
community and your community as a whole. under First Amendment free speech
ou also have access to "the bully pulpit" as protections, to express their opposition to
a means of affecting community sentiment projects on any basis (as long as it does
and expressing new ideas. If you are an not constitute illegal intimidation).
elected leader, constituents may come to
you for help or leverage in addressing their 2. Never make land use or other decisions
concerns. based upon discriminatory statements
made by community members. The
If you are staff, you play an important role courts have repeatedly found such
in upholding, interpreting and explaining decisions to be in violation of fair housing
laws and rules that have been adopted for laws. Taking such action may result in
the benefit of the community overall. You costly legal fees, fines and damages
. - : - - - _ .•-- • _ - - .- •nes most charged to your jurisdiction.
likely to first encounter the angry response
of neighbors who discover a new project 3. Be aware of, and nip in the bud, efforts
proposed for their neighborhood or who are to delay a project through requests
upset with the behavior of other neighbors. from neighbors for repeated meetings
to rehash topics already discussed and
Your job is to walk the line between addressed. At public meetings, balance
responding to legitimate community the need to permit free speech with
concerns about safety and neighborhood the right to be free from intimidation.
conditions on one hand and protecting the Mentally place yourself in the audience,
rights of all residents to have fair access to as a potential resident of the proposed
housing opportunities in communities of housing development, as a way to monitor
1 Ia, COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/21
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 21 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
r P
if and when the testimony strays into those criteria cannot be considered by the
intimidation. Efforts to delay a project can decision-makers.
lead to extra costs for the developer and
threaten its viability. Stalling tactics based 6. Take appropriate action to address
on an illegal objective, lacking a reasonable legitimate complaints that the residents
basis in law or fact or having an improper of any home or apartment building,
motive are violations of the Fair Housing including subsidized or special-needs
Act (U.S. v. Wagner, 940F, Supp 972 (N.D. housing, are engaging in conduct
Texas 1996)). that is dangerous or a nuisance. Fair
housing does not give anyone free rein
4. Be aware of efforts to delay or overburden to disregard the law. Disturbances of
a project through raising facially "neutral" the peace, violent behavior, trespassing
issues (such as parking concerns) which and other offenses should be addressed.
have little basis in fact. Over the years, The complaints must be addressed on
it has become less socially acceptable the basis of the behavior of specific
to raise concerns about a project based individuals, and not on stereotypes about
on the race, ethnicity, national origin or how "those people" behave.
disability status of the likely residents.
Thus, neighbors are likely to find other 7. If your jurisdiction receives federal
ways to raise concerns about a project. housing funds, be aware of your
When you hear concerns about things responsibility to affirmatively further
like parking, sight lines and setbacks, ask fair housing. If you are not familiar with
yourself whether such objections would be it already, find out about your Analysis
raised if the project were to be occupied of Impediments to Housing Choice and
by a different population. Sometimes such the actions that your community has
objections are raised to stall the project proposed to promote access to housing
and drive up the cost of development. opportunities for everyone.
5. If a public hearing is part of a quasi-
judicial proceeding, remind speakers . . .
that a decision can be made solely on
the basis of whether a particular project I
I
conforms to pre-established criteria. If • , • �!
speakers stray into other areas, you can '• I
remind them that testimony not related to ** h. A -
22\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 22 OF 36 r
riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir riiiiiiiiiiiiii
Co MON FAIR HOUSING MISTAKES AFFIRMATIVELY FURTHERING
AN HOW TO AVOID THEM FAIR HOUSING
In a effort to be responsive to constituents
or t• reduce community conflict, it is all
too -asy to stray into practices which All jurisdictions that receive
ma in fact, have a discriminatory effect federal funds of any kind (not
on .rotected classes or otherwise violate just housing) are required to take
fai housing laws. This section describes steps to affirmatively further fair
co mon mistakes and the steps that public housing. At its most fundamental,
of icials can take to avoid or rectify them. the term affirmatively furthering fair
housing means going beyond not
R-quiring that affordable/subsidized discriminating to actively promoting
ousing projects undergo additional access to homes in resource and
pproval steps, hearings, meetings with opportunity-rich communities
neighbors or other processes not required by those who historically have
for similar multi-unit housing developments. had the fewest housing choices,
Public officials and staff may not impose and to invest in bringing higher
extra steps or meetings, and you may not quality services and resources to
condition your approval upon the developer neighborhoods that have such
taking any extra steps. For example, you populations and individuals. If
may not require an affordable housing your jurisdiction receives federal
developer to meet with the neighborhood housing funds directly from the
association if you do not require the same of US Department of Housing and
developers of for-profit housing projects. Urban Development, then, in most
cases, you have also adopted an
Requiring affordable/subsidized housing Analysis of Impediments to Housing
projects to have extra screening, setbacks Choice and a corresponding plan
or other design modifications you do not describing actions to address the
require of for-profit housing projects. identified impediments. In this case,
For example, if a neighbor were to complain affirmatively furthering fair housing
about having "those people" move in, you mean something specific; it means
may not require the affordable housing
implementing those actions and
project to build a fence, documenting them and other steps
plant screening
shrubbery or provide a bigger setback if that your jurisdiction has undertaken
to address the impediments.
those same requirements would not impose
upon a project with a similar form in the
same zone.
1 aiv, COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/23
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 23 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
r P
Placing burdensome public safety or special needs housing are required
requirements on affordable housing or to submit documentation that their
housing for people with disabilities. plans conform to local zoning codes.
To quote the law, fair housing does not Withholding or delaying certifications or
provide protection to "an individual whose other documentation that the developer
tenancy would constitute a direct threat to needs could be considered discrimination,
the health or safety of other individuals or especially if the underlying reason for doing
whose tenancy would result in substantial so is itself discriminatory (for example,
physical damage to the property of because of objections to the project by
others" (42 U.S. Code § 3604(f)(9)). Thus, neighbors).
a jurisdiction may impose reasonable
protections to ensure the safety of the Again, a court case provides a relevant
community as a whole. However, the example. In Fu v. City of Clyde Hill,
concerns upon which the protections are an operator of a home for adults with
based must be fact-based. The concerns disabilities requested documentation from
may not be based on assumptions, the city certifying that that her home would
generalizations or stereotypes about a not be in violation of the local zoning
population as a whole, and the protections ordinance. Her bank loan was denied
must be reasonable. because the city would not provide that
documentation. The court held that the
The courts have provided guidance on town's failure to provide the letter was a
reasonableness. For example, a court in violation of fair housing laws (FH-FL Rptr.
Utah found that requiring a group home 16.195( W.D.Wash. March 7, 1997)).
for developmentally disabled adults to
have 24-7 supervision and a community Treating group homes in a neighborhood
advisory panel to address complaints to zoned for single dwelling units differently
be intentional discrimination. The court from any other housing for unrelated
found that the city did not place similar people living together in a single unit.
requirements on other communal living The remedy here is straightforward: do not
arrangements and that the requirements impose any use restrictions, notice criteria,
were not justified by actual public safety design requirements or siting criteria on
concerns (46 F .3d 1491 (10th Cir. 1995)). group homes that you do not apply to
other group living situations, such as a
Interfering with funding for an affordable or group of unrelated people renting a house
fair housing project. together or a homeowner who provides
Often applicants for funding for affordable or rents space to housemates. If there are
24\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 24 OF 36
TIP
Neighbors need a place to air their grievances; however,
monthly meetings on the same subject with the same
opposition only creates hardship for the affordable
housing provider. Be clear on what is not negotiable.
conflicts between neighbors, and one of the been found to be in violation of the Fair
neighbors happens to be a group home, you Housing Act because they limit housing
may refer them to a Community Dispute choice for people with disabilities. (See, for
Resolution Center, just as you might offer example, Larkin v. State of Michigan, 89 F.3d
this referral to other neighbors who have 285 (6th Cir. 1996)).
conflicts. You may not, however, make an
approval contingent upon a successful A fundamental principle of the Fair
resolution of a conflict involving a group Housing Act's protections is that people
home if you do not also follow this approach with disabilities should be able to live in
with other neighbors. an integrated residential setting of their
choice. The only way that dispersion
Imposing dispersion or spacing requirements have been found to be
requirements for housing for people with acceptable by the courts is if they result in
disabilities. an environment beneficial for the disabled
In an effort to prevent the concentration residents by avoiding segregation and
of special needs housing for people with clustering (Famiiystyie of St. Paul v. City of
disabilities in a particular neighborhood, St. Paul, Minnesota, 923 F.2nd 91 (8th Cir.
some cities may consider imposing 1991)). However, in most cases, dispersion
dispersion requirements that require a requirements have been found to be in
designated amount of space between such violation of the Fair Housing Act and have
housing. Such spacing requirements have been struck down by the courts.
0
•
• •
• •
• I ~ . �
VA
1 aii„^ COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/25
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 25 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS =ME / kni
Irmf
. .O
PROVIDING REASONABLE ELJ
■
ACCOMMODATIONS FOR PEOPLE
WITH DISABILITIES FAIR HOUSING LAND USE
To ensure that people with disabilities
have access to a full range of housing AND ZONING CHECKLIST
opportunities, fair housing law enables FOR O R E G O N
them or their representatives to ask for a
reasonable accommodation—a departure The Fair Housing Council of Oregon
from a general rule or practice—to adapt or has developed a checklist for local
develop housing that is accessible. jurisdictions to use in reviewing their
land use and subdivision ordinances
According to the federal Department of and related practices. Called
Justice, whether or not a request for an Examining Local Land Use with a Fair
accommodation based on disability is Housing Lens, the checklist helps
reasonable depends on the answers to two jurisdictions both identify problem
questions: areas and add new best practices. It
• Does the request impose an undue is a "living tool" in that it is updated
burden or expense on the local as the Fair Housing Council assists
government? local jurisdictions with code-related
issues and discovers additional
• Does the proposed use create a issues and best practices. The most
fundamental alteration in the zoning recent version of the checklist can be
scheme [or other regulation]? For found on the Fair Housing Council of
example, does it allow a fundamentally Oregon's website:
different kind of use, such as a large www.fhco.org/pdfs/AFFHfhcol.pdf
skilled nursing facility in a single family
neighborhood?
If the answer to either question is "yes,"
then the requested accommodation may
be considered unreasonable. This is a very
complex and nuanced topic (for example,
how does one determine whether a burden •
or expense is "undue?") with a substantial , •###aa
amount of case law informing it.
26/ Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 26 OF 36
1
DID YOU KNOW? •
• A •
Failure to provide reasonable ••r
accommodations is a violation of
the Fair Housing Act. If this occurs, •
contact the Fair Housing Council of (It
Oregon for assistance.
Lo.al jurisdictions are encouraged by the
De•artment of Justice to specify, provide
an• publicize the availability of mechanisms
fo requesting a reasonable accommodation. COMMUNITY- BASED DISPUTE
T ese processes may not impose significant RESOLUTION CENTERS
casts or delays. If your jurisdiction does not
-pecify a mechanism, applicants for people IN O R E G O N
with disabilities can still request a reasonable -
accommodation. Inordinate delay or failure In Oregon, 22 of the state's 36 counties
to respond to such a request is a fair housing are served by one or more community-
violation. based dispute resolution centers that
provide a neutral forum for resolving
COMMUNITY DISPUTE conflict. A current list of centers can
RESOLUTION PROGRAMS be found through Oregon Office for
Some communities may find it helpful to Community Dispute Resolution at the
engage the services of a Community Dispute University Of Oregon School Of Law:
Resolution Program to help work through
concerns with respect to a new or existing www.osbar.org/_flocs/public/cable/commdispute.pdf
ousi' . . •.- . - :-- - -.. -•
organizations, some of which are affiliated
with city government, have trained staff and
volunteers who provide a neutral forum and ::::
a facilitated process for addressing conflict.
Community dispute resolution is a way to IIIIIIIIIIIII
raise difficult issues in a non-confrontational
way and work toward finding a solution that IMIIIIIIIII ••••
all parties can accept. ■■M■
1 iaN,COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/27
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 27 OF 36
INFO FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS
One of the potential outcomes of a KEY CONCEPTS
community dispute resolution process is a • Public officials, including elected officials
voluntary Good Neighbor Agreement, which and Planning Commission members as
lays out the rules each party agrees to follow well as staff, often finds themselves in the
to avoid conflict and be good neighbors, as middle of conflict over the development of
well as steps to take if problems do arise. affordable/subsidized housing or special
needs housing.
•
• Be aware of common fair housing
mistakes, especially those that place
burdensome requirements on housing for
people with special needs.
RESOURCES ABOUT REASONABLE • Engage the services of a Community
ACCOMMODATIONS Dispute resolution program if it exists in
your community.
Joint Statement of the Departments • It is important to maintain a balance by
of Justice and of Housing and Urban doing the following:
Development on Group Homes, Land • Listen to what the neighbors have to
Use, and the Fair Housing Act say;
Joint Statement of the Department of • Never make land use decisions on
Housing and Urban Development and discriminatory statements made by
the Department of Justice—Reasonable community members;
Accommodations under the Fair
Housing Act, May 17, 2004. • Be aware of and stop any efforts to
delay a project through neighborhood
www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/about_guidance.php requests for repeated meetings to
discuss the same topics over and over
again;
•
•
4-
.kt
28/ Fair Housing Council of Oregon s
LU 25-0001 AT 8 OF 36
ii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii..___i iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
• Be aware of effort to delay a project Housing is a platform—a location in a
through raising facially neutral issues particular place and a safe haven—for
such as parking or traffic; pursuing life's opportunities. Housing
If a public hearing is part of a quasi- situates people in a particular place, with a
judicial proceeding, remind speakers particular set of nearby assets like schools,
that a decision can be made solely on in a particular environment (healthy and
the basis that the project conforms to safe, unhealthy and unsafe or somewhere in
established criteria; between), and among a particular group of
people. Denying people the opportunity to
• Take appropriate action to address live where they can thrive based on their race,
legitimate complaints of neighbors; color, religion, national origin, sex, disability,
and, or family status perpetuates cycles of poverty
• Be aware of your responsibility to and despair and represents both a huge loss
affirmatively further fair housing if of human potential and a crime.
your jurisdiction receives federal
funding. At first, integration may not be easy or
comfortable for those on the front lines—
CONCLUSION: FROM NIMBY TO not for the neighbors who may be reluctant
ACCESS TO OPPORTUNITY to experience change, nor for the new
In the decades since the passage of the people moving in. As public officials, you
Fair Housing Act, the emphasis has begun have the opportunity to promote patience,
to change from a focus on the prevention dialogue and understanding. You also have
and elimination of discriminatory practices the responsibility of upholding the law. We
(eliminating a negative) to proactively
encourage you to use the resources at your
supporttrrg acc rite -throw h disposal, including our office, to help promos_
enabling a wider variety of housing and fair access to opportunity through housing in
neighborhood choices for those who your community.
historically and economically have had the 4
fewest choices (pursuing a positive). 0 0 0 . • •
ell— •
SS
otAii. • 0 0
'I
■ ■
t v`P .
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/29
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 29 OF 36
4 . RESOURCES
The information available online
on fair housing and inclusive ESSENTIAL RESOURCES FROM
communities continues to expand. THE DEPARTMENTS OF HOUSING
Entering the search terms "Fair AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT AND
Housing" and "NIMBY" (which JUSTICE
stands for Not in My Back Yard, a
term commonly used to describe Fair Housing Act, As Amended:
neighborhood opposition to a www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/title8.php
project being located in that
neighborhood) into a web browser List of Fair Housing Laws from HUD's Office
will yield resources which can be of Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity:
scanned to determine which ones http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/
are from reliable sources, such as fair_housing_equal_opp/FHLaws
state fair housing agencies, national
nonprofits and academic sources. Department of Justice Fair Housing Policy
Statements and Guidance:
In this dynamic information www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/about_guidance.php
environment, a comprehensive list of
resources would soon be out of date. Department of Justice Overview of Fair
Thus, the information in this chapter Housing Act and Enforcement Measures:
represents an annotated selection of www.justice.gov/crt/about/hce/housing_coverage.php
key resources, including ones used in
the development of this guide. While
all links are current as of publication
of this guide in July 2014, they, too,
may change over time.
30\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 30 OF 36
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii.hill, iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiir iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
IPP.4. w
OREGON-SPECIFIC MATERIALS GENERAL GUIDES
City of Portland, Office of Neighborhood Pratt, Sara and Allen, Michael. (2004).
Inv Ivement (2072). Addressing Community Opposition to
Co munity Residential Siting Resources. Affordable Housing Development: A
ww portlandoregon.gov/oni/32417 Fair Housing Toolkit. Housing Alliance of
efore it was discontinued in 2012, the Pennsylvania.
ommunity Residential Siting Program www.housingalliancepa.org/resources/111
rovided guidance to neighbors and At 80 pages, a very thorough guide
ousing providers on siting affordable to understanding and responding to
housing and housing for difficult-to-house neighborhood concerns about affordable
populations in Portland and Multnomah housing. This guide addresses the I
County. Four practical resources are following topics: zoning and land use, free
still available on the website above: speech, community information campaigns
information for neighbors, recommended and government opposition. The sidebars
public involvement guidelines, community contain relevant examples, information
involvement strategies, and site selection about best practices, practice-related hints,
guidelines for post-incarceration facilities. and detailed information about topics
Some of the information references mentioned in the text. The list of resources
Portland zoning code and may not be (10 pages) includes websites, articles and
applicable elsewhere, but much of the books, and cases. This is a good resource
l information is relevant throughout the to have bookmarked on your computer.
state.
Fair Housing Council of Oregon (2014).
Examining Local Land Use With a Fair
Housing Lens: An Evaluation Tool for
Planners, Policy Makers and Other
Practitioners.
www.fhco.org/pdfs/AFFHfhcol.pdf
A checklist for reviewing zoning codes and
current planning practices based on both
fair housing laws and Oregon state land use
laws and administrative rules.
1 iaii,' COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/31
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 31 OF 36
RESOURCES ILEHI,
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RESOURCES FOR NEIGHBORS RESOURCES FOR PUBLIC OFFICIALS
Tennessee Fair Housing Council. (2003). McCartney, Tracey. (2003). Navigating
Good Neighbors, Healthy Communities. NIMBY: A Public Official's Guide to
www.tennfairhousing.org/resources Neighborhood Living for People with
A guide about housing for people with Disabilities. Tennessee Fair Housing Council.
disabilities written for neighborhood www.tennfairhousing.org/resources
residents. Using research findings, it One of the few guides available specifically
addresses common misconceptions about for elected officials. It includes a clear,
the impact of group homes and other logical presentation of the laws and
housing for people with disabilities on significant cases, myths and truths about
neighbors and neighborhoods. It also people with disabilities and a thoughtful
includes chapters on relevant laws, the chapter on the role of public officials.
rights of neighbors who live near housing
for people with disabilities and frequently Voelker, Robert. (n.d.). Utilizing the Fair
asked questions. Housing Act to Counteract NIMBY.
Shelterforce Online. National Housing
Institute.
www.nhi.org/online/issues/fairhousingmonth.html#Resources
A brief but very useful article that
describes the kinds of actions by local
governments and local officials that courts
have found to be in violation of the Fair
Housing Act. Includes a list of resources.
32\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 32 OF 36
RESOURCES FOR HOUSING
PROVIDERS
Connelly, Joy. (2005). Yes, in My Back Yard: Housing Assistance Council. (2005). Telling
A Guide for Ontario's Supportive Housing Our Story: Marketing Affordable Housing.
Providers. HomeComing Community Choice Rural Voices (10) 1.
Coalition. www.ruralhome.org/storage/documents/voicesspring2005.pdf
www.homecomingcoalition.com The Spring 2005 edition of Rural Voices,
While the laws governing housing choice the publication of the Housing Assistance
are different in the US and Canada, the Council, includes ten articles about how
underlying human dynamics are similar. This to advocate for affordable housing within
guide provides step-by-step suggestions for communities, with funders and with local
housing developers. Of particular interest residents in rural areas.
are the fifteen predictable objections and
how to deal with them. John Jay College of Criminal Justice. (2009).
In Our Backyard: Overcoming Community
Corporation for Supportive Housing. (2006). Resistance to Reentry Housing.
Thinking Beyond NIMBY: Building Community www•jjay.cuny.edu/TOOL_KIT_1-NIMBY_FINAL.pdf
Support for Supportive Housing. This guide introduces the magnitude of
www.csh.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/BeyondNlMBYpdf.pdf the challenge of finding housing for people
A guide for providers of supportive released from jails and prisons. The principal
housing—affordable housing with services focus is a detailed case study of The Castle,
for people who face complex challenges a reentry project undertaken by the Fortune
with daily living. Includes a variety of Society in New York City, and the more
strategies for overcoming community fears, broadly applicable best practices learned
including ideas for ways to link to outside from it. The publication also includes a list of
resources. Concludes with a case study and resources related to on reentry housing and
a list of additional publications. related topics.
1 Ih�ll^� COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/33
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 33 OF 36
4 . RESOURCES ,,,,,,,,, i ,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
RESOURCES FOR HOUSING
PROVIDERS CONTINUED
OneCPD Resource Exchange (n.d.). NIMBY
Risk Assessment and Decision Tree Tool
(online resource).
https://onecpd.info/resources/nimbyassessment
An online resource for developers of
housing, with or without supportive
services, targeted to homeless individuals.
The user completes an online questionnaire
about current concerns, and the tool leads
to targeted case studies that address the
identified issues.
Tennessee Fair Housing Council. (2003). A
Place to Call Home: Addressing Opposition
to Homes for People with Disabilities in
Tennessee Neighborhoods.
www.tennfairhousing.org/resources
A guide for providers of housing for
people with disabilities. One of the best
features of this guide is a thorough
discussion of the comparative advantages
and disadvantages of high profile and
low profile approaches to siting. Other
chapters present an overview of relevant
laws, myths and truths (backed by research
findings) and other issues related to siting,
including a discussion of "fair share."
34\Fair Housing Council of Oregon
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 34 OF 36
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiriiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiii
NO ES
Iiil 4
• • • . •
Nom ■ ■ ■ • N ■ ■ ■ ■ II ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ UUU ■ ■ ■
■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ gm p ■ ■
■ ■ • ■ ■
. ,
. illi � 11411MT11911 0 •
Ilti it ' w-. - mi VA)
COMMON GROUND: GUIDE FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS/35
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 35 OF 36
•
:,
IFAIR
HOUSING
COUNCIL
OF OREGON
www.fhco.org
(503)223-8197
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 1/PAGE 36 OF 36
Po ffr . 1)
Ii ui1din4- Inclusive Communities
A Guide for Public Officials
r1/441,
4
144
Op) aer
-
IL
MIN alb
411111111.
f o O C
[1 L
�
} .
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 1 OF 30
❑ ❑
Scan QR code to download the online
version of this guide, complete with
&� r • ir reference links and the latest updates.
■ r
I
11111FAIR
HOUSING
COUNCIL
OF ORE ON
Fair Housing Council of Oregon,Winter 2024
Have a fair housing question or complaint in Oregon?Contact our housing discrimination hotline anytime via email at enforcement@
fhco.org or through our website.Please be sure to include your name,contact information,raceðnicity,city&zip code,and as
much detail as possible including dates and nature of incident(s).Providing this information will help us to assist you better.
Developed and written by Commonworks Consulting with JET Planning
Design and layout by Jean Dahlquist
The author gratefully acknowledges the assistance and contributions of the Oregon Depai trnent of Land Conservation and
Development in preparing this guide.
The work that provided the basis for this publication was supported by funding under a grant with the U.S.Department of Housing
and Urban Development(HUD).The substance and findings of this work are dedicated to the public.The author and publisher are
solely responsible for the accuracy of the statements and interpretations contained in this publication. Such interpretations do not
necessarily reflect the views of the federal government.
Page x
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 2 OF 30
Table of Contents
1. Introduction ...Pate 1
- Why You Should Use This Guide - Pg 2
- Key Housing Terms - Pg 3
- A Note About Affordable Housing and Fair Housing - Pg 4
2. Federal Fair Housint Basics ...Pate 5
- What is Meant By Discrimination? - Pg 6
- Brief History of Segregation & Land Use in Oregon - Pg 7
- Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing in Federal Law - Pg 8
3 Fair Housint & Ore on Goal 10 Plannin ...Pate 9
- Towards a Marriage of Systems - Pg io
- Plan for Fair and Inclusive Communities - Pg II
- Integrating Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing Into - Pg 12
Your City's Housing Production Strategy
- Increasing Housing Choice Through Supporting the - Pg 13
Development of Diverse Housing Types
- Incorporate Fair and Inclusive Community Engagement - Pg 15
- Establish and Follow Fair and Inclusive Local - Pg 17
Regulations
4. Ore on Land Use Laws and Fair IIousil ...Pa<te 22
11
_ .
.......7 ..../
J1 I I;14
Page xi
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 3 OF 30
1 Introduction
Is this Guide for You?
If you are a planning commissioner, elected official, or a Chapter 2 introduces fair housing and how it is intertwined
city or county staff member who is unclear about what with land use planning historically and today. Chapter
fair housing has to do with land use planning,then this 3 is about how land use planning can foster inclusive
guide is for you. If you are a local staff or official looking to communities, places where everyone is welcome. It
support fair housing,this guide is for you. Staff from other addresses ways to integrate fair housing principles into
departments and agencies that intersect with housing the Oregon Goal 10 housing planning process. Planning
or land use, such as building officials or social services staff seeking formal guidance on Goal 10 should consult
providers, as well as housing developers and community the authoritative materials provided by the Department of
advocates, may also find this guide useful. Land Conservation and Development (DLCD)1.
This guide is about land use planning and management
through a fair housing lens, with an emphasis on
housing that meets the needs of those most challenged
to find a suitable place to live.The goal is to create
inclusive communities by expanding housing choice
and affirmatively furthering fair and equitable housing.
Expanding housing choice means both reducing the 1 Should there be a conflict,guidance provided by DLCD super-
barriers that people experience in finding and securing sedes information in this guide. DLCD guidance is authoritative and is
likely to be more detailed and timelier.
housing that meets their needs and budget and increasing
the range of good housing options available to them.
1=1 II
0 I O O s
im O O
O O
• O O
Page 1 •
- l 5- O D ATTACH 2/PAGE 4 OF 30
O O
Why You Should Use This Guide
Oregon faces a critical shortage of all housing, but
most especially housing affordable to households
and individuals with modest incomes. In 2021, the state
needed an estimated 140,000 more housing units just
to meet current demand at all income levels. Nearly
30%of the projected 580,000 housing units required to
meet housing need through 2042 (twenty years) must
be affordable to Oregon's lowest-income residents and
require public funding.2
Many have called for cuffing regulations and streamlining
processes to address this crisis. But slashing regulations
does not ensure that Oregonians will get more of the
housing needed most, nor does it address existing housing
issues like segregated neighborhoods, racial and ethnic
disparities in homeownership, new development that
maximizes profit over housing diversity and opportunity,
homes full of barriers for people with mobility challenges,
and living environments where older adults cannot age
in place. So, it is important to also do things differently.
That's where this guide to Building Inclusive Communities _____,,w \
.......11111111111111
comes in.
Changes in laws and practices take time to bear fruit. As
Ilk
you go down this path, remember you are trying to change f jrig
the course of an ocean liner, not a kayak. But if that ocean
liner doesn't start to change course now, it won't ever get .11
to its destination. Invest now in doing things differently �` '
so that the next generation can live in more inclusive - +
communities, places where everyone can find a suitable
home. —
2 Source:20220201_RHNA_Interim_Framework_Report.
pdf(oregon.gov).These figures are based on pilot effort to estimate
statewide housing need.Since this time,the methodology has been
revised to better account for second homes and vacation homes.
11111
mm 1] I I 1]
11i 1 11 OD s DO DO
I I Page 2
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 5 OF 30
Key Housing Terms Naturally occurring affordable housing means low-cost
housing that was not built with direct government subsidy.
It may include older apartments, manufactured dwelling
In this guide,the term housing types is used to refer to parks, and, in some cities, older single-family dwellings for
the way structures are built. It includes single-family rent.
detached houses,townhouses, plexes (duplexes,triplexes,
and quadplexes), multifamily, accessory dwelling units, Housing Affordability by Income Level
single room occupancies, and so forth. It also includes
various construction methods, including manufactured, The Oregon Housing Needs Analysis analyzes housing need
prefabricated, and site-built housing. for five income levels:
• Housing affordable to households making less than
Housing affordability refers to the ability of households 30 percent of median family income;
to afford housing if they are to pay no more than 30% • Housing affordable to households making 30
of their gross income for housing costs. While housing percent or more and less than 60 percent of
affordability is a consideration for households at all median family income;
income levels,the term affordable housing typically means . Housing affordable to households making 60
housing affordable to households with lower incomes. percent or more and less than 80 percent of
How low? That depends on the context. For example, median family income;
ORS 197A.470 pertaining to time limits for processing • Housing affordable to households making 80
development applications defines affordable housing as percent or more and less than 120 percent of
being affordable to households earning 60% Median Family median family income; and
Income (MFI), whereas ORS 197A.445 requiring cities to • Housing affordable to households making 120
permit affordable housing developments outright across percent or more of median family income.
most zones defines it as being affordable to households
earning 80% MFI for a minimum of 30 years. Sometimes Source: ORS 194.453(4)
the law also specifies ownership (e.g., nonprofit-owned
housing). Because the term affordable housing is used
fluidly, check individual laws to identify what is meant.
Housing tenure refers to ownership structure. Rental
housing is owned by a non-resident property owner or
landlord. Owner-occupied housing, as the name implies, is
owned by one or more residents. Mixed tenure, also called
divided asset ownership, sometimes occurs, as in the
case of investor-owned manufactured dwelling parks with provided by the federal government. In 2015,it cost$90 billion,while
owner-occupied manufactured homes. While jurisdictions the combined price tag for federal housing assistance to low-income
households such as housing vouchers and public housing was$51
are required to provide for both rental and owner- billion. Source: https://talkpoverty.org/2016/06/30/biggest-beneficia-
occupied housing,they are prohibited from requiring ries-housing-subsidies-wealthy/index.html.
specific projects to be for sale or rent per ORS 197A.465.
Government supported housing refers to housing financed
in whole or part by government subsidy from the federal,
state, or local government or a housing authority, per
ORS 456.005. It includes site-specific subsidies, such as
low-income housing tax credits, or household-specific
subsidies, such as Section 8 or Housing Choice vouchers.
It excludes indirect or market-wide subsidies that affect
housing units produced by the private market, such as the
Mortgage Interest Deduction'or highway investment.
3 While not often considered a housing subsidy,the federal
Mortgage Interest Tax Deduction is the largest single housing subsidy
Page 3
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 6 OF 30
- - -
•
' L �: ;:
ti'kk. y4. v '� Y �"i 7 i,_i .. iy r r •rt:
•
•
•
•
+R . y� 111:2i 1.r� .: rF,.. m }. _ 1 +.�
' s _��'. ,�#, s ti `1- '4 'tat T. �Y• ;' �� - '}''•
• . '.
'' ..‘-.T 1.• II l'Itli op
;iig
3 _
411t17- -..'0'." It "7 ' '. . °L.fiL.:1.1;• ,.. • . .r. - .•...9..
V . ••1 ti " `'. • ice.IllA•. Y .
ii
•
_ � •- - , _ . ....'7;-:. r ' • _ -rL �' .
.. . A Note About Affordable Housing
. 1iiiii
. and Fair Housing
ft
J • . A k 1
... .l
• . • • ••••• •.n.1.- f %:',1 . 1: . . I :
.;.! .. .illtpr: �'Lfi l y . Y �}
•'� , Its e i` I
'' !�iYr 'S }' r• {
•
cm
41.vi. N„
ti
r •
., I j ' r ; ii-
•
1 T ' i
t
.•
IlkFair housing and affordable housing are related but distinct concepts. Housing affordability deals -
with whether a household's housing costs are within its means to pay. Fair housing, on the other
hand, refers to barriers that a household experiences based on protected class characteristics.
Because a disproportionate share of some protected class groups, such as Latinx households or
people with disabilities, have low incomes, these groups have a disproportionate need for govern-
ment-supported and naturally occurring affordable housing. Thus, a nexus between fair and afford-
able housing exists. r
Supporting the creation and preservation of affordable housing is essential to affir- i.• �J
'
matively furthering fair housing, but it is only part of the solution. i.
• vka rl r •:
Page 4
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 7 OF 30
2. Federal Fair Housin�4 II asics
• • • • •
L. I Ili 1 .
11 Al
3'67 Ili
DISABILITY' RACE SEXCOLOR NATICSdvAL RELIGION FAMILY'
01 61N STATUS
The federal Fair Housing Act (FHA) was adopted as part
of the sweeping Civil Rights Act of 1968 in the wake of selling, lending, and providing insurance.
the assassination of Dr. Martin Luther King. It makes equal
access to housing regardless of one's race, color, national Federal Protected Classes
origin, religion, sex (including sexual orientation and Race
gender identity),familial status (the presence or absence Color
of children under the age of 18 in the household), or National Origin
disability the law of the land. Religion
Sex(including sexual orientation and gender identity)
"Protected class" refers to a social characteristic, such Familial Status
as sex. Within each protected class, some population Disability
groups are more likely to experience discrimination than
others. For example,testing by the Fair Housing Council of Additional Oregon Protected Classes
Oregon consistently finds that Black and Latinx households Marital Status
experience discrimination in seeking rental housing4. Source of Income
Currently,there are seven federal "protected classes." Locally-Designated Protected Classes
OregonProtectedClasses FHCO2021.pdf
Oregon has designated several additional protected classes
statewide. Some cities and counties have adopted local
ones as well. This guide focuses on land use and zoning-
related fair housing issues, but the FHA also applies to
a range of housing-related activities, including renting,
4 Differences in how prospective rental applicants were treated
based on their race were found in 26.4%of matched pair tests con-
ducted by the Fair Housing Council of Oregon between 2014 and 2022.
People of color were shown fewer options,told that there were no41411110
vacancies,or experienced other unfavorable conditions when compared -
IN
to white applicants with similar or not quite as good rental qualifica-
tions.
111
111
It'''.
~L
•
ti
Fi.
5 Tage 5II
-
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 8 OF 30
What is Meant By Discrimination?
When the term discrimination is used, overtly racist,
sexist, homophobic, or able-ist actions may come to
mind. But discrimination today is likely to be more subtle.
Housing discrimination takes many forms, and all are -"P°
prohibited by the FHA. Here are some examples:
• Direct Evidence: Actively and openly limiting
access to housing options based on an individual's ,
protected class status, such as the presence of a
disability or national origin.
• Unequal Treatment:Treating people differently F
based on their protected class status, like charging
a household with children a higher security deposit h, 41116
;
than an adult-only household.
• Disparate Impact: Taking actions or adopting
policies that have a disproportionate and negative NIEL
effect on a protected class group while appearing
14 •ir
to treat everyone the same. Because this type •
of discrimination is particularly relevant to land :• ••
use and housing policy, it is discussed further in
Section 3 of this guide. ti .
• Institutionalized or Systemic: Discrimination that ,*
is widespread and deeply embedded in values, • ,
policies, and practices. Systemic discrimination �t , _
can be hard to recognize because it feels "normal,'
simply the way things are. For example, policies
that support the perpetuation of segregated is).1.1
neighborhoods are embedded in land use codes
throughout the US. It takes a conscious effortofei '.11:1
_
to see how those laws foster racial, ethnic, and
economic segregation and to change them.
0
lit-
A
Page 6
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 9 OF 30
A Brief History of Segregation and Land Use in
Oregon
Oregon, like other states, has a long history of discriminatory housing practices which contribute
to persistent economic and social patterns of residential segregation and intergenerational wealth
gaps. For millennia,the area that became the Oregon Territory and later the State of Oregon was
home to indigenous people. These tribal nations were forced off their traditional homelands
and onto reservations as white settlers began coming into Oregon in the mid-19t"century.The
Donation Land Act of 1850 encouraged white families to move to Oregon, build farms, and spread
out across the state.The land claims were distributed without waiting for tribes to officially cede
the land through negotiated settlements. Within five years,the Oregon settler population boomed
from 13,000 to 52,000, and millions of acres of native land had been stolen and occupied by white
settlers.
The land grant program for white settlers is just one of several laws that made Oregon a
predominantly white state. During the mid-19t"century, as Oregon was preparing to become the
33rd state, a series of laws excluded Black people from coming to or residing in the Oregon Territory.
Article 35 of the Oregon State Constitution stated: "No free Negro or Mulatto, not residing in this
State at the time of the adoption of the constitution shall come, reside or be within this State,
or hold any real estate."This law was not repealed until 1926, and the actual language was not
removed until 2001.
Chinese immigrants, once the second largest racial group in Oregon after whites, faced their own
exclusionary barriers in the 1859 constitution. "No Chinaman, not a resident of the state at the
adoption of this constitution shall ever hold any real estate or work in any mining claim therein."
While there was an unwillingness to ban Chinese labor,the government made it clear that they
were not to be regarded as permanent residents.This provision was not repealed until 1946.
In the early part of the 20"century, early zoning codes across the US were used to explicitly
exclude certain residents by race. Oregon was no exception. When this practice was made illegal
by the Supreme Court in Buchanan v. Warley(1917), single-family residential zones and racially
restrictive deed covenants were used instead to achieve similar aims.
During WWII, the United States forcibly relocated and incarcerated thousands of people of
Japanese descent, most of whom were from Pacific Coast states. They lost their homes,their
businesses,their neighbors, and their communities. More than 4,000 Oregon residents of Japanese
descent were forcibly relocated, only to return to discrimination and reduced opportunities.
Mortgage lending"redlining"further solidified patterns of residential racial segregation. Later in
the century, urban renewal projects and highway building disproportionately displaced people of
color and low-income households.Today, economic displacement and gentrification remain active
threats in some areas.
This history means that Oregonians have a lot of work to do to recognize, understand, and address
old patterns of racial and economic exclusion that persist. Subtle vestiges of discriminatory laws still
haunt our land use and planning practices today.
Page 7
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 10 OF 30
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
in Federal Law
ffirmatively furthering fair housing means going
Abeyond not discriminating. It means taking meaningful
Sflsls�, ai Housing Plans
et Mite
actions to address disproportionate housing needs, Grantee� DT J
overcome patterns of segregation, and racially/ethnically - _ _ Statewide
concentrated areas of poverty. It means fostering inclusive °rn B8Iincof State 2021
communities free from barriers that restrict access to Cite
opportunity based on protected characteristics. Albany+ City Entitlement 201
A5hlarrd City Entitlement 2024
The Fair Housing Act (FHA) requires jurisdictions that Beryl City Entitlement 20J9
receive federal funding for housing to affirmatively further .Corvallis City Entitlement 2018
fair housing. If a jurisdiction routinely receives an annual Eugene City Entitlement ZIWICI
appropriation from any of five funding sources managed G;ants Pass City Entitlement 2016
by the US Department of Housing and Urban Development ry edford City Entitlement 201S
(HUD),5 they must prepare and implement a fair housing I Redmond City Entitlement 2013
plan on specified cycle,typically every five years. Currently, I— City City Entitlement ION
fourteen local jurisdictions and the state of Oregon have 5prirfield City Entitlement
fair housing plans. Most are cities with populations ofuftt � " � '
50,000 or greater, but the list includes some counties as IMult omah county Portland Consortium 2011
well.The State of Oregon plan covers the balance of state, kiVashingon County Washington County Consortium 2020
that is,the areas without their own local fair housing Clackamas County Urban ErrtFtternent County 2
022
plans. As jurisdictions meet eligibility thresholds,the list
changes slightly over time. Marlon County Urban EntLtlernentCourt!? 2021,
These federally mandated fair housing plans contain L15QRpagrri oral ilo aingand dr- nq n..u.,cilifRI(Aunty
Mwbslie,etedfevni commur I rb
extensive data and analysis about local housing needs
and disparities. They also describe what a jurisdiction
has committed to do to affirmatively further fair housing. gases
They are an important local resource, and planners should L Zo,Kelmrioimod Harlon Counr.Y,formir a r.ew MSM1Ceufi[yr
EnLiderne,nt Pragram for CMG$HOME
consult these plans and meet with local housing staff Eiderre and 3.0ngIf'e1.are Ina CCMsjart.urnlrom inerrurlsdrtaiQrrs irriraMedl.
as part of their local Oregon Goal 10 housing planning but Owe°ima xrparerr Ain arid subrrlrt Omni pin ay.
process.
1 Resources
Defining Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
Federal State
Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing I HUD. ORS 197A.100(9)
&D
gov/U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD)
5 The five HUD programs are Community Development Block
Grants(CDBG),HOME Investment Partnerships(HOME),Emergency
Solutions Grants(ESG),Housing Trust Fund(HTF),and Housing for Peo-
ple with AIDS(HOPWA).
Page 8
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 11 OF 30
n F — I.
a .--- -11t
4 I
1
14.0 Jba.: II
'..1PIZI-L . '
+ 4 a
N. 1
V -T— ) f- 1.smi
L
j. 1111r214141114
/ SQII ' • • ' ..--- Ai-ILL\
*iv,i .'
irk
I Fair Housin and
�_
Oreon Goal 10 Plannin4_
ElGoal 10 Housing: Buildable lands for residential use shall be inventoried
and plans shall encourage the availability of adequate numbers of needed
housing units at price ranges and rent levels which are commensurate with
the financial capabilities of Oregon households and allow for flexibility of
housing location, type, and density...
illim Excerpt from Oregon Housing Goal 10,goa110.PDF (oregon.gov)1
12
Page 9
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 12 OF 30
Towards a Marriage of Systems
Goal 10 Housing was among the first 14 Statewide housing choices for people who have the fewest. Who has
Planning Goals that LCDC adopted in 1974 to form the fewest housing choices? Members of protected class
the backbone of Oregon's land use planning system. Goal groups, like people of color and people with disabilities.
10 Housing requires cities to plan for the availability of
needed housing. The federal and state laws also have different geographic
scopes. Federal law requires cities of approximately 50,000
Needed housing, and its related features of affordability, or greater to affirmatively fair housing through fair housing
type, density, and location, are concepts central to Oregon plans, while the state obligation extends to Oregon cities
housing planning. Oregon cities must demonstrate that of 10,000 or greater that produce Housing Production
they have sufficient land available to accommodate the Strategies.
projected 20-year need for these types and any locally
designated types of needed housing. Needed housing is This section addresses four aspects of promoting inclusive
what cities must "plan for." neighborhoods through land use planning in Oregon:
• Updating your comprehensive plan and the Goal
Oregon's Goal 10 Housing and the federal Fair Housing 10 Housing Planning Process
Act were inspired in part by a similar impulse—ensuring • Incorporating fair and inclusive community
housing choice for everyone—and were adopted within engagement and decision-making
a few years of each other.The connection was cemented • Establishing and following fair and inclusive
beginning in 2019, when state regulations and laws began regulations and procedures
to embed federal affirmatively furthering fair housing • Understanding shelters and emerging housing
principles in the Goal 10 housing planning process. types
However,the two laws take different approaches to The recommendations are in keeping with both federal
expanding housing choice. Federal law focuses on people- and state fair housing law.
-protected classes--to promote housing choice,whereas
Goal 10 initially focused on land use planning for physical
buildings--needed housing. However,the inclusion of
affirmatively furthering fair housing in the Goal 10 housing
process elevated the importance of expanding decent
- ..
f 'IN
..... ..„„,.. ...p , .
N.
State Housing Council Chair Betty Niven
of Eugene (pictured) and Homebuilders
Association lobbyist Fred VanNatta advocated
Vi 1. iel for the creation of a housing goal in 1974.
It' . .i •x.. L L
il
•
,r F
Page io
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 13 OF 30
Plan for Fair and Inclusive Communities
When the state legislature revamped the Goal 10 The cycle begins with the Oregon Housing Needs Analysis
Housing Planning Process in the early 2020s,they (OHNA), an annual 20-year estimate of housing needs
established two goals: statewide by the Oregon Department of Administrative
• the production of housing to meet the need of Services (DAS). DAS allocates that 20-year need to local
Oregonians at all levels of affordability; and governments and also provides a total Housing Production
• the production of housing in a way that creates Target and the number of units needed at specified
more housing choice by affirmatively furthering income levels for each city and urbanized area in the state
fair housing. annually.
The diagram below illustrates the process that cities Cities,through a Housing Capacity Analysis, determine
with populations of 10,000 or greater must follow to whether they have sufficient buildable land within their
periodically study and plan for the housing needs of both Urban Growth Boundary to meet those needs, and what
current and future residents. kinds of comprehensive plan and code changes may be
Fat_Is.:ig Cspau:y.4nsly: %
I.
Oregon r
Housing IlJ l.6 IIIIWi y, Loam!Hail#ing Naas!Ng Srodurhan
Ali1.1t4001#hlAf Nerd FHvutin i RopoilinCi Duflbdurnd
Amv sa Fund Caciavry& Attarnrrkiiato hrl edtd
Gw elapne rw Ff as d;ne s_. F•luuad ng
-- app. ®
F4mluinq Prglu�ikn Skrahupy
Eslraabe a Cleo/ n ne T . 0 Rt erl um Riot•-• Evaluate Sargittt
A lecgiae C---II Ierisr-n A'_7.14+x1 .4 L, &cruFce,mc1 Ga Production
1.0,. ....K.'. ..,' + lied
• ...... . ,,,,__
The i til 14 F'cravat
PrcpmiusA Allrmalr. •Fi.IIwm
Slate I4ddt9 Fri+Neusing
Source: Department of Land Conservation and Development
needed to meet those needs. Cities also develop and
adopt a Housing Production Strategy that describes actions P Resources
that a jurisdiction will take to support the development
of needed housing and promote housing choice. Finally,
cities implement their Housing Production Strategy and
report annually on housing production to track progress.
The housing planning cycle is repeated every six (PortlandLEI
-
Metro)to eight (balance of state)years to update city full m atttNlliriud+Id r1r6640
plans and evaluate their progress. ha,..`m°ti^a MVO id.SChr •
DLCD Housing
;F';�•k Capacity and
- i ' Production
i+'� Overview &
t..9 ..4ra
Goal 10
Hp ruJng hlrodiriCopacity
krvlr.F.[RPM)
Page u
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 14 OF 30
Integrating Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing
into Your City's Housing Production Strategy
Cities are required to achieve fair and equitable housing
outcomes through the implementation of their Housing ♦
Production Strategy. The Strategy must affirmatively •
further fair housing as well as identify strategies to make I ♦
•
progress towards a city's Housing Production Target. •
Affirmatively furthering fair housing means taking
proactive steps to address housing disparities, patterns of .
segregation, and disparate access to community assets. pei
k
Before you can identify the right strategies, however,you r
must identify the problems. Fair housing plans required
by the federal government of jurisdictions that are annual -` •
• .
HUD Grantees contain data and research directly related
Y
to housing needs of protected classes.They also lay out
strategies and actions to affirmatively further fair housing. -
If your city is covered by a fair housing plan, consult it,' - 0 ,
or, if you don't, refer to county-level data in the state's j', •
fair housing plan.' Research barriers experienced by _/
members of protected classes in your area. Look for fair • Examine your city's geographic pattern of
housing problems embedded in planning and land-use integration and segregation and consider its
related policies and practices, such as those propping up
relationship to patterns of affluence and poverty,
segregation by income and race/ethnicity. locations of community assets like good schools,
Here are some recommendations for identifying fair and exposure to environmental harms.
housing issues: Consider what can be accomplished through your land use
• Identify the primary populations facing housing
planning system, such as changes to the comprehensive
challenges like cost burden. Consider race, plan, capital improvement plan, zoning map and code,fee
ethnicity, housing status (whether housed or schedules, development incentives, and programs. Also
unhoused),types of disability, age, and household consider changes to processes and procedures within both
types (such as single parent households). the planning commission and the planning department.
• Look at regional demographics, as well as those But don't stop there.
of your city. Identify protected class groups in
the region but not in your city and consider what The obligation to affirmatively further fair housing applies
barriers might be preventing them from living in to the entire city, not just one department. So, be sure
your community. to include elected officials and city leadership, other
• Look for barriers that prevent local protected
class groups from accessing each of these city departments including public works, engineering,
parks, finance, and administration, as well as potential
specific housing options: 1) rental housing, 2) partners like housing developers, culturally specific
homeownership opportunities, and 3) housing organizations, and social service providers in the Housing
with needed accessibility adaptations. Go deeper Production Strategy planning process and work to secure
than the shortage of low cost and government-
supported housing. While that is a pervasive and commitments from them.
important problem, it's not the only one to solve. After the HPS is adopted, decide how to integrate periodic
6 See page 8 of this guide for a list of jurisdictions that produce progress reports to your planning commission, city council
HUD-mandated fair housing plans. and key partners to keep them engaged in implementation.
7 Oregon's 2021-25 Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing
Choice can be found here:Con Plan Dividers(oregon.gov)
Page 12
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 15 OF 30
Increasing Housing Choice through Supporting
the Development of Diverse Housing Types
In 2023, the City of Gold Beach, which has
a population of less than 2,500, passed the
Housing Advancement Project, which combined
all existing residential zone types into a single
residential zone. The City also allowed middle
housing types by right. These changes had the
effect of simplifying the permitting process,
saving time and money. In the long term, it
may also lead to more inclusive development
patterns, with housing of all types and
• densities side-by-side one another in every
. .: �
neighborhood.
regonians have diverse housing needs, and they Getting the right zoning in place is an important first step,
LI change over the course of a lifetime as households but it's just one piece of the larger puzzle of support-
grow and contract, and abilities change with age.Average ing housing choice. Simply allowing a housing type as a
household size has been shrinking over the decades, permitted use does not guarantee that it is practicable to
while average dwelling size has increased. Currently, most build. Many other aspects of development regulations,
Oregon households—approximately 60%--are comprised such as siting and design standards and public facilities
of one or two individuals, of which more than a quarter standards, affect whether a given housing type is econom-
are single individuals who live alone. Nearly one in five ically feasible to build. Financial policies, like system devel-
Oregonians are older adults over the age of 65. opment charges and permit fees, and public investments
further impact project feasibility. These are all aspects of
Simply planning and zoning land within a UGB for a bifur- housing development that local governments can address
cation of single-family detached homes and multifamily to support the creation of diverse, inclusive communities.
apartments does not provide for an abundance and diver-
sity of affordable options. Housing options like accessory Providing for variety within each residential neighborhood
dwelling units (ADUs), middle housing types (plexes,town- (not just within the city overall) supports greater economic
homes, and cottage clusters), manufactured and modular integration at a human scale. Economic integration opens
homes, single-room occupancy developments (SROs), and the door to greater racial, ethnic, and cultural integration.
other housing options play an important role in meeting Providing people of all income levels with meaningful
the evolving housing needs of Oregonians. Accessibility choices about the community they live in helps overturn
or adaptability features that go beyond the minimum longstanding patterns of racially segregated living. Allowing
required in state building code, like ensuring that all new for a broader mix of housing types in single-family neigh-
bathroom walls are reinforced to support future installa- borhoods as required by state law is a good start; what can
tion of grab bars, support aging in place. your city do to encourage their development?What other
housing options can be permitted in more places within
your community?
Page 13
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 16 OF 30
• Resources
no_ _
. Ill
DLCD Guidance and Resources—
• Accessory Dwelling Units:
Microsoft Word - SB1051 ADUguide
updatedSept2019.docx (oregon.gov)
• Middle Housing:
Department of Land Conservation and
Development : Housing Choice : Housing
Program : State of Oregon
• Housing in Climate Friendly Areas:
Department of Land Conservation
and Development: Increasing Housing
Production and Transportation Choice
Climateandhousing.pdf
Li.
o
011 Ll7 0
0
o 1 o 0
, . moo' ,
.:-Y:640 4. '
i +i _' - -
... I
Page 14
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 17 OF 30
Incorporate Fair and Inclusive Community
Engagement
• Don't "tokenize" certain leaders within Assessingggm
�) ized communities or assume that they speak for
Enaeent Practices the whole community. Seek out a variety of voices
within communities.
• Take time to understand why someone might want
Incorporating fair housing into the way your city works to get involved. Two studies found that the prima
means taking a fresh look at your community engage ry motivations of participants from traditionally
ment processes,from who is on appointed commissions marginalized communities were the desire to give
and committees through how outreach is done around back to their community and to improve opportu-
specific projects. Think broadly about the kinds of commu-
nities for future generations'.
nities that exist in your area, including geographic commu . Depending on the community, consider focusing
nities (such as neighborhoods), communities of interest dialogue more on desired outcomes than on tech
(such as cyclists), and communities of identity (such as nical concerns. If you must get technical, present
people who have emigrated from Mexico). How do these options with clear examples to help illustrate the
intersect(or not) with protected class groups in your city? choices to be made.
• Create realistic expectations by incorporating
Many cities struggle with including communities of color, information on what is and is not within the city's
people born outside the US, and non-English speakers ability to achieve.
in their outreach efforts. Start with investing in building • Be respectful of people's time. Only ask for
trust, which takes time and the willingness to engage in information that you will use or is relevant to the
two-way communication. Here are some ideas': choices that will be made. Don't ask if what stake-
• Take time to learn about the culture and communi holders say isn't likely to make a difference in the
cation pathways of the groups you want to reach. project. Be clear about how community input will
• Invest in forming relationships and building trust
impact a project.
over time, so that you are not scrambling at the • If people provide you with information, be sure
last minute to conduct outreach to "check a box." to circle back to them to let them know how that
Focus on showing up, listening, being culturally
appropriate, honest, and consistent with actions. information was used and what the final product
includes. Getting back to participants is part of
• Look for opportunities to merge engagement of building trust.
forts for multiple projects. For example, Beaverton
identified several projects that would involve out-
reach to Latinx communities over a few years. This
enabled city staff to combine resources, recruit a
9 See:Zapata,Moses,Mercurio,Ghosul,&Townley.(2021).
single group of volunteers, and build relationships. Regional Supportive Housing Impact Fund Report:Equitable Evalua-
• Don't let the lack of local culturally specific organi- tion Framework and Governance Recommendations,"Health Share of
zations derail your efforts. Instead, consider where Oregon(2021). https://www.pdx.edu/homelessness/equitable-eval-
people naturally congregate, such as a church or a uation-framework-and-governance-report.Also: Snow,Tweedie,&
store or a Head Start Center. Reach out to cultur Pederson.(2018)."Heard and Valued:the development of a model
to meaningfully engage marginalised populations in health services
ally specific organizations active throughout the planning,"in BMC Health Services Research 18,Article 81.https://doi.
state to see what ideas and potential contacts they org/10.1186/s12913-018-269-1
may be able to provide.
• Consider why some groups may not trust"the
government" and seek advice on navigating those .�
barriers.
8 Some suggestions in this section come from this report: •
Zapata,M.,&Mercurio,S.(2022).Planning Housing with Marginalized * r
•
Communities.Oregon Department of Land Conservation and Develop-
ment.
Page 15
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 18 OF 30
Seek Decision Makers with Diverse
//0
Csties should identify and promote individuals with a
variety of experiences to serve as decision makers on
appointed boards and commissions. Members of protected
classes may be significantly underrepresented at all levels
of political leadership. Consider how to include people
who may add a new perspective on planning issues. For ex-
ample, does your planning commission include renters10? ilk 1‘ all*
Does it include someone with a mobility-related disability
whose lived experience may be relevant? What about
younger adults,who may be living in your community for
decades to come?To ensure that newer commissioners
feel welcome and able to participate, review the kinds of ®f
support your city can offer,from training on land use and CEPublic Meetings
)
informal mentoring to financial assistance and practical
support such as meals and childcare during meetings.
One of the impacts of the COVID pandemic was to
accelerate cities' adoption of virtual and hybrid public
meetings. Consider how these meeting types affect com-
10 See: Levine Einstein,Maxwell,Palmer.(2023).Who Rep- munity participation. Have they supported greater partici-
resents the Renters?Housing Policy Debate,33:6,1554-1568,DOI: pation by groups underrepresented at in-person meetings,
10.1080/10511482.2022.2109710https://maxwell palmer.com/research/
EinsteinOrnsteinPalmerHomeowners.pdf such as people with disabilities, people with transportation
challenges, and people with childcare responsibilities?
. Have they decreased participation from less digitally con-
- nected or less tech savvy groups like older adults? Evaluate
lt.• 1 4 and fine tune outreach and the conduct of meetings to
include previously or currently underrepresented people.
While it's difficult to contain hateful statements from the
public because of Constitutional free speech protections
i and state law, public officials need to remember that public
a decisions about housing cannot be based on race, color,
religion, sex, national origin,familial status, or disability
status. Here are some general guidelines:
r
• Listen to what people say, but never make deci-
IP
• sions based on discriminatory statements.
• Pay particular attention to not buying into un-
~ \ founded generalizations about groups of people.
it • Don't fall for the ploy of facially neutral issues like
. traffic generation which mask underlying resis-
tance to living near"those people."
• Stay focused on impacts related to a specific de-
: 1 '
velopment that are regulated by zoning like height
L and density and be hyper-alert to comments about
"community character" or "decreased property
values"that may be coded discrimination against
' .. protected classes.
Aill • Be aware of, and nip in the bud, efforts to delay
•
111] 1] 1 1 7° ,' 1EI
1-]
1 1 decisions and rehash topics as stalling tactics.
Page 16
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 19 OF 30
Establish and Follow Fair and Inclusive
Local Regulations
Clear and Objective Standards for
For all housing types inside an Urban Growth Boundary, for Portland's central city or Metro's eight designated
a city must offer a clear and objective review path regional centers. However, there's a small exception to the
with clear and objective standards for an application or exception: clear and objective standards must be applied
permit for residential development.The review path and to development of housing on property owned by a
standards cannot "have the effect, either in themselves nonprofit corporation organized as a religious corporation,
or cumulatively, of discouraging needed housing through such as St. Vincent DePaul of Eugene or Caritas Housing/
unreasonable cost or delay" (ORS 197A.400(1)(b)). The Catholic Charities (ORS 197A.470(5)).
intent in part is to make the approval process more
predictable, streamlined, and cost-efficient for developers A common practice from the past is to make the
than a path embedded with discretionary reviews. A city construction of single-family detached housing"clear and
may also offer an additional review path that includes objective," but to subject other housing types like duplexes
standards that do not meet the clear and objective criteria, to scrutiny by the planning commission and/or city council,
provided the pathway is 1) optional, 2) in compliance with typically through a conditional use permit process.This
statewide land use planning goals and laws and 3) enables can lead to discretionary standards being applied,which is
the same or more housing than what would be allowed via a violation of state law. Vestiges of this practice still exist
the clear and objective pathway. in some planning codes, and cities should address them
to comply with state law and avoid potential litigation by
There are two exceptions to the "clear and objective" applicants.
requirement of state law: applications for residential
development in designated historic districts and those
Resources
Clear and Objective Standards:
A local government may adopt and apply only clear and objective
standards, conditions and procedures regulating the development of
housing... The standards, conditions and procedures...may not have the
effect, either in themselves or cumulatively, of discouraging needed
housing through unreasonable cost or delay...
Excerpts from ORS 197A.400
Page 17
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 20 OF 30
achieved by another practice that has a less discriminatory
effect(Step 3).
— _— One example of a policy that falls under the discriminatory
• — — effects doctrine is so-called "snob zoning." Researcher
, I _ Richard Kahlenberg claimed zoning laws barred multifamily
units on three-quarters of the land in most US cities11
I 1. For example, 81%of residential land in Connecticut
f I required one-acre lots, driving up the cost of housing. In
r-. --'l communities where significantly more people of color
iii
�, and people with disabilities have lower incomes than
y ` - white people and people without disabilities, snob zoning
# would both perpetuate racial segregation and have a
disproportionate impact on several protected classes.
J Zones that allow for only single-family detached
housing may be vulnerable to a legal challenge under
_. . „ �=�. the discriminatory effects doctrine. Oregon state law
• —— '* ��-.F- mandating that cities of 2,500 or more allow a mix of
• housing types in zones permitting single-family detached
housing may reduce vulnerability to such a legal challenge.
Cities may, however, have other policies resulting in
Discriminatory Effects: Disparate potencitiestiallyshould discriminatorythe effects. That's oneand reasonnega whyve
Impact and Perpetuation of Se ) egatlO� analyze potential positive ti
impacts of housing policies on protected class groups
before they are adopted. Consider whether the policy
As a matter of good practice, cities should consider the increases or decreases housing opportunities for groups
potential positive and negative impacts of a land use with the fewest housing choices.
policy on protected classes before adopting it(such as a
burdens and benefits analysis). But there's also a legal 11 See:Kahlenberg, R.(2023). Excluded:How Snob Zoning,NIM-
reason:the federal Discriminatory Effects Doctrine. BYism,and Class Bias Build the Walls We Don't See.Excluded by Richard
D. Kahlenberg I Hachette Book Group
Under the federal Fair Housing Act, cities are prohibited
from adopting policies that perpetuate segregation or have .
a disproportionate impact on members of one or more Resources
protected classes.This is called the Discriminatory Effects
Doctrine. It provides a legal basis for challenging policies
such as zoning requirements that unnecessarily exclude rill L
protected classes from housing opportunities or cause
systemic inequality in housing, regardless of whether they
were adopted with discriminatory intent or not. HUD Guidance on Discriminatory Effects
Doctrine:
HUD has instituted a three-step process to determine • Fact sheet on 2023 Rule:
whether a policy runs afoul of the Discriminatory Effects DISCRIMINATORY EFFECTS FINAL RULE
Doctrine. In a discriminatory effects challenge of a planning
policy,the parties bringing the lawsuit must show evidence (hud.gov)
that the claim has sufficient merit to proceed to trial (Step • Revised Rule:DISCRIMINATORY EFFECTS
1).Then, the burden shifts to the jurisdiction to show that REVISED RULE
the challenged practice is necessary to achieve one or
more substantial, legitimate, nondiscriminatory interests
(Step 2). However,the parties bringing to lawsuit may still
prevail by proving that the legitimate interests could be rE
Page 18
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 21 OF 30
' Resource 11\easponablple AcccoithmmDiobidatilitions for
eo� e wsaes
sties should work toward planning accessible
Reasonable accommodations Ccommunities that provide people with disabilities
eliminate barriers that prevent persons more choice in where they live and increase their ability
to engage in daily life.There are many proactive actions
with disabilities from fully participating that cities can take to promote housing choice for people
in housing opportunities, including both with disabilities, and some have been mentioned in prior
private housing and in federally assisted sections of this report. At a minimum, cities must follow
programs or activities. the "reasonable accommodation" policy in the federal Fair
Housing Act, which requires local jurisdictions to make
Source: Reasonable Accommodations and Modifica "reasonable" exceptions or changes to the general rules
lions1 HUD.gov/ U.S. Department of Housing and or practices to accommodate the needs of people with
Arban Development (HUD) ] disabilities.
The federal law requires that jurisdictions decide what is
reasonable on a case-by-case basis based on the needs
of the individuals involved.The city is not required to put
health and safety precautions aside or change the nature
of the zoning of the neighborhood. The jurisdiction should
keep a running list of accommodations made over time
to help guide future decisions about what is reasonable
and to ensure consistency. An example of a reasonable
accommodation might be to allow the slight encroachment
of a housing feature such as a wheelchair ramp into a
setback.
Jurisdictions must also make reasonable accommodations
for people with disabilities when they meet with staff,
apply for a permit, or attend a public meeting. This may
mean changing the meeting location if it is not accessible
or providing sign language interpretation if the person is
hearing impaired.
IFJ ii.
i Information
I What does disability mean?
There are many different definitions of disability. The one relevant to fair housing is
if
included in the Fair Housing Act and states that someone is disabled if he, she, or they has
a physical or mental impairment which substantially limits one or more major life activities,
is regarded as having such an impairment, or has a record of such an impairment. Source:
L. DOC 7771.PDF(hud.gov) and 43 U.S.C. 3602(h).
Page 19
LU 25-0001 .,ATTACH 2/PAGE 22 OF 30
E( Jnderstandi Shelters and Emergency
Livn A�rm�� ements
I ! 1T
! %.
❑❑ ❑❑ ❑❑
— -
ir. 9.. .
Shelters
Shelters address an important human need for people who `
lack a permanent place to live. They function as part of a
shelter to housing continuum".
•While shelters are important to community health,the '—_- •
federal Fair Housing Act and Oregon land use law treat lip 'ti,
them differently. Because the FHA applies to "dwellings," may .- It.,
some shelters are likely covered, and thus shelter ; .. F-..
_,r
; Au
operators cannot discriminate based on the federal
protected class status of a resident or applicant.The courts . •All
have found that a shelter qualifies as a dwelling when it is
intended for occupants who plan to remain at or return to While the state does not treat shelters like housing in
the facility over a period of time.13 land use law, it does regulate how cities manage the siting
Shelters,transitional housing, motels used as transitional of shelters. As long as the share of people experiencing
housing, and campsites do not fall under the definition of homeless in Oregon continues to reach or exceed 0.18%as
measured by the biennial statewide point-in-time count,
needed housing per ORS 197A.018. This means that cities local governments must approve emergency shelters on
are not required to plan for them in comprehensive plans any property within the UGB or on rural residential lands,
nor describe how they will support their development subject to certain conditions and ownership, per ORS
through their Housing Capacity Analyses and Housing 197.78314. Local governments must unconditionally allow
Production Strategies. Shelters do not count as housing the conversion of hotels or motels to emergency shelters
units for state housing production counts. or affordable housing meeting statutory parameters, per
ORS 197.748.
12 This continuum represents a range of living arrangements.
Note,however,that individuals do not have to experience each stage
before moving on to the next. For example,in the"Housing First"ap-
proach,people without housing move directly into subsidized housing. 14 The rate of homelessness in Oregon is.42%,per The 2022
13 An average stay of 14.8 days has met the court's standard. Annual Homelessness Assessment Report(AHAR to Congress)Part 1:
See Lakeside Resort Enters.v.Bd.Of Supervisors of Palmyra Two., 2006 Point-In-Time Estimates of Homelessness,December 2022(huduser.
US App.LEXIS 18223(2006). goy)
An Example of a Shelter Housing Continuum
•
-.—rN ID MN i ri' ..
..Freir....-z:
- _
._.iiii
i h 15111:40_0:( _. . - 0 0 •-• .1, —e
4R u ij ....____, 0 , , 0 . IHIL. -.70).....i p,
. .. .
y. I
IlOrrSfr #fn 33 EMI erglrt i 'Fro nsit Ion aI Supportatire Coro Th:riaryl SIJb5id■rcd 'II,,r.,tc
5haitars MOu3irS HaolFrig Sacia: Hai:sing Ik arki,t kint `�arkec Rent riDir.tUwriarsI•iu
Page zo
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 23 OF 30
Emerging Living Arrangements
New kinds of living arrangements emerge when traditional housing options become less affordable or less appealing to
more people. Some have been fashioned by people who would otherwise lack a place to live. Others have been created
by people who want a more minimalist or mobile lifestyle than that offered by standard housing.These options include
recreational vehicles and Tiny Homes on Wheels.
Recreational Vehicles (RVs) are motor vehicles or trailers that typically include sleeping
quarters, a kitchen, and bathroom. They are designed to readily travel from place to place
and are built to be temporary living quarters for recreational, camping,travel, or seasonal
use, not permanent dwellings. However, some households live in them for years and consider
• A
them to be their permanent home. Per state law, RVs are allowed in manufactured dwelling
parks. The state does not require local jurisdictions to make RVs outside manufactured
dwelling parks an allowed use.
Tiny Homes on Wheels (THOWs) are small living spaces on wheels that typically have
provisions for sleeping and eating as well as a bathroom. Oregon state law does not define
THOWs, and so there's no uniform construction code that they all must meet. Some are built
to RV dimensions and code standards and are regulated as such by some cities.Their quality
and safety vary,with some being very well-crafted. (More about Tiny Homes)
Locally and nationally,the high cost of construction has spurred interest in new building
technology and types. The use of robotics, new variations in factory-built housing, and 3-D
printed homes are some of the emerging options being considered to build permanent
housing meeting standard fire and life safety codes.
Cities should consider--and plan for and permit--a range of shelter and housing options to
meet the immediate and permanent housing needs of residents locally and in their region.
Cities should consider how to regulate emerging living arrangements without losing sight of - u
the need to create permanent housing options for all residents.
Resources
Tiny Homes on Wheels
Tiny House Movement
Housing Innovation Resources
Building Differently, an Under the Lens series — Shelterforce
Portland: Shelter to Housing Continuum Report and RVs
The City of Portland did an extensive study of their local shelter to housing continuum. Among the chang-
es implemented, the city elected to allow one RV or tiny house on wheels per residential lot with a house
if it connected to water, sewer, and utilities. Portland also allows up to four occupied recreational vehicles
in the parking lots of religious institutions.
Shelter to Housing Continuum (S2HC) Project I Portland.gov
Occupied Recreational Vehicles, including Tiny Houses on Wheels I Portland.gov
Page 21
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 24 OF 30
4. Oregon Land Use Laws
and Fair Housing
I :
•
- I1 I: •
•
40.
From its origins in the 1970s through today, Oregon's and persist over time. Housing opportunities for older
land use system has attempted to promote housing adults and others who need mobility or sensory housing
choice, an important component of fair housing. The adaptations will remain limited without changes in building
table below presents a summary of some of the principal codes, some of which may add to the cost of new housing.
laws that help increase the housing options available to
Oregonians and promote more inclusive communities. The summary of key Oregon laws affecting planning and
Even if federal policy shifts with changes in federal zoning for housing below highlights both long-standing
administrations, Oregon's laws will continue to support principles and recent legislative refinements,focusing
access to housing opportunities for all Oregonians. on newly updated rules that jurisdictions may need to
take action to address. Keep in mind that state policy
Is it a perfect system? No. Public regulation can only go makers are likely to continue to approve new laws
so far. Cities are mostly in the business of setting rules and administrative rules aimed at promoting housing
for development, not developing or directly funding production and choice, and so some provisions below may
housing themselves. Housing affordability is also a change.
major issue. Without subsidy, most new housing is not
affordable to households with lower incomes,thus limiting
housing choice for many protected class groups most
likely to experience fair housing issues. Also, patterns of
segregation by income and race are deeply entrenched
Page 22
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 25 OF 30
Principal Oregon Land Use L.
December 20
State Policy Statute
PLANNING
Comprehensive Land Use Planning Basics Limit Implicit& Explicit Bias and Support Housing Choice
Needed housing—Local governments must plan for and support the devel- ORS 197A.018 ('need-
opment of needed housing through their Goal 10 Housing Planning Process. ed housing' defined),
As part of the Buildable Land Inventory, cities must evaluate the availabil- ORS 197A.200 to ORS
ity of buildable land for development of each needed housing type over a 197A.320 (planning for
20-year timeframe. Housing Production Strategies must include actions and needed housing), ORS
policies to promote the development of needed housing. Needed hous- 197A.100 to 197A.130
ing types include detached single-family housing, single-room occupancy (Housing Production
developments, middle housing, multifamily housing, government assisted Strategies)
housing, manufactured dwelling parks, manufactured homes on individual
lots, housing for agricultural workers, housing for individuals with disabili-
ties, housing for older persons, housing for college or university students, if
relevant to the region. It includes housing affordable to households with in-
comes in these ranges: 0—30% MFI, 30—50% MFI, 50—80% MFI, 80—120%
MFI, 120% MFI and greater. It also includes multifamily housing for sale and
for rent.
Local approval of housing- Local governments must approve subdivisions, ORS 197.522
partitions, or construction of any land for needed housing consistent with
the comprehensive plan and applicable land use regulations
Oregon Housing Needs Analysis (OHNA) Distributes Housing Need Uniformly and Fairly
OHNA projections, allocations, and targets-On an annual basis, Oregon ORS 184.451 to 184.455
Department of Administrative Services (DAS) projects the statewide 20-year
housing need. DAS allocates proportional shares to individual cities and
counties and provides six-or eight-year housing production targets for each
city with populations over 10,000 and the unincorporated Portland Metro
urban areas. The 20-year projections, allocations, and six-or eight-year tar-
gets are segmented by income.This data forms the basis for cities' Housing
Capacity Analysis and Housing Production Strategy.Available starting Janu-
ary 1, 2025.
Housing Production Strategies Must Affirmatively Further Fair Housing
Housing Production Strategy—Cities with a population of 10,000 or greater ORS 197A.100 to
must develop and adopt a Housing Production Strategy every six years if 197A.130
located inside the Portland Metro Region and every eight years if located in
the balance of the state. In addition, Metro must develop and adopt a Hous-
ing Coordination Strategy every six years.
Affirmatively furthering fair housing—Housing production strategies must ORS 197A.100(3)(e) and
include a list of specific actions jurisdictions will take to promote affirmative- (9)
ly furthering fair housing.
Equity Indicators—Oregon Housing and Community Services publishes ORS 197A.130(2)(a)(C),
Equity Indicators for each city annually. The indicators may address subjects referencing equity indi-
such as cost burden, housing segregation by race and income, and housing cators in ORS 456.602
accessibility/visitability. DLCD may consider Equity Indicators in evaluating a
city's performance.Available starting January 1, 2025.
Page 23
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 26 OF 30
ZONING & LAND USE REVIEW
Clear and objective standards and review-With some exceptions, a city ORS 197A.400(1)
must offer a clear and objective review path with clear and objective stan-
dards for an application or permit for all housing types inside an Urban
Growth Boundary.The review path and standards cannot discourage housing
development by causing unreasonable cost or delay.
Optional discretionary pathways-"Optional discretionary" review pathways ORS 197A.400(3)
must meet the required statutory conditions:
1. The applicant retains the option for a clear& objective pathway;
2. The discretionary pathway complies with statewide land use plan-
ning goals and rules; and
3. The discretionary pathway authorizes a density"at or above"the
density authorized in the clear&objective pathway.
Dwelling Occupancy Limits—Jurisdictions may not impose occupancy limits ORS 90.112
for residential dwelling units, such as through code definitions of'family,'
based on the familial or nonfamilial relationship status of the dwelling's
occupants.
Small Housing Types Provide Housing Choice in Single-Family Neighborhoods
Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Developments-SRO developments are ORS 197A.430
structures with attached, independently rented, lockable units for sleeping
and living. Residents share common bathrooms or kitchens.Jurisdictions
must allow SRO developments of four to six units on parcels in single-family
residential zones.Jurisdictions must also allow SRO developments on parcels
in multifamily residential zones, subject to density standards consistent with
multifamily developments.
Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) -Cities with a population greater than ORS 197A.425
2,500 and counties with a population greater than 15,000 must allow the
development of at least one ADU on any lot zoned for residential use that al-
lows single-family detached dwellings within the UGB. Cities cannot require
off-street parking or owner occupancy of ADUs.
Middle Housing Types Provide Housing Choice in Single-Family Neighborhoods
Duplexes-All Oregon cities with a population of 2,500 or more, and, with- ORS 197A.420(3)
in the Portland Metro Boundary, all cities with a population greater than
1,000 and all unincorporated areas with sufficient urban services must allow
duplexes in single-family residential zones. Deadline:June 30,2025,for cities
with populations of 2,500-10,000.
Triplexes, quadplexes, cottage clusters, and townhouses-Oregon cities with ORS 197A.420(2)
a population greater than 25,000, unincorporated areas within the Portland
Metro boundary that are served by sufficient urban services, all cities within
the Portland Metro boundary with a population greater than 1,000, and
all cities and communities within Tillamook County must also allow middle
housing types in areas zoned for residential use that allow for the devel-
opment of detached single-family dwellings. Deadline:June 30, 2025,for
Tillamook County jurisdictions
Middle housing land divisions- Middle housing land divisions that meet ORS 92.031
specific statutory requirements must be approved by cities and counties via
an expedited land division process.
Page 24
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 27 OF 30
Expediting Permitting of Affordable and Government-Assisted Housing Supports Housing Choice
Affordable housing allowed-Affordable housing allowed- Local governments ORS 197A.445
must allow affordable housing that meets specific statutory requirements on
sites zoned for commercial use, religious assembly, or public lands, without
requiring a zone change or conditional use, and must provide density and
height bonuses.
Affordable housing allowed in commercial zones—Local governments must ORS 197A.460
allow residential and mixed-use affordable housing projects by right in all
commercial zones.
Expedited affordable housing review- Cities and counties above a population ORS 197A.470
threshold must take final action on qualifying affordable housing applications
within 100 days after an application is deemed complete
Equal treatment of affordable housing—Cities and counties may not outright ORS 197A.395(1)
prohibit government assisted housing and may not impose additional stan-
dards on government assisted housing that do not apply to similar unassist-
ed housing projects.
Manufactured Housing Expands Housing Choice
Manufactured homes-Cities must allow manufactured and prefabricated ORS 197.478
homes in single-family residential zones, subject to only the same standards
as other homes.
Manufactured home parks-Cities and counties must allow manufactured ORS 197.480 to 197.493
home parks sufficient to meet need as identified in an adopted Housing Ca-
pacity Analysis.They must allow the siting of manufactured homes, prefab-
ricated structures, and RVs meeting statutory requirements in manufactured
home parks
Manufactured home subdivisions-Cities and counties must approve subdivi- ORS 92.835 to 92.845
sions for manufactured home parks that meet applicable local standards and
parameters outlined in statute.The applicant must provide notice and `right
of first refusal' to manufactured home park tenants.
Equal Treatment of Farmworker Housing Prevents Discrimination
Farmworker housing-Cities and counties must permit single-family and ORS 197A.395(2) and (3)
multifamily farmworker housing in any residential or commercial zone that
permits single-family or multifamily residential, respectively, and may not
impose standards that are more restrictive than those applied to other sin-
gle-family or multifamily uses in those zones.
Residential Homes and Facilities Expand Housing Choice
Residential homes&facilities- Local governments must permit "Residential ORS 197.660 to 197.670
homes" and "Residential facilities" (definition in ORS 443.400) in residential
zones and may not impose more restrictive zoning requirements.
Permitting Residential Uses in Commercial Zones Expands Housing Options
Residential conversion of commercial uses— Local governments must allow ORS 197A.445(3)
conversion of commercial uses to residential uses without requiring a zone
change or conditional use permit.
Page 25
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 28 OF 30
Siting and Permitting of Emergency Shelter is Expedited
(Oregon land use laws do not consider shelters to be housing.)
Local Approval of Emergency Shelters—When the statewide point-in-time ORS 197.783
count indicates that 0.18%or more of the total state population consists of
people experiencing homelessness, local governments must approve emer-
gency shelters subject to certain conditions on any property within the UGB
or on rural residential lands if it is operated by a local government, non-prof-
it, religious corporation, or housing authority.
Hotel/Motel conversion - Local governments must unconditionally allow the ORS 197.748
conversion of hotels or motels to emergency shelters or affordable housing
meeting statutory parameters
Limits on Development Moratoria Remove Barriers to Housing Development
Public facilities- Local governments engaging in a "pattern or practice of ORS 197.524
delaying or stopping the issuance" of permits/approvals based on a shortage
of public facilities must adopt a public facilities strategy or a moratorium
Moratoria -Cities, counties, and special districts that adopt moratoria must ORS 197.505 to 197.520
comply with specific statutory provisions that ensure they are temporary,
narrow in scope, and underlying problems are addressed through local ac-
tion.
Zoning and Permitting Laws Limit Bias and Require Timely Action on Development Applications
Permitting and approval -Approval or denial of permits must be based on ORS 227.175 (city)
clear and objective standards outlined in the development ordinance and ORS 215.416 (county)
may not condition reductions in height for housing, except to resolve a
health, safety, or habitability issue or to comply with a statewide land use
planning goal.
120-day land use approval- Final action on a permit must be taken within ORS 227.178 (city)
120 days after an application is deemed complete ORS 215.427 (county)
Land use procedure—Cities and counties must apply procedural require- ORS 227.180 and
ments surrounding appeal of local actions, including timelines, ex parte 227.181 (city)
contact, bias, and remand. ORS 215.422 and
215.435 (county)
Page 26
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 29 OF 30
IA
110 0
+i Scan QR code to download the online
version of this guide, complete with
1.
reference links and the latest updates.
...6„ ,. .. .
r. .
L
0 ■
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 2/PAGE 30 OF 30
6/23/2025
Comprehensive Plan Fair Housing Policies—Other Metro Cities
Research for City of Lake Oswego Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing policy
Portland: Comprehensive Plan Chapter 5 - Housing
Policy 5.10 Coordinate with fair housing programs. Foster inclusive communities, overcome
disparities in access to community assets, and enhance housing choice for
people in protected classes throughout the city by coordinating plans and
investments to affirmatively further fair housing.
Beaverton: Comprehensive Plan Chapter 4—Housing—4.4 Fair and Affordable Housing
Policy c) Continue to work with the Washington County HOME Consortium to identify
impediments to fair housing and develop strategies to address them
Gresham: Comprehensive Plan Volume 2: Policies— 10.600 Housing
Housing Equity Policy: All housing related policies and actions will affirmatively further fair
housing for all state and federal protected classes and other underserved populations by:
addressing disproportionate access to housing,furthering patterns of integration and
lessening racial or ethnic segregation, deconcentrating areas of poverty and wealth, and
decreasing disparities in access to housing services and opportunity.
Housing Choice and Location Policy:Facilitate housing choice for all, particularly for state and
federally protected classes, communities of color, low-income communities, people with
disabilities, and other under-served populations. Foster access to existing or new quality
housing that is located in neighborhoods with high-quality community amenities,
schooling, employment and business opportunities, and a healthy and safe environment.
Tigard: Comprehensive Plan
Housing Policy 9: The City shall make affirmative efforts to further fair housing and equitable
access to community resources for all residents. In doing so, the City shall comply with
federal and state housing laws, including the Fair Housing Act, as well as applicable
implementing administrative rules and regulations.
Housing Policy 10: The City shall enact policies that provide for equitable housing opportunity
without discrimination or disparity based on tenure,familial status, or household
composition of the occupants of any type of housing.
Milwaukie: Comprehensive Plan
POLICY 7.1.3 Promote zoning and code requirements that remove or prevent potential
barriers to home ownership and rental opportunities for people of all ages and
abilities, including historically marginalized or vulnerable populations such as
people of color, aging populations, and people with low incomes.
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 3/PAGE 1 OF 2
6/23/2025
POLICY 7.1.7 Support the Fair Housing Act and other federal and state regulations that aim to
affirmatively further fair housing.
Hillsboro: Comprehensive Plan
POLICY H 2.7 Fair housing. Employ strategies that support the Fair Housing Act and
affirmatively further fair housing.
Happy Valley: Comprehensive Plan
Policy H-1.6 Employ strategies that support the Fair Housing Act and affirmatively further fair
housing goals.
City of West Linn: Comprehensive Plan—Goal 10: Housing
Policy 16 Employ strategies that support the Fair Housing Act and affirmatively further fair
housing.
No policy specific to"fair housing"/AFFH:
• Tualatin
• Cornelius
• Forest Grove
• Wilsonville
• Gladstone
• Oregon City
• King City
• Sherwood
• Troutdale
• Wood Village
LU 25-0001 ATTACH 3/PAGE 2 OF 2
8.2
Q S�
c
+ Cl
EG�
Lake Oswego Voter Views of
Replacing the South Shore Fire Station
Key Findings of a Survey Conducted June 3-10, 2025
F IV 3 OPINION
RESEARCH
RESEARCH & STRATEGY
220-7588
Survey Methodology
Dates June 3-10, 2025
Survey Type Dual-mode Voter Survey
Research Population Likely 2026 Voters in Lake Oswego
Total Interviews 410
Margin of Sampling Error (Full Sample) ±4.9% at the 95% Confidence Level
(Half Sample) ±6.9% at the 95% Confidence Level
Contact Methods s Telephone Text
Calls Invitations
itp
Telephone _°R Online
Data Collection Modes Interviews ' __ Interviews
F JP 3 (Note: Not All Results Will Sum to 100% Due to Rounding)
RESEARCH 2
e*-N.c,
,
\\\<.,
�REGOra li
Context
3
Most in lake Oswego believe things
are headed in the right direction .
Would you say things in Lake Oswego are headed in the right direction,
or do you feel they are pretty seriously off on the wrong track?
Right
Direction
57%
11.1
Don't Wrong
Is Know Track
22% 21%
F M 3 Q1'
RESEARCH 4
Views of a Ballot Measure
More than half of voters initially support a bond
measure to rebuild the South Shore Fire Station .
Shall Lake Oswego rebuild an earthquake-safe South Shore Fire Station to improve emergency response throughout
the community by issuing bonds? If bonds are approved, they will be payable from taxes on
property ownership that are not subject to the limits of Sections 11 and 11b, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution.
Definitely yes 28% Total
Probably yes 17% Yes
Undecided, lean yes 8/ 54%
Undecided, lean no 6% Total
Probably no 9/ No
Definitely no 20% 35%
Undecided 11%
Fm 3 Q2. Would you vote yes or no on this measure?
RESEARCH 6
Majorities of men and women support the measure,
as do seniors and voters under 40.
Initial Vote by Gender & Age
Total Total
• Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes Undecided Undecided, Lean No Probably No Definitely No Yes No
Men 28% 16% 11% 10% 5% 9% 20% 56% 15%
Women 28% 18% 6% 13% 7% 10% 19°. 52% 35%
al
18-39 20% 25% 19% 5% 5% 7% 18% 65% 30%
40-49 23% 16% 8% 21% 6% 10% 17% 47% 33%
50-64 27% 14% • ' 11% 9% 12% 22% 46% 43%
65+ 34% 16% 7% 11% 4% 8% 20% 58% 32%
Fm 3 Q2. Would you vote yes or no on this measure?
RESEARCH 7
Three-quarters of progressive and liberal voters support the bond;
moderate and conservative voters are split.
Initial Vote by Ideology & Party
• Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes • Undecided Undecided, Lean No Probably No Definitely No Total Total
Yes No
Progressives 37% 27°° 12% 11% 8% 76% 13%
Liberals 36% 26% 13% iL 4% °, 76% 10%
Moderates 27% 1°0 6% 13% 9% 11% 24% 43% 44%
Conservatives 18% 8% 7% 61 8% 10% 33% 43% 51%
Democrats 32% 22% 12% 11% 5% 11% 66% 23%
Independents 25% 13% 9% 14%-1. 7% 10% 22% 47% 39%
Republicans 23% 11% 8% 7% 14% 34% 36% 56%
Fm 3 Q2. Would you vote yes or no on this measure?
RESEARCH 8
Lower-turnout election scenarios show slightly stronger support.
Initial Vote by Vote Frequency
• Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes Undecided Undecided, Lean No Probably No Definitely No Total Total
Participated in 1+ of the Last 6 Yes No
Primary or General Elections 28% MIMS 8% 12% 6% 10% 20% 53% 36%
2+ 28% 16% 9% 12% 6% 9% 19% 53% 35%
r
3+ 28% 16% 9% 12% 6% 10% 19% 53% 35%
CD
4+ 29% 17% 8% 13% 7% 10% 53% 34%
3
0
5+ 31% 17% 7% 16% 5% 8% 55% 29%
6+ 37% 18% 6% 14% 3% 7% 61% 26%
F M 3
RESEARCH 9
Many voters who typically support finance measures are initially
softly supportive or undecided on this one.
Softly Supportive and
Undecided Voters
These voters are disproportionately:
• Progressive/liberal independents
• Liberal voters
• Progressive/liberal Democrats
• Democratic men
o • Democrats under age 55
\ 3 7
o • Progressives
• Ages 18-39
• Non-college educated men
Fm 3 Q2. Would you vote yes or no on this measure?
RESEARCH 10
Supporters of a bond cite the impact of a new
fire station on reliable emergency response.
In a few words of your own, why would you vote YES on this measure?
(Open-ended; Asked of Yes Voters Only, n=220)
Public safety/reliable emergency response 31%
Safe work environments for first responders/firefighters 16%
Disaster/earthquake preparedness 15%
Updated/modern infrastructure 14%
General support for public infrastructure 11%
Rapid emergency response times 10%
Growth/changing needs of the community 10%
Live near/served by this fire station 6%
Mixed feelings (e.g. support with accountability/efficiency) - 3%
Other _ 5%
F M 3 Q3a'
RESEARCH 11
Opponents are against taxes increases in principle.
In a few words of your own, why would you vote NO on this measure?
(Open-ended; Asked of No Voters Only, n=143)
Taxes are too high (general) 45%
Waste/mismanagement/no trust in government 21%
Don't need a new/upgraded fire station 18%
Other priorities are more important 11%
Do not support property taxes 10%
Earthquake chances are low 3%
Other 11%
Don't know/Unsure 1%
FM 3 Q3b.
RESEARCH 12
Voters next heard or saw a brief description
of what the measure would do.
The measure would authorize up to $25 million in principal amount of general
obligation bonds for modernization of the South Shore Fire Station, one of the city's
four fire stations. If approved, it would finance capital costs to:
• Construct an earthquake-safe fire station to replace the current station,
which currently does not meet current seismic standards as an essential facility;
• Provide dedicated space for decontamination areas to help limit carcinogenic
exposure for firefighters;
• Add living quarters for increased staffing during emergency or natural disaster;
and
• Create ADA-accessible community space for meetings, educational programs,
emergency preparedness, and firefighter training.
Fm 3 Q4. Having heard this, would you vote yes or no?
RESEARCH 13
This information lifts support to nearly three in five.
Initial Vote After Information
Definitely yes 28% Total 35% Total
Probably yes 17/ Yes 19/o Yes
54% 59%
Undecided, lean yes 8% 5%
Undecided, lean no 6% Total 3�° Total
Probably no 9/ No 6% No
35% 27%
18/
Definitely no 20% °
Undecided 11% 14%
F 1i,p 3 Q2 would you vote yes or no on this measure?
Q4. Having heard this, would you vote yes or no?
RESEARCH 14
Voter Priorities and
Willingness to Pay
There is no real difference in support between $25 million
and $ 18 million overall bond amounts.
Total Total
•Very Willing Somewhat Willing Don't Know Somewhat Unwilling Very Unwilling Willing Unwilling
$18 million 41% 10% 9% 61% 30%
$20 million 39% 9% 12% 20% 59% 32%
$22 million 38% 8% 12% 19% 60% 31%
• Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes Undecided Undecided, Lean No • Probably No Definitely No Total Total
Yes No
$25 million 35% 5% 14% 6% 59% 27%
Q4. Having heard this, would you vote yes or no?
F M 3 QS. Please indicate whether you would be very willing,somewhat willing,somewhat unwilling,or very unwilling to support each of the following overall bond amounts for the South Shore Fire Station.
Asked of xxx
RESEARCH 16
There is a greater distinction when it comes to household amounts,
with two-thirds willing to pay as much as $ 100 per year.
• Very Willing Somewhat Willing Don't Know Somewhat Unwilling Very Unwilling Total Total
Willing Unwilling
$100 47% 6% 11% 66% 29%
$150 38% 6% 12% I 61% 33%
$200 25% 29% 6% 17% 24% 54% 40%
$250 22% 29% 6% 18% 25% 51% 42%
F M 3 Q6. Please indicate whether you would be very willing,somewhat willing,somewhat unwilling,or very unwilling to pay each of the following amounts per household per year in additional taxes for
the South Shore Fire Station.
RESEARCH 17
Voters especially value outcomes like supporting response times,
response to critical incidents, and disaster response.
Uses of Funds
Extremely/Very
• Extremely Important Very Important Somewhat Important Not At All Important Don't Know Important
Supporting emergency medical response times 45% 29% 16% 5% 74%
Supporting citywide response to critical fires,
accidents, and medical emergencies
45% 29% 16% 4% 74%
Providing decontamination areas to help limit 37° 33% 16% 4% 70%
firefighter exposure to carcinogens �
Supporting disaster response 41% 29°0 20% 4% 69%
Supporting response to fire and emergency medical calls to
Lake Oswego Recreation & Aquatic Center, Luscher Farm, 35% 29% 24% 4% 64%
Lakeridge High School, and other large community facilities
Supporting hazardous materials incident response 32% 29% 2 ' 12° 6% 62%
Supporting wildland-urban interface fire response 31% 29% 25% 9% 6% 60%
F M 3 Q7 Here is a list of some of the specific kinds of investments this measure could make. Please indicate how important each would be to you:extremely important, very important,somewhat important, or not at all
important. Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH 18
More than half also value an earthquake-safe station with updated wiring,
repairing the leaky roof and providing space for increased staffing.
Uses of Funds
Extremely/Very
• Extremely Important Very Important Somewhat Important Not At All Important Don't Know Important
Constructing an earthquake-safe fire station 30% 21% 4% 57%
*Replacing the current station, which has outdated 24% 55%
and deteriorating electrical wiring 32% 4'
Supporting technical rescue operations 23% 26% co 9% 55%
*Replacing the current station, which has a leaky roof 31% 23% 23% 17% 54%
*Providing storage for personal protective equipment
for firefighters 25% 29% 30% 12% 54%
Providing space for increased staffing during an 23% 30% 28% 14% 53%
emergency or natural disaster
*Providing storage for modern medical and
firefighting tools and equipment 28% 24% 32% 10° 6% 52%
F M 3 Q7 Here is a list of some of the specific kinds of investments this measure could make. Please indicate how important each would be to you:extremely important, very important,somewhat important, or not at all
important. *Split Sample
RESEARCH 19
They are less urgently concerned with access to community rooms
for people with disabilities and replacing outdated locker rooms.
Uses of Funds
Extremely/Very
• Extremely Important Very Important Somewhat Important Not At All Important • Don't Know Important
*Replacing the current station, which has outdated 26% 29% 5% 51%
and deteriorating plumbing
Supporting water and dive rescue operations 22% 32% Eh 5 51%
*Replacing the current station, which has outdated 29% 19% 32% 14% �% 48%
and deteriorating heating and air conditioning
Replacing the South Shore Fire Station 22% 22% 25°0 22% . '0 45%
*Providing private living space, including individual
showers and bathrooms for firefighters 20% 24% '0 13% 44%
Improving access to community rooms for 13% 24% 35% 22% 37%
people with disabilities
*Replacing outdated group locker rooms and /
bathroom facilities with individual, private facilities 12% 15% 33% 33% 7% 27°
F M 3 Q7 Here is a list of some of the specific kinds of investments this measure could make. Please indicate how important each would be to you:extremely important, very important,somewhat important, or not at all
important. *Split Sample
RESEARCH 20
Voters like all funds being spent directly on the
project as well as independent annual audits.
Potential Accountability Elements
■ Total More Likely Total Less Likely Difference
All funds spent directly on this project 69% +63%
Independent annual audits of City budget and bond spending 66% 6% +60%
Providing no money for salaries or pensions 47% 11% +36%
FM 3 Q8. Here are some potential elements that could be included in the measure to enhance accountability.Please indicate if including that element would make you more likely or less likely to vote yes on the measure.
RESEARCH 21
Messaging and Movement
Information and positive messages lift support to three in five
while increasing the "definitely yes" vote to more than one-third .
• Definitely Yes Probably Yes Undecided, Lean Yes • Undecided Undecided, Lean No • Probably No Definitely No Total Total
Yes No
Initial Vote 28% 8% 11% 6% 9% 54% 35%
A ada
After Information 35% 19% 5% 14% 6% 18% 59% 27%
After Positive Messages 36% 16% 6% 11% 8% 22% 58% 31%
After Positives and Negatives 31% 15% 8% 13% 24% 54% 33%
Q2. Would you vote yes or no on this measure?
F M 3 Q4. Having heard this, would you vote yes or no?
Q10& Q12. Please consider the measure to replace South Shore Fire Station by issuing up to$25 million in general obligation bonds again. Would you vote yes or no?
RESEARCH 23
Segmenting the Electorate
by Consistency of Support
❖ Consistent Yes: Voters who consistently indicated they would vote
"yes" on the measure: disproportionately progressives, liberals,
renters, Democrats ages 55+, and voters with some college or less.
Consistent
❖ Consistent No• Voters who consistently indicated they would vote No
22%
"no" on the measure: disproportionately Republicans, those served Consistent
by Jean Road Fire Station, moderates and independent men. Yes
46%
❖ Swing: Voters who do not fall into any of the other categories — Swing
remaining consistently undecided or switching positions: 32%
disproportionately independent women, those served by the Main
Fire Station, household incomes over $200,000, independents ages
55+, Republicans under age 55, and conservatives.
F M 3
RESEARCH 24
Positive Messaging Tested
Ranked by Very Convincing
(MINUTES/COVERAGE) In a house fire, property destruction generally exceeds 50% after just 8 minutes of
52w burning. And in a medical emergency like a heart attack, every minute counts — that's why Lake Oswego sends
firefighters from two stations to critical calls. The South Shore Fire Station provides firefighting and emergency
medical coverage for all areas of the city.
(WITHOUT) Lake Oswego's four fire stations provide critical medical, fire, and emergency services within minutes
52% for every resident of the city. With one less station, response times will increase beyond the current standard of
8 minutes or less — risking lives and property. Voting "yes" keeps response times low and our community safe.
(SIZE) Currently, only one of Lake Oswego's fire stations can fit a traditional fire truck — and the South Shore
47% station does not have enough room for modern medical and firefighting tools and equipment. By upgrading
South Shore Fire Station to modern standards, we can provide a critical backup location for life-saving equipment.
(AGE) The South Shore Fire Station was built in 1971 — it is not earthquake safe and does not meet modern
440i10 disability access standards. It has a leaky roof, outdated electrical wiring and plumbing, and failing heating and
cooling systems. Our firefighters and our community deserve a safe, modern fire station.
FM 3 Q9. Please indicate whether you find it very convincing,somewhat convincing,or not convincing as a reason to support the measure.
RESEARCH 25
Positive Messaging Continued
Ranked by Very Convincing
(DECONTAMINATE) The current South Shore Fire Station has no dedicated space for firefighters returning from
43% calls to decontaminate and store personal protection equipment, which increases risk of exposure to carcinogens.
Our firefighters deserve facilities that can reduce their risk of exposure to hazardous materials as they protect us.
(WILDFIRE) Communities like ours are facing new challenges in the era of extreme wildfires that quickly spread to
38% homes — and that's especially true for the south side of town near the Stafford area. This measure would protect
our community by ensuring rapid response and coverage for high-risk areas.
(BOAT) Our fire department responds to water emergencies on the Willamette River, Clackamas River,
259'o and Lake Oswego — and the South Shore Station hosts our city's only rescue boat. A new, updated station would
provide safe storage for the Rescue Boat and all emergency tools and equipment.
(COMMUNITY) A new South Shore Fire Station will include a classroom for training and skill-building in CPR,
25% first aid, and fire prevention. The station can also serve as a center for information and assistance in case of
emergency or disaster. Voting "yes" will strengthen our whole community's preparation and response.
FM 3 Q9. Please indicate whether you find it very convincing,somewhat convincing,or not convincing as a reason to support the measure.
RESEARCH 26
Stressing the impacts of the station replacement on emergency
response times and its current size and age are compelling.
■ Very Convincing Somewhat Convincing
Minutes/Coverage 53% A 77%
Without 52% 25% 76%
Size 47% 27% 74%
Age 44% 24% 69%
Decontaminate 43% 35% 78%
Wildfire 38% 36% 74%
Boat 25% 41% ' 66%
Community 25% 35% 60%
FN 3 Q9. Please indicate whether you find it very convincing,somewhat convincing,or not convincing as a reason to support the measure.
RESEARCH 27
Emergency response times stand out for swing voters.
Very Convincing
Statement Party Targets Fire Station
All
Voters Dems Inds Reps CYesons Swing Cons No JeanRoad
Main SouthShore Westlake
Minutes/Coverage 53% 62% 48% 41% 79% 48% 9% 49% 47% 61% 55%
Without 52% 61% 46% 40% 80% 41% 9% 46% 54% 63% 46%
Size 47% 56% 41% 35% 74% 38% 4% 44% 38% 55% 47%
Age 44% 53% 38% 34% 73% 32% 3% 36% 35% 55% 48%
Decontaminate 43% 50% 40% 33% 72% 31% 2% 40% 31% 55% 44%
Wildfire 38% 46% 32% 29% 62% 28% 3% 38% 26% 53% 35%
Boat 25% 28% 24% 18% 41% 18% 2% 26% 19% 33% 22%
Community 25% 24% 30% 20% 43% 15% 2% 26% 19% 27% 26%
FN 3 Q9. Please indicate whether you find it very convincing,somewhat convincing,or not convincing as a reason to support the measure.
RESEARCH 28
Negative Messaging Tested
Ranked by Very Convincing
33% A(COST/ANTI-TAX The cost of living is skyrocketing, and our taxes are already too high. We just can't afford
more taxes right now.
31% (DEBT) Because it is a long-term bond, this measure will cost taxpayers too much for too long. We shouldn't
pay for decades, leaving debt to our children and grandchildren.
29% (RFNfVOTE) Rather than asking us to pay for new facility, the City should present us with a plan to repair the
station we already have. Voting "no" sends a message that the city should live within their means.
18% (UNCERTAIN) With experts saying the economy is likely to enter another recession soon, now is the
wrong time for this measure.
SCA (CLOSE We just don't need four fire stations and all the costly equipment and staff that come with them.
We should let South Shore close.
FM 3 Q11. Please indicate whether you find each statement from opponents very convincing,somewhat convincing,or not convincing as a reason to vote no. ^Not Part of Split Sample
RESEARCH 29
Conclusions & Recommendations
Conclusions & Recommendations
• A bond measure to replace the South Shore Fire Station with an earthquake-safe station to
support emergency response times is viable for a 2026 ballot.
■ More than half say they would vote "yes" based on ballot title and caption alone. Although a
significant share are softly supportive initially, three in five support the measure with a brief
explanation.
■ Broad shares are willing to support a bond of as much as $25 million overall, and are willing to
pay $150 per household per year to replace the South Shore Fire Station.
■ Negative arguments reduce support — demonstrating the need to avoid well-organized
opposition.
• Communications should focus on the outcomes of a new station : supporting emergency medical
response times; disaster response; and citywide response to critical fires, accidents and medical
emergencies.
• Messaging that shares specifics such as the need for decontamination area for firefighters, the
age and condition of the current station, and the impacts of fast response times for housefires
and heart attacks are also highly persuasive.
F M 3
RESEARCH 31
IF NI 11
Miranda Everitt
Miranda@FM3research.com
RESEARCH
BAY AREA I LOS ANGELES I PORTLAND
8.2
F °� COUNCIL REPORT
� o
OREGO\-\
Subject: South Shore Fire Station Polling Results & Community Engagement Plan
Meeting Date: July 15, 2025 Staff Member:
Kristine Artman, Assistant Fire Chief
Report Date: July 2, 2025 Madison Thesing, Deputy City Manager
Department: Fire Department
Action Required Advisory Board/Commission Recommendation
❑ Motion ❑ Approval
❑ Public Hearing ❑ Denial
❑ Ordinance ❑ None Forwarded
❑ Resolution ❑X Not Applicable
❑X Information Only Comments:
❑X Council Direction
❑ Consent Agenda
Staff Recommendation: Not applicable— Council information only
Recommended Language for Motion: Not applicable—Council information only
Project/ Issue Relates To: 2025 Council Initiative: Conclude the South Shore Fire Station
needs assessment and launch a community engagement process.
Issue before Council (Highlight Policy Question):
❑X Council Goals/Priorities ❑Adopted Master Plan(s) ❑Not Applicable
ISSUE BEFORE COUNCIL
Staff update to Council on community outreach efforts related to South Shore Fire Station
project, including initial polling results.
BACKGROUND
Constructed in 1971, South Shore Fire Station is the oldest of the Lake Oswego's four fire
stations. Located at 1880 South Shore Boulevard, firefighters based out of this facility primarily
respond to calls for service within the southeast quadrant of the city. The South Shore Fire
Station has reached the end of its useful life. This facility needs to be replaced in order to
maintain our current and future coverage for medical, fire, and life safety emergencies.
Respect. Excellence. Trust. Servi e.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO, OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 2
Following recommendations from the South Shore Fire Station Task Force and City Council
direction during the March 4, 2025 City Council meeting, staff are exploring project costs and
gauging community support.
DISCUSSION
Project Public Opinion Polling
To assess community sentiment regarding the South Shore Fire Station project and a potential
General Obligation bond, staff hired FM3 Research to conduct polling of likely voters.
The primary objectives of this polling were to gauge public opinion on the project itself and to
determine the optimal scope and timing for a bond measure. Specifically, the polling sought to
understand the community's perspective on:
• Replacing the South Shore Fire Station.
• The potential scope and cost of the project.
• The preferred timing for a ballot measure (May or November 2026).
Public opinion polling took place from June 3-10, 2025. The purpose of the survey was to
evaluate voter support and assess voter priorities related to the proposed project. Top level
polling results will be shared during the July 15 City Council meeting (Attachment 1).
Communications & Engagement Plan
One of the top findings of the polling was the importance of community education and
awareness of the project and how it aligns with our overall emergency response. To further
bring awareness to the project, staff have created the South Shore Fire Station Communications
& Engagement Plan with input from the South Shore Task Force.
The South Shore Fire Station Communications & Engagement Plan (Attachment 2) is a strategic
document that outlines how the Project Team will connect with target audience, stakeholders,
or the broader community to achieve our project goals. It is a roadmap for communication and
engagement, that serves as a working document that can be updated and adjusted as the
project is developed. The plan is designed to build relationships, disseminate information,
gather community feedback, and ultimately achieve desired goals.
Communications & Engagement Goals
The objectives and goals of the South Shore Fire Station Community Engagement &
Communications:
• Inform the community of the current condition of the South Shore Fire Station (SSFS)
• Inform the community on the Task Force and Project Team's findings
• Increase community understanding how the SSFS relates to public safety goals, including
future needs
• Increase public awareness and support for the potential SSFS project
• Inspire key community leaders to proactively champion on behalf of the project
Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
Page 3
• Maintain ongoing communications and transparency with neighbors, neighborhood, and
other interested parties/stakeholders
• Monitor community response
Progress to Date
The Project Team began the community-wide communications and engagement activities in
April following the Council's direction to launch an engagement process to gauge community
support.
Completed Ongoing Upcoming
• Finalize Communications • Featured City publications— • National Night Out
& Engagement Plan HelloLO, LO Down, Social
• Project website • Station tour—in person & • Lake Grove Farmers'
virtual Market
• Project branding • LO Review stories & articles • CERT trainings
• Project key • Millennium Farmers' Market • Multi-
Messages/fact Points, family/apartment
including FAQs outreach
• Mayors Roundtable at • Adult Community Center • Senior Living outreach
South Shore (6/12) Lunches
• Community • Community events visits • Community
Presentations o Concerts Presentations
o Neighborhood o Mary's Woods o Neighborhood
Chair Committee Associations
o Neighborhood Annual
Associations Meetings (Fall)
Annual Meetings o Chamber
(Spring) o Rotary
o Chamber
o Farmers' Market
All activities and communications have been focused on the potential project. Council direction
to referring a bond to voters will initiate an adapted plan to prepare for ballot.
Next Steps
Following the polling results, staff will develop updated communications materials that reflect
the sentiments and themes of the community. Ongoing communications and outreach will
continue through the summer and into fall. The current plan is to poll again in early 2026 to
provide more information to Council on a decision for a potential bond.
ATTACHMENTS
1. FM3 Survey Results
2. South Shore Fire Station Communications & Engagement Plan —Working Document
Respect, Excel'ence. Trust. Service.
503-635-0215 380 A AVENUE PO BOX 369 LAKE OSWEGO,OR 97034 WWW.LAKEOSWEGO.CITY
ATTACHMENT 1
JUNE 3-10, 2025
LAKE OSWEGO SSFS SURVEY
F M 3 220-7588-WT
N=410
MARGIN OF SAMPLING ERROR ±4.9% (95%CONFIDENCE INTERVAL)
RESEARCH A/B SPLIT
400 LIKELY NOV. 2026 LAKE OSWEGO VOTERS
(PHONE ONLY)
Hello, I'm calling from ,a public opinion research company.We are conducting a survey about issues
that concern voters in Lake Oswego. Please be assured that I am not trying to sell you anything or ask for a donation of any
kind, and that your participation and responses will be kept confidential. May I please speak with ? (MUST
SPEAK WITH THE VOTER LISTED AND VERIFY THEY LIVE AT THE LISTED ADDRESS—OTHERWISE TERMINATE.)
(PHONE ONLY)
A. Before we begin, have I reached you on a cell phone? (IF ON CELL PHONE, ASK: If you are currently driving or
otherwise occupied, please confirm that it is safe for you to take this survey without endangering yourself or
others.)
Yes, on cell and can safely take survey 79%
Yes, on cell and should reschedule (RESCHEDULE)
No, not on cell 21%
(ONLINE ONLY)
Thank you for participating in this public opinion survey about issues that concern voters in Lake Oswego. Please be assured
that we are not trying to sell you anything or ask for a donation of any kind, and that your participation and responses will
be kept confidential.
A. If you are taking this survey on a mobile device and are currently driving or otherwise occupied, please confirm
that it is safe for you to take this survey without endangering yourself or others.
Yes, can safely take survey _ 100%
I'll come back later (DIVERT TO LANDING PAGE)
(RESUME ASKING ALL RESPONDENTS)
1. Overall, would you say things in Lake Oswego are headed in the right direction, or do you feel they are pretty
seriously off on the wrong track?
Right direction 57%
Wrong track 21%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Don't know 22%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 2
RESEARCH
2. The next questions are about a measure that could be on your local ballot in the future. It may read as follows:
"Shall Lake Oswego rebuild, an earthquake-safe South Shore Fire Station to improve emergency response
throughout the community by issuing bonds? If bonds are approved, they will be payable from taxes on property
ownership that are not subject to the limits of Sections 11 and 11-b, Article XI of the Oregon Constitution."
Would you vote yes or no on this measure?
(ONLINE: SHOW ANSWER OPTIONS FOR"YES," "NO"AND"UNDECIDED")
(IF YES/NO,ASK: Is that definitely or just probably YES/NO?)
(IF UNDECIDED,ASK: Do you lean toward voting yes or no?)
TOTAL YES 54%
Definitely yes 28%
Probably yes 17%
Undecided, lean yes 8%
TOTAL NO 35%
Undecided, lean no _ 6%
Probably no _ 9%
Definitely no 20%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Undecided 11%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 3
RESEARCH
(ASK IF YES/NO IN Q2—CODES 1-6)
3. In a few words of your own,why would you vote YES/NO on this measure? (OPEN-ENDED)
(PHONE: RECORD VERBATIM RESPONSE AND PROBE FOR SPECIFIC RESPONSE, NOT JUST "SOUNDS GOOD" OR
"SOUNDS BAD.")
a. Yes, n=220:
Public safety/reliable emergency response 31%
Safe work environments for first responders/firefighters 16%
Disaster/earthquake preparedness 15%
Updated/modern infrastructure 14%
General support for public infrastructure 11%
Rapid emergency response times 10%
Growth/changing needs of the community 10%
Live near/served by this fire station 6%
Mixed feelings (e.g. support with accountability/efficiency) 3%
Other 5%
Don't know/Unsure 0%
b. No, n=143:
Taxes are too high (general) 45%
Waste/mismanagement/no trust in government 21%
Don't need a new/upgraded fire station 18%
Other priorities are more important 11%
Do not support property taxes 10%
Earthquake chances are low 3%
Other 11%
Don't know/Unsure 1%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 4
RESEARCH
(RESUME ASKING ALL RESPONDENTS)
4. Here is some more information about the measure.
The measure would authorize up to $25 million in principal amount of general obligation bonds for modernization
of the South Shore Fire Station, one of the city's four fire stations. If approved, it would finance capital costs to:
• Construct an earthquake-safe fire station to replace the current station, which currently does not meet
current seismic standards as an essential facility;
• Provide dedicated space for decontamination areas to help limit carcinogenic exposure for firefighters;
• Add living quarters for increased staffing during emergency or natural disaster; and
• Create ADA-accessible community space for meetings, educational programs, emergency preparedness, and
firefighter training.
Having heard this, would you vote yes or no?
(ONLINE: SHOW ANSWER OPTIONS FOR"YES," "NO"AND "UNDECIDED")
(IF YES/NO,ASK: Is that definitely or just probably YES/NO?)
(IF UNDECIDED,ASK: Do you lean toward voting yes or no?)
TOTAL YES 59%
Definitely yes 35%
Probably yes 19%
Undecided, lean yes 5%
TOTAL NO 27%
Undecided, lean no 3%
Probably no 6%
Definitely no 18%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Undecided 14%
(ASK IF CODES 2-7 IN Q4) (IF CODE 1 IN Q4 CODE ALL AS"1")
5. Now, please indicate whether you would be very willing, somewhat willing, somewhat unwilling, or very unwilling
to support each of the following overall bond amounts for the South Shore Fire Station. (READ IN ORDER; ONCE
"1" IS CHOSEN, STOP AND CODE REMAINDER AS"1")
(ONLINE: SHOW ALL ANSWER OPTIONS)
Very Smwt Smwt Very Don't Total Total
Willing Willing Unwill Unwill Know Willing Unwill
a. $22 million 38% 22% 12% 19% 8% 60% 31%
b. $20 million 39% 19% 12% 20% 9% 59% 32%
c. $18 million 41% 20% 9% 20% 10% 61% 30%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 5
RESEARCH
(RESUME ASKING ALL RESPONDENTS)
6. Now, please indicate whether you would be very willing, somewhat willing, somewhat unwilling, or very unwilling
to pay each of the following amounts per household per year in additional taxes for the South Shore Fire Station.
(READ IN ORDER; ONCE "1" IS CHOSEN,STOP AND CODE REMAINDER AS "1")
(ONLINE: SHOW ALL ANSWER OPTIONS)
Very Smwt Smwt Very Don't Total Total
Willing Willing Unwill Unwill Know Willing Unwill
a. $250 22% 29% 18% 25% 6% 51% 42% _
b. $200 25% 29% 17% 24% 6% 54% 40% _
c. $150 38% 23% 12% 21% 6% 61% 33% _
d. $100 47% 18% 11% 18% 6% 66% 29%
7. Here is a list of some of the specific kinds of investments this measure could make. Please indicate how important
each would be to you: extremely important, very important, somewhat important, or not at all important.
(RANDOMIZE)
(ONLINE: SHOW ALL ANSWER OPTIONS)
Not Total
SS Ext Very Smwt At All Don't Ext/Very
Imp Imp Imp ImpKnow Imp
p
a. Replacing the South Shore Fire Station 22% 22% 25% 22% 9% 45%
b. Constructing an earthquake-safe fire station 30% 28% 21% 18% 4% 57%
c. Replacing the current station,which has outdated and A 26% 26% 29% 14% 5% 51%
deteriorating plumbing _
d. Replacing the current station,which has outdated and B 32% 23% 24% 16% 4% I 55%
deteriorating electrical wiring
e. Replacing the current station, which has outdated and A 29% 19% 32% 14% 6% 48%
deteriorating heating and air conditioning
f. Replacing the current station,which has a leaky roof B 31% 23% 23% 17% 6% 54% _
g. Providing decontamination areas to help limit 37% 33% 16% 10% 4% 70%
firefighter exposure to carcinogens _
h. Providing storage for modern medical and firefighting A 28% 24% 32% 10% 6% 52%
tools and equipment
i. Providing storage for personal protective equipment B 25% 29% 30% 12% 4% I 54%
for firefighters
j. Providing private living space, including individual A 20% 24% 37% 13% 6% 44%
showers and bathrooms for firefighters
k. Replacing outdated group locker rooms and bathroom B 12% 15% 33% 33% 7% 27%
facilities with individual, private facilities _
I. Providing space for increased staffing during an 23% 30% 28% 14% 5% 53%
emergency or natural disaster _
m. Improving access to community rooms for people with 13% 24% 35% 22% 6% 37%
disabilities
n. Supporting emergency medical response times 45% 29% 16% 5% 5% - 74% _
o. Supporting water and dive rescue operations 22% 29% 32% 12% 5% 51% _
p. Supporting technical rescue operations 23% 31% 26% 10% 9% 55%
q. Supporting wildland-urban interface fire response 31% 29% 25% 9% 6% 60%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 6
RESEARCH
Not Total
SS Ext Very Smwt At All Don't Ext/Very
Imp Imp Imp ImpKnow Imp
p
r. Supporting hazardous materials incident response 32% 29% 21% 12% 6% 62%
s. Supporting disaster response _ 41% 29% 20% 7% 4% 69% _
t. Supporting citywide response to critical fires, 45% 29% 5% 4% 0
accidents, and medical emergencies 16% 74/
u. Supporting response to fire and emergency medical
calls to Lake Oswego Recreation &Aquatic Center,
Luscher Farm, Lakeridge High School, and other large 35% 29% 24% 8% 4% 64%
community facilities
8. Next, here are some potential elements that could be included in the measure to enhance accountability. For each
one, please indicate if including that element would make you more likely or less likely to vote yes on the measure.
If it would make no difference to you, you can indicate that instead. (RANDOMIZE)
(ONLINE: SHOW ALL ANSWER OPTIONS)
(PHONE: IF MORE/LESS LIKELY,ASK: Is that much or somewhat MORE/LESS likely?)
Much Smwt Makes Smwt Much Don't Total Total
More More No Less Less Know More Less
Likely Likely Diff Likely Likely Likely Likely
a. Independent annual audits of City budget 37% 29% 21% 4% 2% 7% 66% 6%
and bond spending
b. Providing no money for salaries or 23% 24% 29% 5% 6% 13% 47% 11%
pensions
c. All funds spent directly on this project 45% 24% 18% 3% 3% 7% 69% 6% _
Now you will be presented with statements from supporters and opponents of this measure.
9. For each one, please indicate whether you find it very convincing, somewhat convincing, or not convincing as a
reason to support the measure. If you do not believe the statement,you can indicate that instead. (RANDOMIZE)
(ONLINE: SHOW ONE STATEMENT AT A TIME; SHOW ALL ANSWER OPTIONS)
SS Very Smwt Not Do Not Don't Total
Cony Cony Cony Believe Know Cony
a. (AGE)The South Shore Fire Station was built in
1971—it is not earthquake safe and does not
meet modern disability access standards. It has
a leaky roof, outdated electrical wiring and 44% 24% 24% 4% 3% 69%
plumbing, and failing heating and cooling
systems. Our firefighters and our community
deserve a safe, modern fire station.
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 7
RESEARCH
SS Very Smwt Not Do Not Don't Total
Cony Cony Cony Believe Know Cony
b. (WITHOUT) Lake Oswego's four fire stations
provide critical medical,fire, and emergency
services within minutes for every resident of the
city. With one less station, response times will
increase beyond the current standard of 8 52% 25% 15% 4% 5% 76%
minutes or less—risking lives and property.
Voting "yes" keeps response times low and our
community safe.
c. (COMMUNITY)A new South Shore Fire Station
will include a classroom for training and skill-
building in CPR,first aid, and fire prevention.
The station can also serve as a center for 25% 35% 34% 3% 3% 60%
information and assistance in case of
emergency or disaster.Voting "yes"will
strengthen our whole community's preparation
and response.
d. (MINUTES/COVERAGE) In a house fire, property
destruction generally exceeds 50%after just 8
minutes of burning. And in a medical
emergency like a heart attack, every minute
counts—that's why Lake Oswego sends 53% 24% 16% 4% 4% 77%
firefighters from two stations to critical calls.
The South Shore Fire Station provides
firefighting and emergency medical coverage for
all areas of the city.
e. (SIZE) Currently, only one of Lake Oswego's fire
stations can fit a traditional fire truck—and the
South Shore station does not have enough room
for modern medical and firefighting tools and 47% 27% 16% 6% 5% 74%
equipment. By upgrading South Shore Fire
Station to modern standards, we can provide a
critical backup location for life-saving
equipment.
f. (DECONTAMINATE).The current South Shore
Fire Station has no dedicated space for
firefighters returning from calls to
decontaminate and store personal protection 43% 35% 13% 3% 5% 78%
equipment, which increases risk of exposure to
carcinogens. Our firefighters deserve facilities
that can reduce their risk of exposure to
hazardous materials as they protect us.
g. (BOAT) Our fire department responds to water
emergencies on the Willamette River,
Clackamas River, and Lake Oswego—and the
South Shore Station hosts our city's only rescue 25% 41% 26% 4% 5% 66%
boat. A new, updated station would provide safe
storage for the Rescue Boat and all emergency
tools and equipment.
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 8
RESEARCH
SS Very Smwt Not Do Not Don't Total
Cony Cony Cony Believe Know Cony
h. (WILDFIRE) Communities like ours are facing
new challenges in the era of extreme wildfires
that quickly spread to homes --and that's
especially true for the south side of town near 38% 36% 20% 4% 2% 74%
the Stafford area. This measure would protect
our community by ensuring rapid response and
coverage for high-risk areas.
10. Please consider the measure to replace South Shore Fire Station by issuing up to $25 million in general obligation
bonds again. Would you vote yes or no?
(ONLINE: SHOW ANSWER OPTIONS FOR"YES," "NO"AND "UNDECIDED")
(IF YES/NO,ASK: Is that definitely or just probably YES/NO?)
(IF UNDECIDED,ASK: Do you lean toward voting yes or no?)
TOTAL YES 58%
Definitely yes 36%
Probably yes 16%
Undecided, lean yes 6%
TOTAL NO 31%
Undecided, lean no 2%
Probably no 8%
Definitely no 22%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Undecided 11%
Now you will be presented with statements from potential opponents of the measure.
11. For each one, please indicate whether you find each statement from opponents very convincing, somewhat
convincing, or not convincing as a reason to vote no. If you do not believe the statement, you can indicate that
instead. (RANDOMIZE)
(ONLINE: SHOW ONE STATEMENT AT A TIME; SHOW ALL ANSWER OPTIONS)
SS Very Smwt Not Do Not Don't Total
Cony Cony Cony Believe Know Cony
a. (COST/ANTI-TAX)The cost of living is
skyrocketing, and our taxes are already too high. 33% 25% 33% 8% 2% 58%
We just can't afford more taxes right now.
b. (UNCERTAIN)With experts saying the economy
is likely to enter another recession soon, now is A 18% 24% 44% 11% 2% 42%
the wrong time for this measure.
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 9
RESEARCH
SS Very Smwt Not Do Not Don't Total
Cony Cony Cony Believe Know Cony
c. (DEBT) Because it is a long-term bond,this
measure will cost taxpayers too much for too B 31% 22% 38% 7% 2% 52%
long. We shouldn't pay for decades, leaving
debt to our children and grandchildren.
d. (CLOSE) We just don't need four fire stations
and all the costly equipment and staff that come A 6% 20% 44% 25% 6% 26%
with them.We should let South Shore close.
e. (RENOVATE) Rather than asking us to pay for
new facility, the City should present us with a
plan to repair the station we already have. B 29% 24% 38% 7% 1% 53%
Voting "no" sends a message that the city
should live within their means.
12. Please consider the measure to replace South Shore Fire Station by issuing$25 million in general obligation bonds
again. Would you vote yes or no?
(ONLINE: SHOW ANSWER OPTIONS FOR"YES," "NO"AND "UNDECIDED")
(IF YES/NO,ASK: Is that definitely or just probably YES/NO?)
(IF UNDECIDED,ASK: Do you lean toward voting yes or no?)
TOTAL YES _ 54°4
Definitely yes 31%
Probably yes 15%
Undecided, lean yes 8%
TOTAL NO
Undecided, lean no 2%
Probably no 7%
Definitely no 24%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Undecided 13%
We're just about done.The next few questions ensure we are hearing from a representative set of Lake Oswego voters.
13. How would you describe yourself politically?
(PHONE: READ LIST)
Progressive 15%
Liberal 17%
Moderate 48%
Conservative 19%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Prefer not to say 1%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 10
RESEARCH
14. Do you own or rent your home?
Own 87%
Rent 12%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Prefer not to say 1%
15. What was the last level of school you completed?
First to 11th grade 0%
High school graduate 2%
Vocational or technical school 1%
Some college, but no degree 5%
Associate degree 3%
Four-year college degree 58%
Graduate school 31%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Prefer not to say 0%
16. When asked to identify your racial or ethnic identity, how do you identify?(ALLOW MULTIPLE SELECTIONS)
Native American,American Indian or Alaska Native 2%
Asian or Asian American 5%
Black or African American 1%
Hispanic or Latino 4%
Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander 0%
White 86%
An ethnicity not included above(PLEASE DESCRIBE) 4%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Prefer not to say 1%
17. Which of the following best represents the annual income of your household before taxes?
(READ LIST)
Less than$50,000 6%
$50,000 to$100,000 17%
$100,001 to$200,000 35%
$200,001 to$500,000 33%
More than$500,000 8%
(DON'T READ ON PHONE) Prefer not to say 2%
18. What is your gender?
Male _ _ 48%
Female 52%
(THANK AND TERMINATE INTERVIEW)
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 11
RESEARCH
SAMPLE VARIABLES
AGE
18-24 3%
25-29 3%
30-34 5
35-39 4%
40-44 7
45-49 10%
50-54 9%
55-59 10%
60-64 9%
65-74 17%
75+ 23%
F M 3 220-7588-WT PAGE 12
RESEARCH
PARTY REGISTRATION
Democrat 48%
Republican 23%
Non-Affiliated 21%
Other 8%
DATA COLLECTION MODE/CONTACT METHOD
Telephone 49%
Online/Text 51%
A/B SPLIT SAMPLES
A 50%
B 50%
PAST EVEN-YEAR ELECTION PARTICIPATION
P20 61%
G20 92%
P22 56%
G22 88%
P24 55%
G24 94%
Blank 2%
ZIP CODE
97034 51%
97035 49%
ATTACHMENT 2
, Os FIRE
AAF
South Shore Fire Station „-use
V O 1 u o
Communications & Engagement Plan -
�REGO� DRAFT dEpl•
WORKING DOCUMENT
Purpose
The purpose of the South Shore Fire Station (SSFS) Communications & Engagement Plan is to
outline the City's strategy and approach to communications related to outcomes of the South
Shore Fire Station Task Force and next steps for the Station.
This plan is intended to be a working document that can be updated and adjusted as the
project is developed. This plan will need to be further developed for bond campaigning
(dependent on Council-direction).
Communication Goals
The objectives and goals of the SSFS communication:
• Inform the community of the current condition of the South Shore Fire Station
• Inform the community on the Task Force's eight key findings
• Increase community understanding how the SSFS relates to public safety goals, including
future needs
• Increase public awareness and support for the potential SSFS project
• Inspire key community leaders to proactively champion on behalf of the project
• Maintain ongoing communications and transparency with neighbors, neighborhood, and
other interested parties/stakeholders
• Monitor community response
Sequence
Why/What How* Project*
Why/What How Project Delivery
Winter/Spring 2025 *We are here* *Dependent on voter-approve bond
To upgrade South Shore Fire
Tell the story of South Shore Station to meet the needs of Need for station and funding
Fire Station the community today and in has been supported by the
the future, we need to community
rebuild the station
Why is this being talked
about now?What are the How will we finance the Construction underway,
facility/service needs? rebuild? here's how it is going.
This should include: This should include: This should include:
• City Council Goal • Polling on messages • Ongoing storytelling
• SSFS Task Force • Financing options of progress
formation &work explored • Community designed
• The current • Proposed bond spaces/aspects when
conditions of the SSFS package appropriate
• Task Force's Eight Key • Value provided to the
Findings community
Intent: inform community of Intent: engage the Intent: deliver on the voter-
the challenges and community on how to fund approved project
limitations of the current SSFS
building with a focus on
future needs of the
community
Timeline
March
• Draft April HelloLO—Task Force • Neighbor Chair Committee
Report/Council meeting draft polling • Mary's Landing NA
contract— Evan
• finalize postcard
April
• Publish polling contract (2-3 advertising) • Palisades NA
• Draft May HelloLO—call response time, • McVey/South Shore NA
why 4th station matters • Westlake
• Create project website
• Create additional hand out materials
(budget postcard, coloring sheets)
• Develop internal talking points/key
messages
May
• Draft June HelloLO— • AAPI Month Celebration
o Mayors Roundtable • Farmers Market (5/31)
o Introduce Project and Task Force
findings
• Finalize Mayors Roundtable
o Promote through SSFS listserv,
CERT, Task Force, B&C, NAs
June
• Continue promoting Mayors Roundtable • Mayors Roundtable (6/12)
• Draft July HelloLO—fireworks, citywide
response
• Polling & Report
July
• Draft August HelloLO—fireworks, • Farmers Market (7/19)
insurance rating
• Presentation to Council
August
• Draft August HelloLO—fireworks, • Lake Grove Farmers Market (8/3)
insurance rating • National Night Out (8/5)
• Plan Fall Neighborhood Associations • MPP Farmers' Market (8/16)
schedule
Key Stakeholders
Stakeholders will evolve as the project takes shape, however, there are key groups to identify
and invite into the early stages of the process.
Elected Officials/Decision Makers City Boards& Commissions
• City Council • 50+ Board
• County Board of Commissioners • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion Board
• Fire Union • Development Review Committee
• City Department Leadership— Library, • Budget Committee
Police, Parks • Library Board
• Parks Board
Special Interest—Emergency Response &
Emergency Preparedness Special Interest— Environmental
• CERT • Friends of Hallinan Heights Woods -
• LOARES Freepons Park
• Prep LO • Friends of Hallinan Heights Woods -
• CPR class graduates Hallinan Woods
• Wildfire Home Assessments • Friends of Luscher Farm
participants • Friends of Stevens Meadows
• Clackamas Co Water Rescue Group • Lake Corporation
• TVF&R • Watershed Council
Special Interest—Senior Facilities Special Interest—Community Organizations
• Mary's Woods • Methodist Church
• Marylhurst • Rotary
• The Stafford • Lions
• Contracted fire districts • Kiwanis
Neighbors/Service Area General Public
• Adjacent neighbors • Overall Lake Oswego community
• All Neighborhood Associations • Lake Oswego voters
• Atherton Neighborhood • Lake Oswego property owners
• Stafford-Hamlet • Property tax payers
• Hallinan Elementary • School-age children
• Palisades World Language School • Oregon State Fire Marshal
• Lakeridge High School • People who work in LO but don't live
• Park Academy here
• French Immersion School
• Palisades Marketplace Businesses
• Users of neighboring dog parks and
athletic fields (Hazelia)
• Neighbors who use the adjacent path
• West Linn
Channels
Majority of communications will be shared publicly. This will reach our "subscribed"/followers
on the City's different communications channels. However, more targeted and intentional
communication will need to be distributed to targeted/special interest groups.
City-Owned Channels Events/Presentations
• City website—dedicated project page • Farmers' Market— Downtown (May-
• HelloLO Oct) & Lake Grove (Aug-Nov)*
• LO Down • Mayor's Roundtable*
• Social media channels—utilize both • Summer concerts— Foothills &
main &fire-specific Westlake*
• Project email subscribers • Fourth of July Parade (July)*
• Parks & Library Listserv/newsletters • National Night Out (August)*
• Parks Activities Guide • Cultural Exchange (September)*
• Mailers • Emergency Preparedness Fair
• Utility bill insert (use selectively) (September)*
• Posters in City facilities—QR code • Reunion Farmers' Market (November)*
• Cardiac Arrest Survival Breakfast*
External-Owned Channels • Arts Festival
• Chamber newsletter • Rotary/Lions/Kiwanis
• LOSD newsletter • Neighborhood Associations Meetings
• Individual school newsletter • Neighborhood Chairs Committee
• LO Review articles • Chamber of Commerce Breakfast
• Neighborhood Associations newsletters • Lake Grove Business Association
• Lake Corporation newsletter Meeting
• Portland Tribune *City-sponsored events and programs
• NA websites & newsletters
• Mary's Woods newsletter Additional "Tools"
• Local LO blog/social media groups • SS Station tour
• Elementary & preschool visits
• Outreach to Mary's Woods
• Outreach at LORAC
Key Messages
These key messages reflect the project knowledge of today. The key messages serve as a
current platform to build off of. Messages should be further refined by stakeholder input and
public polling, as well as shift as the project progresses.
Top Level Message:
Constructed in 1971,the South Shore Fire Station has reached the end of its useful life. This
facility needs to be replaced in order to maintain our current level of coverage for medical,
fire, and life safety emergencies.
South Shore Station Service Demands Today
• Constructed in 1971, the fire station is the oldest of the City's four station.
• In 2024, firefighters from the South Shore Fire Station responded to 1,106 calls for
service ranging from public service calls and medical emergencies, to fire and life safety
incidents.
• The South Shore Fire Station is the closest emergency facility to large City-owned
amenities including Luscher Farm, George Rogers park, the Lake Oswego Recreation &
Aquatic Center, and the Municipal Golf Course.
• Additionally, SSFS is the closest to facility to Lakeridge High School, Hallinan Elementary
School, and Mary's Woods.
• Uniquely SSFS houses Rescue Boat 212, which responds as part of the regional water
consortium team to Lake Oswego and all of Clackamas County Waterways including the
Willamette, Clackamas, and Tualatin Rivers.
South Shore Station Deficiencies
• Over the last fourteen years, through strategic investment, the Fire Department has
extended the life of this facility.
• However, there are substantial upgrades to maintain its ability to effectively respond to
medical, fire, and life safety emergencies.
• This includes, but not limited to: requires to be built to "essential facility" seismic
standards, electrical system and backup power needs to be replaced, new roof, HVAC
system needs to be upgraded and/or replaced.
• Additionally, station should be upgraded for to be inclusive to the community, as well as
our diversifying workforce. This includes ADA upgrades, individual bathroom and sleep
quarters, and professional office spaces separate than living quarters.
Project Background
• In 2023, the City's statistically-valid community survey asked residents to prioritize a list
of potential capital improvement projects. More than 50% of respondents ranked
upgrading the South Shore Fire Station as one of their top three priorities.
• Based on these results, the City Council directed staff to "begin a needs assessment and
community engagement process to rebuild the South Shore Fire Station" as a part of
their 2024 and 2025 City Council Goals.
Task Force Process
• City Council adopted the 2024 initiative "begin a needs assessment and community
engagement process to rebuild the South Shore Fire Station."
• South Shore Task Force was formed to: study the existing conditions of the Station,
evaluate community coverage needs, and make a recommendation to the City Council
about how to address facility deficiencies.
• Task Force was composed of members representing various Neighborhood Associations,
community groups, and City Boards & Commissions.
Task Force Findings
• Task Force members reviewed information prepared by project staff and produced eight
key findings from their analysis:
1. The South Shore Fire Station has reached the end of its useful life.
2. The City needs a fire station in the southeast quadrant of Lake Oswego to
maintain the current level of system-wide service.
3. A new fire station should be built to meet the needs of the LOFD for the next
50 years.The long-term projected spatial need is approximately 14,000 sf.
4. The current location of Station 212 is optimum.
5. Alternatives, including renovating the existing facility, were deemed
infeasible.
6. Staff should explore the benefits and feasibility of acquiring additional land.
7. Based on comparable projects, a new build of this size could cost up to $18
million.
8. The most viable funding source would be a General Obligation Bond.
Future of South Shore Station
• Task Force Findings were presented to Council on March 4, 2025 for further project
direction.
• Council directed staff to continue the work--this next phase will focus on determining
the project cost and generating public support.
Materials Needed
To support the delivery of communications and messages, a suite of materials will be needed
for different channels and audiences:
• Project website • Main Project Key Messages/Fact
• Cohesive, identifiable project Points
branding • Project hand out (postcard style)
• Photo catalog to use on materials, • Budget hand out (postcard style)
including building condition • Pathway signage
• Video series (including station tour) • Coloring sheets— LO fire truck &
• Frequently asked questions 'design your fire station'
• Farmers' Market board displays