The record · Transcript
Council Session — 2026-01-12
Transcript from the session's official auto-captions (14,988 words), shown in readable case and split into speaker turns. Speakers are not yet identified (colors just separate consecutive turns). Auto-captions can contain errors — check the recording for anything that matters.
Session summaryEditor-reviewed
The Portland City Council Finance Committee convened on January 12, 2026, with roll call confirming attendance. The committee heard two items. The first was an ordinance adopting a supplemental budget for the Portland Housing Bureau for fiscal year 2025-2026, addressing roughly $20-21 million in previously unallocated landlord registry funds; figures for specific allocations toward homeownership, gap funding for named projects, rent assistance, and portfolio stabilization were described in the ordinance but stated inconsistently across speakers. An amendment was pre-filed proposing to substitute exhibits reflecting a "Slow the Inflow" resolution developed in the Housing and Homelessness Committee; discussion covered process concerns about which committee should have originated the funding decision, the legality of multi-year budgeting versus current-year budget modifications, and competing priorities between rent assistance and homeownership/development investments. Extensive public testimony was heard from realtors, nonprofit representatives, faith leaders, lobbyists, and individuals with lived experience, expressing both support for and opposition to the ordinance as written versus the proposed amendment. Votes occurred on the amendment and on the underlying ordinance; outcomes are recorded in the vote ledger. The second item, a Portland Clean Energy Community Benefits Fund ordinance allowing transfer of FY2023-24 interest into the FY2025-26 budget, was presented by bureau staff, discussed briefly, and voted on, with outcomes recorded in the vote ledger. The meeting adjourned at 1:36 p.m., with the next Finance Committee meeting scheduled for January 27th.
AI-drafted from the session's auto-captions, reviewed by an editor — describes the discussion only; recorded votes live in the vote ledger. Captions contain errors.
0 All right. Good afternoon. I'm going to call the finance committee to order. It's Monday, January 12th at 12:02 p.m. Diana, could you please call the roll?
1 Good afternoon. Candace. Sorry. Avalos. Sorry. Present pirtle-guiney here. Novick here.
2 Green here. Zimmerman here. Christopher, can you read the statement of conduct?
3 Welcome to the meeting of the finance committee to testify before this committee in person or virtually. You must sign up in advance on the agenda at wwe. Agenda finance committee or by calling 311. Information on engaging with the committee can be found at this link. Registration for virtual testimony closes one hour prior to the meeting. In person, testifiers must sign up before the agenda item is heard. If public testimony will be taken on an item, individuals may testify for three minutes unless the chair states otherwise, your microphone will be muted when your time is over. The chair preserves order disruptive conduct such as shouting, refusing to conclude your testimony when your time is up, or interrupting others testimony or committee deliberations will not be allowed. If you cause disruption, a warning will be given. Further disruption will result in ejection from the meeting. Anyone who fails to leave once ejected is subject to arrest for trespass. Additionally, the committee may take a short recess and reconvene virtually. Your testimony should address the matter being considered. When testifying, state your name for the record. If you're a lobbyist, identify the organization you represent, and virtual testifiers should unmute themselves when the clerk calls your name. Thank you.
4 Great colleagues. Today, the finance committee is going to hear two ordinances, one related to the Portland housing bureau budget and two, an ordinance brought to us by the staff from PCEF with that clerk. If you could read item number one, please.
5 Item one adopt a supplemental budget for the Portland housing bureau for fiscal year 2025, 2023 2026. Oh my gosh, it's been a day.
6 That's okay. All right. Thank you. Clerk. Colleagues, this ordinance is coming out of my office. It is response to the news that we were all made aware of after I had a conversation some months ago with the former housing director about the use of the funds that are paid by landlords in our registry here. And most of us have heard about the almost $21 million that was not allocated in our last budget process. And so in order to put those funds to work and to. Adopt a budget modification, I put together this ordinance and outlined in exhibit two funding that does a number of things. I'm just going to go down the list and then I'll and then I'll stop $1 million in gap funding for the williams russell project, enabling development of approximately 85 affordable units and 25 affordable units for purchase, 1.5 in gap funding for the self enhancement northeast 13th avenue permanently affordable homeownership project, enabling the development of an additional 18 units beyond the other 35 units. Half $1 million increase in a solicitation that the housing bureau has an RFP out for at 102nd and Burnside, 5.6 million in gap funding for the broadway corridor. Affordable housing via prosper Portland, enabling the development of an approximately 230 additional units, 1 million for rent and other financial assistance for tenants facing eviction, 5 million for rent and other financial assistance for individuals existing from shelter to exiting. Excuse me exiting from shelter to permanent housing via non-profits currently engaged in housing connection work. So total. That's 6 million in various forms of rent assistance, 1.4 million for affordable housing. Portfolio stabilization tactics which may include rent buy downs. Providing gap funding, supporting the restructure of debt grants for safety and security concerns, and other means of repositioning properties. 1 million for down payment assistance loan program with for homeownership funds administered by fb and 3.7 million returning to the general fund by applying fbs authorized admin fee to the total of the 20.7 million. I'll just note that fb could take 4.14 for that admin fee, but total 3.7. And that brings us to the 20.7. The reason I've put forward and authored this ordinance really comes out of a desire to both help projects that are helping us, you know, fight the capacity issue, get more buildings built, more units built, more units available, and at the same time, make sure that those who are in shelter have the means and the and the support to transition from shelter to available units. The other programs I have appreciated hearing what we've heard from others who are in the home ownership world. Getting that type of assistance to me is such an up stream type of program that I'm very supportive of that. And so for that, that this ordinance brings those as, as you can see in exhibit two, and I'm happy to close my comments. I know we have some public comments, so I'll entertain questions, but then happy to go to public comment depending on where the committee wants to go. Thank you colleagues, I see councilor Green, you're in the queue first.
7 Thank you, mr. Chair. I'm in the queue because I've actually pre-filed an amendment and I can talk about that amendment now. Or I can wait. Well, I could just briefly say what it does. That amendment replaces the exhibits in the in the Zimmerman amendment or ordinance with exhibits that were from an ordinance that councilor Smith, in consultation with councilor Avalos and councilor Dunphy, developed to actualize the intent of the slow the inflow resolution that went through substantive engagement with the bureaus and was passed out of the housing and homelessness committee. And there's been about a month of engagement in the public on that issue. My understanding is that the intent for that ordinance that was to come to the full council, but the council president thought better to refer it to the finance committee. At least that's what I see in council. And I guess I was expecting to see that ordinance today. But instead I see this ordinance which I haven't heard much about and we'll hear some about today, I'm sure. But to me that feels a little bit disingenuous. And so I would like to offer this amendment to correct the course on the path of this $21 million. So that's what that's what I've done today.
8 Councilor Avalos you're next in the queue.
9 Thank you, councilor Green for pre-filing that amendment. I, I am very disappointed that councilor Zimmerman, chair Zimmerman, you're choosing to use your position to promote your policy desires over others. Councilor Smith developed the exact same ordinance to accompany our solar inflow resolution, which has already traveled through the housing and homelessness committee back in early December. It has been waiting for a council assignment ever since councilor Smith submitted the ordinance to this committee, and but instead of putting that on the agenda, chose to withhold that ordinance so that you could copy and paste and put your own allocations. I do not understand the the ethics behind that. I will note that it isn't even a matter of not having enough time to schedule smith's ordinance, since she requested 30 minutes, and this meeting only has 90 minutes of items scheduled on it. At the very least, the they could have been scheduled together, so we could have discussed them at the same time, but this feels like a blatant misuse of your power chair, and an obvious attempt to not deal directly with what was already put on the table. Not. Let's not even get into the fact that I have not heard anything about this. And I think as the housing and homelessness chair who put this forward, I deserve the minimum bare respect of being given any kind of heads up. And instead of a transparent and direct debate and offering amendments to what's already in play, councilor Zimmerman is choosing to be sneaky. Something you accuse me of constantly. I can't stop you from doing that right now, but I need to call it out and make sure the public knows before they give their testimony that what is before them is not what was put forth by the housing and homelessness committee. I am still waiting to hear if council president will be scheduling the resolution that we've been waiting a month to hear, when that's going to get on the agenda. And I just I'm curious when councilor Smith's ordinance will be coming forward to this committee. So I it's really uncomfortable to have to do this. And I don't see the fact that this is so incredibly blatant and the disrespect that I was not noticed at all is disgusting. So I'm incredibly infuriated by this. And I think that is unbecoming of a council colleague to treat another council colleague like this. I don't understand how you feel that this is ethical or correct, and it's not.
10 Okay. Thank you. Councilors, I'll just note that we don't spend money in the city via resolution. We do spend it via blood, mud and through ordinance. And so that's what this is. I consulted with councilor Avalos the exact same number of minutes that she consulted with me about her previous housing resolution. That was a rent assistance, heavy resolution. This is a rent assistance and new units ordinance, which is actually how the city spends money with that clerk. I believe we have a number of people signed up for public testimony. Can you let me know what number we're at at this point?
11 Currently, there are 16 people signed up.
12 Okay. Thank you. I do see a few more people have gotten in the queue. Let me go to councilor. Novick, please.
13 Yes, councilor Greene and councilor Avalos. I just want to. I'm going through trying to add up numbers on the the the alternative. I'm just trying to make sure that I have it right with this in effect, say 5 million in new rent assistance, 2 million in rent assistance and rapid rehousing for tenants facing eviction, 3.6 million in another form of rent assistance, 1.5 million in right to counsel and 7.4 million in emergency housing vouchers. I'm just sort of like going through and looking at the, the, the numerous individual numbers and trying to add them up to see if that's right.
14 I don't have that in front of me, so I'm not going to I can't answer that right away. I don't think it's about the numbers. I think it's more about the fact that this was brought forward. I am very well aware that you do things by ordinance, which is why we had councilor Smith put forward the ordinance. We acted with urgency. Councilor Zimmerman, who sits on housing and homelessness, had plenty of opportunity to offer his amendments at that time. And between that meeting and this point, and yet I have not heard a anything from that, and I believe that it is my right as the council, as the chair of a committee, to bring something forward, that that was given a directive to me. And the email clearly states that the chair and vice chair were given the directive to respond to those dollars, which is what we did. So I completely reject this premise that you were not consulted. You had every opportunity to talk about it in committee and between now and then, and instead chose to not talk to me at all and propose this in a very disturbingly sneaky way. So I don't. So back to your question. I don't I'm not looking at those numbers, so I don't I can't answer to that. But I think what's important is that a discussion was already had. And if this if you want to propose amendments, I actually very much welcome that. But in a process that is not what we're doing right now there, there's the opportunity to bring that to full council. And in fact, we have amendments that we're already going to be bringing to full council to the original allocations due to further discussion that we had. But we acted with the urgency that the public demanded. And I think this is completely that is a disingenuous argument.
15 Councilor Novick. If you restate those, I'll check verify the math. There's no tabulation in the document. Okay. I just need to do the math with you.
16 Yeah. I mean, what I think I see is rent assistance for tenants, new funding for flexible short term aid. It seems to me that that adds up to 5 million in new funding, 500,000, 2.5 and two, and then rent assistance and housing for tenants facing eviction. It looks to me like that's an increase in 2 million. And then rent assistance for individuals experiencing homelessness. It looks to me like it's an increase of 3.6 million. Right to council pilot. That seems to me it's an entirely new thing of 1.5. And then emergency housing vouchers looks as self-explanatory a total of 7.4.
17 I mean, I think your tabulation is correct.
18 Thank you.
19 Councilor Green. You're also in the queue.
20 That was just to respond to Novick.
21 Okay. Great. Let's go ahead and call the first three up folks. We're going to call three at a time if you can come up together. And then we'll just go down the line. Whoever gets the microphone first, please introduce yourself when you can. Thank you.
22 First up we have amy walsh. She's online. Then we have maybe munoz and regina. Very. Modesto.
23 Good afternoon. As you get settled, go ahead and you can kick us off by introducing yourself.
24 Hi, everyone. My name is amy walsh. I'm a member of the Portland metropolitan association of realtors and serve on the realtor committee for the Portland housing center. Councilor Zimmerman, thank you for your thoughtful investments into this supplemental budget. I'm here to share why the investment in down payment assistance programs matters so much to portland's future. Homeownership is one of the strongest tools we have to stabilize households and neighborhoods. When families own, their housing costs become predictable and they're more likely to stay, invest, and build roots in their communities. Homeownership is still the single largest driver of generational wealth in the united states. Yet portland's homeownership rate has hovered around 53% for the past five years. For bipoc households, it's just 40.8%. If we're serious about closing those gaps, homeownership cannot stay on the back burner. That's why the allocation for down payment assistance is so critical. I talk with buyers almost every day who's barrier isn't the monthly mortgage, it's the upfront cash. They have steady jobs, want to stay in Portland long term and can even manage today's high rents. But rising housing costs have made saving for a down payment nearly impossible. I guess that many of us in this room that can point to a moment where somebody believed in us before we fully believed in ourselves, and that belief changed our path down. Payment assistance does the same thing for families. For those it reaches, this support can be truly life changing. It's often just one small step that turns a dream of ownership into a real, lasting future. While the city has rightly invested heavily in homelessness response and rental stabilization, investing in homeownership creates long term solutions to the million dollar. Investment is modest compared to rental investments, and unlike short term assistance, these homes become lasting community assets. Families build equity, neighborhoods become more stable, and pressure on the rental market eases over time. This investment and down payment assistance is exactly the kind of commitment Portland needs more of targeted, equitable and lasting. We urge you to see this not as just a small line item, but as a foundational tool for strengthening the long term health of our city. Thank you for your time.
25 Thank you. Please, whomever wants to go first.
26 Good afternoon. Councilors. My name is matt munoz. I'm a housing and real estate program consultant, managing broker, immediate past president of Oregon realtors, and a member of the Portland metropolitan association of realtors. I've been in the real estate and mortgage industry for more than 25 years, helping families across our city and generations. After all this time, what keeps me in this work is simple. People want stability and a chance. Homeownership is still one of the few ways families can get both. We talk a lot about renters, rents, homelessness, and displacement, and rightly so. But the other side of that conversation is ownership. When a family owns their housing, costs stop rising every year. They stop worrying about being priced out. They start building wealth and putting down roots. Homeownership remains one of the most strongest pathways to generational wealth and long term stability. As my colleague mentioned, portland's homeownership rate has been stuck around 53% for years. For bipoc households, it closer to 40%. Those numbers aren't abstract to me. They're teachers, caregivers, administrators, and young adults I've worked with who love this city but aren't sure they can stay here. 75% of my clients needed down payment assistance. They didn't lack the income to afford a mortgage. They lacked the savings to break through the front door. With today's rents, first time home buyers are essentially already making a mortgage payment just without equity or future return down. Payment assistance is often the only bridge between renting indefinitely and owning a home. Through partnerships with the Portland housing center, the african American alliance for homeownership and other housing nonprofits, nareb Oregon realtors has been one. What happens when the bridge exists at our pathway? Our paving the way for black homeownership forum, we connected families to lenders, housing counselors, and estate planners to attendees have already purchased homes. That may sound small, but those families, it changed their trajectory. That is why the supplemental budget matters. The 1 million allocation for down payment assistance, the williams and russell project and the self enhancement inc project are not line items. They are opportunities. They help families stay in Portland, build equity and belong. I urge council to continue strengthening and expanding these investments. Families are ready. They just need the door to be open. Thank you.
27 Thanks so much please.
28 Hi. Good afternoon. My name is regina modesto. I am a realtor. I have been for six and a half years. I am here as a member of the metropolitan association of realtors. I'm also here as the director of government affairs for the national association of hispanic real estate professionals, western Oregon chapter. But more importantly, I'm here as a mother and of a small child that is in the Portland public school district. As my colleague mentioned, the teachers and caregivers of our local schools need to be able to afford and be in those schools and not just in a working environment. I see every day how homeownership investment expands our communities and creates community within those small school areas so that we can literally see children grow up and become the next generation of Oregonians. I would also like to emphasize. Homeownership in regards to long term availability of spaces for generations to come back to again and again, and also for multiple generations to live in at one time. So I think that homeownership is one of the most important things we can give our children. Thank you.
29 Thanks for spending your time with us, I appreciate that.
30 Next up we have dana fuller shepard, followed by azalea, renfield, and tanisha renee.
31 Welcome whomever gets ready first. By all means, introduce yourself and kick it up. Get up.
32 Get going.
33 That's yours. Hi. Hi, councilors. My name is dana fuller shepard, and I serve as the executive director of the Portland housing center, where a cdfi a consumer, excuse me, community development financial institution, a mortgage broker, and Oregon ida fiduciary organization is short for Portland housing center. By the way, we also manage the Portland housing bureau's homeownership preference policy, referred waitlists as a HUD certified counseling agency. We actually are the sole managers of that list. So many of the units that you speak about and that are detailed in the exhibit, we would be feeding those into the homeownership units. Again, I just want to differentiate that we are the homeownership referred list manager. So with that support and as a HUD certified counseling agency, we provide intensive hands on support to first time and first generation homebuyers who have been displaced or who maintain deep generational ties to north and northeast Portland. I also speak today as a fourth generation portlander, serving as a board member of the williams and russell cdc. Portland housing center has an active pipeline of over 1000 hopeful first time homebuyers. Affordability remains a major barrier, but the challenge is magnified by the severe shortage of available units that fuels intense competition for low to middle income wage earners and those lacking experience and capital to enter the market. Opportunity for these households are directly tied to the decisions that the city makes in the investments in tools that are provided to make homeownership possible. So while I am in support of depositing revenue into Portland housing bureau's housing investment funds, when we outlined the what's outlined in the exhibit, and from what I can tell, I heard some numbers earlier and some data. And from what I can tell from the names of the projects that I am aware of, it looks like about 3.5 million of the 20 million is going to some form of homeownership, affordable homeownership with $1 million dedicated to down payment assistance. And so I want to just speak to the $1 million of down payment assistance, really briefly. And just to say that falls very short of the scale of need that we see every day. However, that investment is an extension and shows further support of long term initiatives and promises made to households identified by the preference policy. Many of us are familiar with the north northeast oversight committee, which I am as well. So with that said, these investments in this decision that is being made, made at this point has a greater impact than what it looks on its face, and it has the potential to bolster a multitude of projects to benefit. And so with that said, I just want to continue helping those that are developing that trust for the city and make sure that we are keeping true to the promises made.
34 Thank you. Thank you for your work. Please.
35 Hi. Good afternoon, chair Zimmerman, vice chair pirtle-guiney, and members of the finance committee. I strongly support this budget allocation from fb. As a ceo of williams and russell, I am. I want to emphasize the critical need for homeownership. There are so much, so much happening across our nation and particularly our city lines. We come here as a coalition in a room, pcr in a room, phc in a room. Because we're a sister agencies, we cannot do this work alone. It is a huge, huge task. But we know that it's hard to get these people across the finish line because money matters. We know that homeownership is not only important, it is a single way to generational wealth. It is something we all strive for. We go to school for. We try to save money for is the vehicle to unlock opportunity. When we turn keys to our own homes, we have civic pride. We join hoa's, we join community churches. It keeps us rooted and grounded in our community. We can't do this alone. Any single dollar is going to be allocated to homeownership is the way forward. And by you all taking time to deliberate and to consider this item before you, it really, really, really would mean a great deal. Now we know that it's only some money, and we know we can't get a lot of people across the finish line. But something is better than nothing. And the fact that you all came up with this and thought about this opportunity to reappropriate and reallocate funds to something meaningful to community organizations, Portland housing center, williams and russell I ci, by the way, all in a room. Yay! This is what matters. We do this together in solidarity. So I really, really urge you all to think long and hard about what this investment means. And I hope that this is only the start of a conversation of something much greater, and that we can think about how we do this work together. Homeownership is the end goal. But prior to that, we don't talk about the levels of people being homeless with nowhere to go, rising rents, affordable housing only does some of the work, but we need homeownership to lock it in to give people a chance. And we know that people who have homes, we think about our children, our grandchildren, and we're able to kind of take that into and keep passing it further and further down the line. So I urge you to take this matter seriously. I thank you for indulging us, to have us here to speak before you all. I really hope that this is a conversation that we can actually think about how we can actually maybe create a coalition where we can think about, you know, how does this look in the community? This is policy diffusion, and people are watching. And I say as a woman and russell, cdc, which is kind of a big deal, respectfully, we're doing something extraordinary. And I hope and I want to thank you all for even just knowing what williams russell do. But we don't do this alone. We are a coalition of people who care, rooted and grounded in this community. So I thank you, and I really hope you and hope and pray that you all consider this as something, as a path forward to be where we need to be. Thank you.
36 So much.
37 Would you mind stating your name for the record?
38 Sure.
39 Thank you. Great. Thank you. Please go ahead.
40 Hi and good afternoon. My name is tanisha renee. It's a pleasure to be here. Thank you for your service. I won't take up too much of your time. And while my colleagues here are speaking about the large scale impact of homeownership, I just want to take a little bit of time to talk about my personal journey to homeownership. I moved to 242nd and powell when I first moved here at ten years old in the 90s, and immediately noticed that nobody looked like me. I was one of only. And we were told very quickly, if you want to see black people, they're all in northeast Portland. So moving to northeast Portland or not even so much moving there, but going to the miracles club, going to matt dishman for teen night, going to lloyd center. This meant I had to get on at least multiple busses for more than an hour, just to see people that look like me in this city. We eventually moved to 17th and prescott, where I could sit on my porch on a sunny day and see probably every black person I knew in Portland. And I can't tell you how much that meant to me just to see people that look like you. Right? So. After that, I joined the military, and I moved back to Portland in 2012 and to move to northeast Portland, it was almost a shocker, right? It had been been gentrified so much that, again, I was kind of looking for people that looked like me. I tried my hardest to stay in northeast Portland. I lived in the evergreens. I lived in the new columbia for seven years before I purchased my home. I sent my kids to foundational black schools, king woodlawn. They were sca members, which was such a foundational thing in their upbringing. We would go to places like interstate lanes. We would be able to do all of those things again, seeing people that look like me. And to emphasize that evidence shows that we work here, we live here, and we play here, and we send our school, our kids to school here, but we rarely own here the roots of northeast Portland and the black community runs so deep and very strong, and there are so many children right now that might live on 145th or 172nd in stark, that take our long bus rides to be around people that look like them, to go to those foundational generational schools where their mother may have went there, their grandmother went there, great grandmother went there. So I was a client at Portland housing center for seven years. I now sit on the board of Portland housing center. I was a d power recipient. I'm now sitting on the oversight committee for that as well. I am also now the chief operations officer of williams and russell. Home ownership changed the trajectory of my life, and it's crucial, right? It is the first step in generational wealth. And today we're really just asking for your help to help bring some of those people back, because we know that they will be here. Let's just make it easier for them. And that's all of my time. Thank you.
41 Thank you. Appreciate everybody coming up.
42 Thank you.
43 Next we have frieda walker lamar wise and devin ruiz.
44 Welcome. As you take your seat, whomever is ready first is free to introduce themselves and kick us off.
45 Okay.
46 Thank you. Chair Zimmerman and members of the committee and president pirtle-guiney. My name is frieda walker, and I'm the chief compliance officer at self enhancement, inc. As many of you know, c.I. Started in 1981 as a basketball camp that provided basketball fundamentals and valuable lessons that life has options and everyone can succeed. Today, we're oregon's largest black led nonprofit organization. We offer wraparound services that include in-school, after school and summer programing, parent support, financial literacy, rent assistance and, 40 years later, affordable housing at 30, 60 and 80% ami. Our core belief is that success is achievable for everyone. After years of witnessing gentrification, predatory lending and the displacement of families in north and northeast Portland, c.I. Decided to enter into the affordable housing arena, convinced we could provide the services to the students. But housing security is the bedrock of stability of families, and the last five years we've co-developed four sites for a combined 190 affordable units, with 75 currently in construction and over 100 in pre-development. We currently have a 95% occupancy rate. I was born and raised in council district two, and I still live in the overlook area today. Council district two is home to many neighborhoods where so many african Americans moved from across the country to this place called Portland, where they could own a home, start a business, and build wealth. The same place where years later, their descendants would be displaced and their family dreams of generational wealth through homeownership would be erased. I'm here today in support of the ordinance to adopt a supplemental budget for the housing Portland housing bureau, as described in exhibits one and two, specifically allocating $1.5 million to cities northeast 13th avenue home ownership project ci has a strong record of turning challenging sites into thriving communities. Project resources include 5 million from PCEF 2.5 in ci land equity, 6.4 from the state of Oregon lift program, and an $8.2 million loan. With this, 1.5 million ci can immediately put these resources to use. We stand here before you, ready to address our deep and troubling housing shortage, and bring folks back who have been priced out and want to come home. Thank you for your consideration.
47 Thank you, mr. Representative.
48 Good morning. Good afternoon. Good afternoon everyone. My name is lamar wise. I represent house district 48 at southeast Portland and north Clackamas. I'm here today to urge the council to support item one as written, to move forward with this ordinance without amendments. This proposal is a technical companion to the slow the inflow resolution that passed out of the house and homelessness committee. It is designed to ensure that the policy and funding move together, rather than being fragmented across separate decisions. That alignment matters, especially given the urgency of the moment. We are losing housing faster than we can create it. Every month, more portlanders are pushed closer to eviction, displacement and ultimately, homelessness. This ordinance helps to stop the bleeding. It gives the city the ability to act quickly and strategically to slow the inflow into homelessness, rather than continuing to absorb the far higher costs of the of crisis response. Using rental services. Using rental service office dollars to keep people housed is not only appropriate, it is necessary. Right now. These funds exist for housing stability, and this is exactly the type of moment that we were meant for preventing eviction and housing loss. As one of the most effective tools that we have to stabilize households and neighborhoods, while longer term housing supply comes online. I want to be clear, approving this ordinance, as is, preserves council's ability to consider the full policy and funding framework together as intended. Amendments at this stage risk a delay of implementation, weakening alignment, or ultimately undermining the core goals of the council that has already been signaled. That has already signaled support for portlanders cannot afford delay. Early intervention works, and this ordinance helps us act before families fall into crisis. So thank you all very much and I urge your support for the ordinance.
49 Thank you.
50 Devin, you're free to unmute and begin your testimony.
51 Thank you. Chair Zimmerman, vice chair pirtle-guiney and members of the committee. My name. My name is devin ruiz and I'm a registered lobbyist for next up. We are a local, nonpartisan, nonprofit organization that began in 2002, and we work to amplify the voice and leadership of diverse young people to achieve a more just and equitable organ. As an organization that supports young, working class people, we know the importance and urgency behind ensuring all portlanders have stable and secure housing. As such, we urge you to support item one as introduced to implement slow the inflow. This would ensure portlanders are receiving rental assistance, rapid rehousing for people evicted from homes, a right to counsel pilot project, emergency housing vouchers and more, including down payment assistance to slow the inflow. Resolution addresses the root of portland's homelessness crisis. Each month, 1400 portlanders lose housing, while only 1100 people are able to gain it again, presenting a gap of 300 people per month who may be left unhoused. This demonstrates that the crisis, the crisis that is affordability and stable housing in our city, and one that must receive immediate action and prioritization data shows that young people are disproportionately impacted, as those under 35 make up the largest percentage of renters in Portland, black communities and communities of color face disproportionate levels of displacement using rental service. Office dollars to keep people housed is urgent and evidence based. We must stop the inflow to homelessness. We urge you to support the original intent of the resolution passed by the housing and homelessness committee, which is. Prevention is the fastest way to ensure portlanders have housing. Keeping people housed should be treated as the emergency it is. It should not be a conversation stuck in limbo or have funds diverted. Please support item one as written to implement slow the inflow. The correct ordinance should be advanced immediately. It's critical that we ensure that Portland is a place where housing is a basic human right and not a commodity. Thank you.
52 Next we have sarah fisher, kimberly horner, and molly hogan. Sarah, you can unmute and start your testimony.
53 Good afternoon. Chair Zimmerman, vice chair pirtle-guiney and committee. Thank you. My name is sarah fisher. I'm an episcopal priest. I pastor a community of housed, unhoused and barely, barely housed people who are constituents in districts one and three. I live in district three and I work in one, three and sometimes four. I some of the people I serve and break bread with each week stand to keep their housing. If the ordinance reflecting the original resolution passed out of the housing and homeless committee is passed by this committee, these same people are not going to be protected at the time that they need it. By the new ordinance that diverts funds away from the original resolution, I am frankly disheartened that I even need to be here. It's not my job to comment on whatever backroom politics went into this substitute ordinance, rather than the one submitted by councilor Smith in December at that time. That committee, the committee responsible for addressing housing and homelessness, heard a huge groundswell of favorable community testimony from all corners of our city. It is my job to wonder out loud, does city council care or does city council not care about doing everything within its power to make our city a place where everyone can thrive, where everyone is given the simple dignity of a secure place to call home? Does city council care, or does city council not care about getting rental assistance and housing support into the hands of the most vulnerable portlanders who need it most and need it now, at a time when I'm hearing a lot of words from a lot of you to the press about fighting threats to our democracy, I would say that you all would do well to listen to the people, as well as to follow the due process of council committee work. Please don't make us come back again and again to say the same things over and over again. If you get tired of hearing me, just imagine how I feel. This ordinance circumvents and dilutes a perfectly good ordinance that would actually make Portland the city that works. I urge you to reject this ordinance in favor of the Green amendment that protects urgently needed housing for portland's most vulnerable citizens. Thank you.
54 Thank you. Whomever is ready is welcome to start.
55 Good afternoon. My name is kimberly horner. I am the executive director and ceo of the Portland community reinvestment initiatives. We are the largest black led affordable housing non-profits in Portland. We've been around since 1992. We have a guiding document called pathway 1000. That was our commitment back in 2015, with the support of the city council, to build approximately 1000 units in north northeast Portland. Of the 1000 units, 250 would be for rental housing and another 800 for homeownership. Our organization is very rooted in supporting the black community in housing alternatives, including home ownership. We are not only a housing provider, we are a master developer. We have been around in this community for over 30 years developing, providing housing, providing safe, decent, clean, affordable housing options to our community. Today, I am here to inform you that there are a number of areas that are occurring in the affordable housing sector. Some of those are the lack of rent assistance and resources needed to keep people housed in rental assistance. There is a number of reasons why this is occurring that my peers that are also affordable housing developers and as well as ceos of other affordable housing non-profits that need to share the information with the city about the availability of units that we have that are under-resourced and need resources from the city in order to keep people in these units. So today, I am asking for the committee to go ahead and consider rent and financial assistance for tenants facing eviction. It is very important that people have access to additional funding so that they can stay housed in the units that we supply. In addition to that, we need millions of dollars for stabilization of properties that have already been built. We talk about new development, and we are very much in support of what our peers are doing, along with our organization. Being a developer on the williams and russell site for the 85 units of housing. However, we do understand that this comes at a cost and that there is a need for the organizations that build rental units to have subsidies beyond what we are currently receiving. The rents are too high for the residents at this current time, and this needs to be adjusted and reevaluated. Therefore, our ask today is for additional subsidies to go towards stabilization of these properties. Thank you.
56 Thank you. Please go ahead.
57 Hello finance committee members. My name is molly hogan and I'm the director of welcome home coalition. And I'm also a registered lobbyist with the city of Portland. So I just found out about this ordinance this morning very last minute. And so I'm here today to support councilor Avalos statements that bringing this forward so quickly and without previous knowledge feels disingenuous to the process. I want to uplift that. Welcome home coalition is a housing justice alliance, and some of our members here spoke today. Self enhancement, inc. Portland housing center, we support homeownership, affordable opportunities 100% and the original slow the inflow resolution and companion ordinance had money for that. There was an opportunity to negotiate for it to be increased up to $1 million. Like what is in this ordinance put forward today. But I am asking you to not move forward. This ordinance that's put forward today because it's disingenuous. And this is money for the housing bureau. And I'm confused why it wasn't in the housing and homeless committee. There was large community support last month for the slow the inflow resolution. And like I said, there's an opportunity to negotiate many of these crucial elements that are in your ordinance today. Zimmerman, into that existing companion ordinance brought forward by Avalos, Smith and Dunphy. So I just want to speak quickly to why we so much supported the slow the inflow resolution in the first place, and it was because eviction prevention is huge and essential. If we are going to slow the increasing homelessness that we see in the city. The rent is too damn high. Everybody knows it and the developers know it because you need rent assistance to help your tenants that can only afford 600 $700 a month rent. And even in the affordable cdc units, you have to charge 1200. And so they need some subsidy. Look, the trump administration just slashed rent assistance. The state slashed rent assistance. Yet hr one, trump's budget increased money for lie tech for low income housing development. There's tif tax increment finance money coming into the pipeline in our city to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars that can you can allocate to development. What we don't have, y'all, is direct rent assistance subsidy that people desperately need. We release this report a few months ago, finding home housing solutions rooted in community expertise. Over 650 people who've experienced homelessness. Input is in this. 91% said they need rent assistance to get housed and stay housed. 75% of them said they could pay something for rent, but just couldn't afford what exists. We have vacant units that need to be filled. It is vital that our local government help slow the inflow. Please do not pass this ordinance as it is today and instead go back to the negotiation table. Pass slow the inflow with negotiations. Thank you.
58 Thank you. I think the next we have four left, right? Correct. Let's go ahead and call them all okay.
59 Next we have mercedes elizalde. Miss j goudie brooklyn. Sorry. Bronwyn carver and waylon thomas I believe mercedes is online and you can unmute and begin your testimony.
60 Hello. Councilors are the finance committee. My name is mercedes and I am the director of advocacy at latino network. And I am here to provide testimony on the php $20 million budget adjustment. We provide services across all the districts. I am here to ask you to prioritize housing stability and stay committed to slowing the inflow of new experiences of homelessness in our community, and use the rental services dollars to keep people housed, especially children. Councilor Avalos put together a solid package that balanced rent assistance and rehousing alongside homeownership and future development, and took a specific effort to ensure that the hundreds of children who are currently at risk of losing their housing due to the federal policy changes that seek to unhoused children explicitly to punish their parents for being immigrants in this country, this new language appears to disregard that issue. Ignore that risk and forget about those children. Please don't do that. Because of the federal changes and the rent assistance being transitioned into shelter dollars or just being cut, our rehousing work has been forced to pause or even slow down. And I want to repeat that our rehousing work is slowing down. When we slow this work, we increase the number of people experiencing homelessness because we get even worse about keeping pace, let alone getting ahead of that inflow. This was this mistake was made during the regular budget season by the federal level, by the state government. And here locally that locally, we made these choices to force our rehousing work to slow down. It is rare that a government gets a second bite at the apple to ensure that our constraints are not just a one way ticket to making things worse. The city is truly a leader in housing development, but housing development strategy does more than just seek to fill a few gaps and a few projects. We need long term financing plans that ensure we are able to build all sorts of housing across the city every single year. The revolving loan fund from Avalos proposal, or a structure like that is what we need, not just a fund. 1 or 2 projects that we happen to like this year, but to build a constant pipeline. It would be helpful to understand, as members of the public, how items move through different committees. Why is this conversation happening here instead of in the housing committee? And how can we get prior information for when bills are going to be reviewed and amended by multiple committees? This also appears not to be just another bill review, but a whole new bill. And what does that mean between bridging the gaps between Avalos proposal and this one here today? Or is the council truly having parallel conversations, which, based on the comments from council members today, it sounds like it's truly a parallel conversation, which is extremely confusing for the public when we're trying to understand what help is coming and more importantly, what help is not coming. Rather than pitting community against each other for competing priorities, which you have to know, housing development and rent assistance is a constant debate about where we put the money and how much money we put there. It's not a conversation you can sidestep by replacing one ordinance for the other. You need to grapple with it. You need to grapple with developing strategies that help us achieve what we can. So again, rather than pitting community against each other, against competing proposals, how can you lead us as a unit? How can you make most of what we have so that we can accomplish as most as much as possible? Again, please take the time to rereview Avalos proposal. Do not rush forward with something that is disconnected from the immense amount of community engagement that has already occurred, and attempt to find a way to bridge this budget adjustment into your longer term strategy. Don't just pick and choose winners and losers in certain projects. Think about what we need for the future. This is what the housing choice voucher was attempting to do by ramping those services down, instead of just creating a cliff. This is what we're trying to do by interjecting the rent assistance and the counseling that people need to fight evictions. It's about creating stability over time, about making sure our system has the components it needs. Thank you so much.
61 Thank you.
62 Hi, I'm bronwyn carver and I just wanted to speak a little bit on the slow the flow in resolution as it was passed out of housing committee. I am a recipient of a home forward section eight voucher. After nine years of homelessness. I've been successfully housed with that voucher for the last two years, obtaining much needed medical care as well as maintaining my sobriety and reconnecting with my loved ones. The lack of affordable housing in this city is no joke. I lost my housing in 2015 due to an affordability issue. Then of course, I could not get myself out of that homelessness. Once you're there, it's practically impossible to save money. So with that stated, I just want to let you guys know that without the slow the flow inflow resolution support, more of us will just be homeless. You won't be gaining anything by passing the resolution as it sits today, supporting it as it was passed out of the housing committee is the right and true decision, not supporting the ordinance as it was brought forward today. I would urge you instead to negotiate some of the elements into the slow the flow resolution and the complementary ordinance thereof, and to just know that behind everything is a person is people that are all competing for the same resources. And we all have no money to do that regardless of employment status. Thank you.
63 Thank you. Please.
64 Good afternoon, chair Zimmerman and president pirtle-guiney. My name is wilma goudie and I grew up on a street that's not even there anymore because they found something better to do with it. I graduated from jefferson high school in 1967, and my granddaughter, nickayla is graduating this year. So we've got had three generations of jefferson high school. I'm here today testifying in support of the supplemental budget for the Portland housing bureau, which includes 1.5 million to self enhancements, northeast 13th avenue home ownership project. Because the dream of home ownership is what brought my family to Portland and my grandparents called back and said, okay, they came with the the the idea of home ownership, and they bought a house on benton street, which of course they found something better to do with it as well, which is where the memorial coliseum sits today. We moved to another place. We moved to another house on interstate. It's still there. The house isn't, but interstate is still there. Owning a home is having a place. You never have to leave unless you want to. And the difference that it makes in people's lives is transformative. I manage resident services at the milner building, an affordable housing complex on northeast interstate in alberta, where I practically I know practically everybody and a little bit of everybody's business. And the ones that I don't know, I know I can reach back and I know their grandparents or their parents. I might not. Our residents have been so displaced for so long, have forgotten their own worth. They, they they just look they, they don't know. As resident services coordinator, I teach a financial class called get your house in order, which it's a financial empowerment class that shows them how to save money and and how to function and move their money around. Well, I was in second grade when we were lived on cherry court, which is where the lloyd center area is now, and was a place that they had some. They found something better to do with. We were with each displacement. It was perfect for something else that they found that was better. Okay. Well, thank you so much for listening. I had some more to say, but I'll save it for next time, so thanks.
65 Yes, ma'am. Thank you, thank you.
66 Thank you.
67 Hello everyone. My name is thomas and I am an organization. I'm an organizer with welcome home and and also an individual who has benefited from rental assistance in getting me out of this shelter to prison system. I can I emphasize the need to house the people, as I suggest in the as suggested in the inflow resolution introduced by councilor, Avalos and Smith, Smith and Dunphy as an individual who has also managed an ample amount of property here throughout the Portland metro area and surrounding areas. It disheartens me having to place anyone under eviction or even in the streets, because I've. I've been in both position. It's even more disheartening not even being able to direct them to any type of assistance due to. Assistance and eviction prevention. Due to the amount of programs and organizations that's going unfunded. So the inflow suggested a solution to portland's housing crisis. While zimmerman's ordinance suggests where where hb should allocate funds and also speaks of development of yet another affordable complex, which I guess where the 85 units you sell will be coming in. When you suggest that we include 85 units to the already developed 85 complexes, that remains empty with margins under 60%, and also with the urgent need of maintenance improvement, because a lot of these low income housing have an urgent need of mental of maintenance improvement, because you have residents who are complaining about black black water, you have residents who have their roof leaking. So a lot of these funds go into that. So, Zimmerman, your ordinance speaks of development, yet fail to provide a general approach to provide us, the general public and economic and real estate development analysis of where and how these funds that you want to place in developing new multi new units will be allocated. I suggest that you rethink this and actually submit us with an analysis and economic analysis, because we don't know where exactly you'll be placing 85 units. And also what multifamily portfolio you'll be purchasing 20 units from. I suggest this denial of zimmerman's ordinance because it cuts the funds of because the cost of funds that could be distributed to the people, to housing programs, and to organizations that are dying out due to lack of funding. And you could do this by negotiating some of the elements in the flow, in the slow to flow resolution. Thank you.
68 Thank you, and thank you to everybody who took time to come out today. I want to make sure there are no other public testimony that's signed up. Is that correct?
69 Clerk no one else has signed up.
70 Great. Thank you. Chair recognizes councilor Avalos, please.
71 Thank you to all the folks who testified today. I just want to say to you all directly, I hate that we're being put in this position that pits good causes and good policies against each other. We all understand that the city is facing budget shortfalls and we can't fund everything. And colleagues, I'm not questioning whether down payment assistance is a good use of our money. And in fact, you know, I'm not questioning it because it's in the original ordinance. It's in the slow the inflow resolution and in the accompanying ordinance. So we are clear that those are important pathways for community to become housed. But what I'm asking is if it's the best use of our money right now to put all of it towards development projects, when the federal government is slashing funding for permanent supportive housing, Multnomah county is shutting shelters, and the people who are losing their housing vouchers are not going to be helped by down payment assistance. The thousands of portlanders facing eviction each month will not be helped by down payment assistance. People cannot scrimp and save their first for their first home, when they don't even know if they'll be able to pay rent next month. So for me, the best use of our money right now is to keep people in their houses and off the streets. And the resolution recognizes that preventing displacement and expanding home ownership are connected goals. They're not competing ones, but stable renters today are the future first time home home owners of Portland. And that is that is personal to me. That is exactly what I had to experience to try to be able to buy my first home. Just three years ago, I lived paycheck to paycheck, struggling with my rent, going up every single year, and I was lucky that I had the assistance of my community, in particular the black community who helped me to be able to get into my home. So I feel that, and that's very real, and I'm grateful to those who spoke to that. But it's really important right now that we are prioritizing with rental service office dollars, mind you, that are collected from landlord fees, that we put those back into those renters, there are plenty of opportunities. And in fact, there were other things that were mentioned in testimony that I'm also addressing. We put a million towards the north and northeast preference policy stabilization, something that I fought for in the budget cycle. I tried to get us 500,000. My amendment was not passed, and now this resolution puts a million in it. So I'm doubling my commitment to that. I've also made sure that the resolution helps that household stay financially intact long enough to build savings and credit, which are essential prerequisites for homeownership. And so I agree that homeownership is a path to stability and generational wealth. It's why we put 250,000 towards tenants ready to purchase. But the reality is that most Portland renters are closer to falling into homelessness than affording a down payment, even with additional financial assistance, this is a balanced approach. It addresses the immediate renter needs while creating on ramps to homeownership, rather than forcing families to remain renters indefinitely, and so using these dollars back into renters support is critical. Lastly, I'll just note as far as the general sentiment that ordinances make are legally binding, you are correct. But let's not forget that there have been many instances throughout this council over the last year where resolutions are put forth without dollars, with ordinances to come after because they state clear intent. The sidewalk improvement plan is a perfect example of that. A resolution passed by the council, even though we don't have dollars for it. But the intent was important to state, and I used the opportunity as the housing and homelessness chair when this news dropped to act quickly. And in fact, the reason that it became a resolution was because I was already writing a resolution directing the mayor to address this next year's budget, to ensure that we were setting aside dollars for all of the different priorities that I luckily was able to put those dollars to that came out of the rsl. And there's also things in this proposed ordinance that I don't that I have questions for cbo. I don't know if I see jonas here around their usage because we went back and forth about what can we use those dollars for because they are restricted, right? They come in for a specific source. And so I want to make sure that we're clear on what that looks like. Finally, I'll just say, you know, all of the things that people are proposing, there is absolutely a good faith way to go about proposing these amendments. And I believe those opportunities were presented in the housing committee. They're available to us in the council. And I think that it is important that we do not accept this way of doing business, that instead of talking to the people who have been leading, who, by the way, are not just me and councilor Dunphy and Smith, it's also community members. We have been talking with the community about what was in there. We talked with many of the people who are in this room, including people who are supporting this ordinance as written. We've discussed those priorities, and in fact, I believe I reflected many of them in the original. But this is a really backwards way to approach policy. And I'm concerned that if a committee who is charged with a task is putting that forward, that it eventually requires a financial ask, that if we have to route it to the finance committee, that the finance committee can just completely disregard the work of the other committee to put forward their own proposal without even including those sponsors. That is a really disappointing way to approach this, and it's very frustrating that we have to put our community members. I'm really I'm angry, actually, that our community came out here asking for things that I know you need, that I put in the original bill because I know you need it. And now we're seeing being put against each other. And it is particularly personal, as a black woman, seeing my community come out here asking for things that I know you deserve and that you're caught in the middle of this political firestorm, that's unfair. So I want to name that directly, that's all.
72 Councilor Green.
73 Thank you, mister chair. I am going to I'm going to formally move my amendment if that needs to happen. Second, it does. Okay.
74 We have a motion and a second for green's amendment. Given that there are some hands in the council. Green first, do you want to discuss it any further or do you want us to move down?
75 Yeah. I'll just just briefly because I know that I did do a little preamble before the testimony. I just want to I want to thank those who testified on either end of this for all the reasons that councilor Avalos just articulated. I very much think that we need gap funding for some of these projects, and I really hope that we can have a conversation on how to find that money in partnership with prosper Portland, because they do have a $50 million strategic investment fund that is unrestricted, that can be used for any purpose. So I think that there's an opportunity there, and I want to thank representative wise for testifying in support of my amendment. I think I think in your language you said the underlying, but I heard slow the inflow there. And so thank you for that. I'll just note colleagues that the least expensive way and most economic way of providing capacity and affordable housing sector is to preserve what already exists. And it's also to keep people from being evicted in the first place. And so a world in which we know we're not keeping up with the rate of evictions, and a world in which our cdcs, our affordable housing developers home forward, are, are frankly, on the brink of insolvency. I think the amendment that I am offering here is urgent, and I think it will cost a lot more to replace those units if they fall into the private sector's hands and we have to build them from whole cloth. And so that's really why, from an economic standpoint, I'm, I'm pushing this forward. But I also think that from process standpoint, I was I really was hoping to see the ordinance that I knew that councilor Smith and, and her co-sponsors were working on. I wish that had come forward here. And then we could have had that debate. But that's not what happened. So you've already heard my piece on that, and I will yield.
76 Let's go to vice chair pirtle-guiney, please.
77 Thank you. Chair, I think that the comments I was going to make to the underlying are relevant to the amendment as well. So if you'll indulge me, I'll speak a little bit to both colleagues. I don't see the ordinance before us, and I didn't see the resolution that came out of the housing committee as a conversation about what we might do with ongoing funds through our regular budget process. These are one time funds that were unexpected, and when we have unexpected funds available, I think it's our responsibility to use them, with very few exceptions, in one of two ways, either to look as far upstream as we can at those things that we can't usually invest in because we are so busy trying to plug the holes from the crises right in front of us, that we can't do the things that might keep us from having all of those holes downstream, or to put so much funding at the crisis in front of us that it actually addresses it and starts to fix it, that it lessons the lessons, the challenges that will face in the future. Very frankly, I think the worst thing we can do with unexpected funding that we only have one time, is to spend the money in a slow trickle on ongoing programs that will address some, but not all, of the need and continue that need, even if doing so helps us with crises that are in front of us. Frankly, if I were crafting a proposal, it wouldn't look like either of these because I would put all of the money into land banking and homeownership programs and going as far upstream as I could to make sure that we are taking advantage of this singular moment in time that we have. And I want to point out that we are fighting over a really incredible, singular moment that we have to spend funds on things that will help our community. I have two choices before me today, both of which I think, frankly make really compelling cases. Do more over the next three years to help keep people from becoming homeless. At a time when the rates of portlanders who are facing homelessness is astronomical, or get more housing online now, put more money into homeownership and address rental assistance at a greater level this year. But not for the two years after that. I want to point out that both of these proposals have rental assistance. One more in the first year, one spread across three years. Both have affordable housing portfolio stabilization funds. Both have some amount of down payment assistance. And I want to point out that while I don't love that my colleagues did not give each other a heads up here, I also don't love that the resolution coming to council didn't actually have time for debate in committee to have this conversation. Colleagues, we have to start making time in committee for debate about the real issues before us. And I appreciate, councilor Green, that you've given us that opportunity today. My north star is a councilor is how we can make this city the best place to raise a family, an affordable, vibrant city, a place where families can afford to live, find stability, find community. And today, with money we hadn't accounted for one time. I want to think about prevention, stability, creation as far upstream as we can. I want to try to do the transformational thing when we have the funds and the time and space to do it. So I am leaning toward supporting councilor Zimmermann's proposal, because I think that it does that to a greater extent. I also hear the calls for more conversation, and if my colleagues want to discuss more, I am happy to do that. Additionally, I can't ignore the calls I'm hearing from my district today and the the calls for making sure that we continue the work that we have started in this council of supporting restabilizing, the black community in north and northeast Portland. I appreciate hearing your voices today as part of this debate and this discussion. I think it's an important part that we can't leave out. So I just wanted to put that all on the record. And I may have more to say as we continue through the debate. Thank you.
78 Thanks. If I was to support the amendment, we'd largely be supporting and passing a nonfunctional ordinance. As I hope you are all aware, we can only pass money for the current year's budget as your amendment stands and as the resolution stood from several weeks ago. That has not been to council, by the way, it is not a council policy, yet it outlines funding in the out years for budgets that have not been adopted yet. It outlines funding for out years by councils who do not exist yet. And as lovely as it is to think that way, it is not something we can legally do. And so the ordinance that I drafted and I will just quickly say the idea that somehow this was stuffed in front of or something of that nature. No, my office wrote this ordinance because we saw and we talked to the mayor and we talked to the housing bureau, and we talked to the community, and we talked to organizations who are ready to put money in the pipeline this year, because the only authority a budget modification has for is the current year. And so I just ask folks to. There's feelings and then there's and then there's facts. And we are dealing in a world of facts, which is we have the ability to supplement and change and budget, modify this current year's budget with these numbers, with these funds, the council can absolutely make a choice not to do that and to keep them in limbo and not be allocated. But if we were to pass this amendment as written, it is. I'll go so far as to say it's not a legal document or it's not an implementable document from the purpose of a budget modification. There are some parts that are now on the substance of it. I am glad that my ordinance quadruples the amount of down payment that's available compared to the previous ordinance. I am glad that. Now let's talk about what rent stabilization is or the stabilization portfolio. What that really talks about. A few weeks ago, we heard about a bunch of affordable units that are vacant in the community. If that doesn't you off, it should. It pisses me off. But it also there are technical parts of that because how can a unit be vacant, one might ask. And the stabilization in the portfolio and the debt buy down is about getting buildings who have been built, lended to, funded to fund at a certain percentage, if you will. The ami are now vacant because they cannot take vouchers at a lower level. If we can get in front of and allow a building to fill its units with lower level ami and give that, give stabilization so that rent assistance can be applied to it, I think that's going to help those units not be vacant, because if Portland has vacant affordable units that are subsidized by the government but not occupied, we should all be concerned about that. And both have that. My before the amendment, mine has slightly more than that, but there may be no greater argument about a hand up or a hand out or long term versus short term. The reason I wrote this ordinance the way I did, and the reason I won't be supporting the amendment, is that I fundamentally believe in a two prong approach, that some members of our community are going to need rent assistance in the most emergency situations, and we should always be there for that. And we have to do everything we can to develop more units, get the pipeline in place and ensure that we have some way to build out of and provide more capacity so that we can start attacking the market rate and lower the the the capacity issue and rent issue that we have in the city of Portland. So that's why I'm not going to be supportive of the amendment overall. And I'll support the original ordinances, because the two prong approach is something that I see in the original that I want to be supportive of in everything that we do. And I'll also say, I want to appreciate the mayor's team and identifying that Multnomah county stopped providing the rent assistance from transition from shelter to apartment, and they largely stopped doing it only for the city of Portland shelters. And those shelters a couple of years ago were some of our most successful shelters at transition, and now they've become some of the least successful. Nobody who talks about getting shelters up thinks of them as the end state. We think of them as the quick stop, the midterm stop. But it does take an effort to get them out. The mayor was very clear to me in our conversations that he needs funds to transition people from our shelters, particularly the shelters, to apartments. And since we've also heard there are so many darn vacant apartments, this math should start mapping that. We've got people in shelters, but then we've got vacant apartments that should alarm people. This ordinance helps us tackle one of those great systemic problems. And so I am very proud of the original. And so I will not be supportive of the multi year, largely only rent assistance. And thank you for that. Councilor Novick you are next in the queue.
79 Thank you, mr. Chair. So as to the substance, I think you've all heard me say that I'm inherently somewhat skeptical of rent assistance because I tend to intuitively agree with the argument. I've heard that we're in a city that doesn't have enough housing, and as long as we don't have enough housing, a certain number of people are going to be homeless. And you can do things that help some people win the housing game of musical chairs, but that means that other people lose it. And I worry that that's when resistance does. It gives money to landlords to keep some people there. But since there's enough housing, there's another group of people who fall off the cliff. So that's why I tend to support anything that invests more in actual housing than in rent assistance. So councilor Zimmermann's proposal is closer to my overall view. And I would say I'm, you know, I realized that we could probably spend zillions of dollars giving home first time, more mortgage, down payment assistance to people. But I like the idea of doing some of it. I also want to recognize that what we're doing here, no matter what problem we're addressing, is trying to empty the pacific with a teaspoon. I mean, it would take billions and billions of dollars to build all the housing that we need. It would take billions and billions of dollars to provide all the rent assistance that people need. So in that context, part of my attitude is that the city should pick a role. The county spends a lot of money on rent assistance. I tend to agree with what councilor Zimmerman said at full council recently, that the city's role is more getting things built, so that's another reason I tend to support councilor Zimmermann's idea. As to the procedural niceties. I actually understand councilor Avalos frustration. I think that there is maybe we should change our procedures so that you can only bring things that are mostly relevant to one committee. Through that committee. But when we set up our rules last year, one of the things we did, and I think actually this might have been something that councilor Kanal was very firm on, is that you should be able to get your if you can get any committee to take your proposal, you can do it. And you're not that bound by what the subject matter is supposed to be. And councilor Zimmermann and arguably rather bull in a china shop way has taken advantage of that provision. That's a provision that does exist. I also want to say that since I'm not a member of the housing committee, I mean, I see that just selfishly, regardless of how the procedure should work, to me, today is an opportunity for me to hear these two competing visions before it gets to the full council. So, selfishly, I appreciate that one thing that maybe this reflects the fact that I'm a lawyer, because I tend to think the first thing to do with any problem is to throw lawyers at it. I was one thing I hadn't studied before. Councilor Avalos was the proposal to spend $1.5 million on a right to counsel pilot, and I sort of interested in hearing the thinking about of that and how much of the need that might cover. And I don't think I'm going to propose this today, but that's something that intuitively appeals to me. So it may be that if we get to full council, I might support, you know, changing councilor Zimmerman's proposal or doing something else in order to get that 1.5 million. But I'd like to hear what it's about.
80 Thank you. I think it just in general speaks to the fact that we worked diligently with the housing bureau about what they can do right now, and that's a pilot that they have been trying to stand up and using their rental service dollars to do that is was the most logical. So we talked to them about that being. And you see that the way it's written, it's about a geographical approach. So that's what they want to pilot because that is a shown to be able to absorb as many people and protect them before, because a lot of people, right, that are facing eviction, they're already overwhelmed and stressed. And so it's a proactive approach so that we're catching people before they're stuck in the the trauma of dealing with dealing with it in the moment. So all of those things that we put and the rest of the bill was about when the housing bureau could implement it, what they were already working on, what needed dollars and being able to put dollars over a couple of years is something that we talked about with the budget office extensively. And importantly, it was just about making sure that we could have a steady amount of dollars for rental assistance, because that is the thing that is being cut the most. We have many other opportunities for the development side, but that's the area that the trump administration is cutting and the state cut and the county cut and it's rental dollars. And we felt that was the easiest way to get that there.
81 Thank you. And I think I'll try to follow up with the folks in the housing bureau about the right to counsel pilot. The other thing I wanted to say is one thing I like about councilor Zimmerman's proposal is returning 3.7 million to the general fund, and frankly, that's based on I am terrified of the deficit that we're going to be dealing with. And that was, frankly, my first personal reaction to the idea that we had this 20 million is to what extent can we use it to help deal with some of that huge deficit? So that's another I just wanted I just wanted to flag that. Thank you. Had a question I just wanted. I'd forgotten to mention that as one of the things I liked about councilor Zimmerman's proposal.
82 Not allowed by the housing investment.
83 So that's the okay. Well.
84 I have for cbo.
85 It's actually part of the administrative. It is absolutely allowed. Councilor Green, you have the floor.
86 Thank you. This is this is fairly brief, but you had chair. You had sort of raised the question of whether this was a legal amendment because of the sort of suggestion that there's multi-year budgeting. I'll note that exhibit a is actually the operative piece of the budget, supplemental budget. I mean, exhibit b explains what the intent is, the legislative intent. But in exhibit a, it speaks to the 2526 revised budget and only the 2526 revised budget and all of those other line items that are in the sort of slow the flow resolution are put into contingency. And I'll note that we all the time pass legislation that parks money for multi-year programs in contingency. So this is not any different than the climate investment plan, which I think we're about to hear something very related to that, hopefully. Yeah, we'll get there. And then finally, you know, I don't think I'll change your mind on this, but I actually really believe strongly in the rent buydown stuff. I agree with that. I will work with you on a different ordinance to achieve the same thing, using a different pot of money, but I believe very strongly that the office revenue should be associated with rental assistance and eviction protections, which is why I'm in this. So okay.
87 Thank you, councilor Green. And last comment before we go to a vote. Councilor Avalos, please.
88 Yeah, I mean, I think as it relates to the process, thank you for saying what you did at the end there, councilor Green, that these what we proposed is common practice in lots of different areas of the city. And I think as it relates to what happened at the housing committee meeting, we had a discussion, obviously, me and councilor Dunphy, as the vice chair and chair, were co-sponsors of the resolution. So we gave a presentation about it. There's not there's nothing else for us to say other than for our colleagues to react. We had a discussion. There was nobody else in the queue. And so I said, we're calling it to a vote. It's what you're about to do. So I don't know what other kind of discussion is being requested. When we provided that opportunity, people spoke. They didn't provide any amendments. I didn't hear anything about other alternative views, just that they didn't like it and they voted against it, which is again within the process. So I just feel like that's an unfair and weird expectation you're setting. For my committee, I did exactly what is process, which is let people talk about it. They have time to propose amendments because it gets posted. I didn't hear anything and then we voted on it. So I guess I'm just rejecting the concept that we did not allow for discussion. We did the process exactly as we were told to by committee.
89 Thank you. Clerk. If you could call the roll on amendment, I think it's Green one, please.
90 Yes.
91 Avalos I.
92 Pirtle-guiney no.
93 Novick nay Green.
94 Hi.
95 Zimmerman.
96 No.
97 With two eyes and three nays. The motion to amend the ordinance, as shown in Green amendment one fails.
98 Thank you. Just noting the time, colleagues, we are at 130. We still have the pcf item with that. Clerk. Can you call the roll on the overarching ordinance, please?
99 Can I get a motion first?
100 Thank you.
101 So moved.
102 Second.
103 Moved by councilor Novack, seconded by the vice chair. Thank you for that reminder.
104 Thank you. Avalos.
105 It's incredibly disappointing how this process has unfolded and I'm really disappointed and disgusted.
106 No pirtle-guiney.
107 Looking forward to continued conversation.
108 I Novick. A Green. No Zimmerman. I with three eyes and two nays. The motion to refer the ordinance document number 2026 010 to city council, with the recommendation to be passed, has passed.
109 Thank you. Okay. When you're ready. Clerk. If we could call item number two.
110 Item number two, amend Portland clean energy community benefits code to allow a transfer of interest earned in fiscal year 2023 2024. For the fiscal year 2025 2026 budget.
111 All right, we got mr. Engstrom. Mr. Barrasso, welcome, gentlemen. And whoever's kicking it off, go for it.
112 Good afternoon. For the record, this is Eric engstrom. I'm the director of the bureau of planning and sustainability. With me is sam barrasso, who's the program manager for the Portland clean energy fund. Very few things in the Portland clean energy fund are entirely without politics and purely technical, but this is pretty close. We're here with an ordinance that would follow up your budget actions last spring to align the pcf code with those decisions, and I want to stress that this is taking interest from 2024 and moving it into the current budget year. It's not about the next budget year or closing the gap that we've identified in the current year. And I'll pass it to sam.
113 Okay. Good afternoon. Councilors. Chair. Zimmerman, vice chair pirtle-guiney councilors. My name is sam barrasso, program manager for the Portland clean energy community benefits fund. So I'm going to go ahead and walk folks through just the entrance ordinance, the pcf entrance interest ordinance, background and context, as well as the proposed code amendment before you all. And we've got dca. Join us here as well if there are questions. So I acknowledge that. All right. So first in July of 2024, your predecessors amended the code to allow a one time transfer of interest that accrued in fy 2223 to the general fund for expenses last fiscal year, and that amounted to about 7.6 million. Now, that particular amendment, as it was supported by the pcf committee, did amend the code to require that the pcf committee review proposed code amendments prior to council action in the future. And so following up on that, in January of 2025, city administrator jordan at the time dca oliveira, dca bera beary discussed that transfer of interest and in the specific proposed code amendment. That's before you all here today. It is the interest that has accrued in fy 2324, because that is our audited financials from that year with the PCEF committee. There are no public comments during the committee for that proposed interest. And that's where we conclude that process. And then this past fiscal year, you all adopted the city council more broadly, adopted the fy 2526 budget, which included that transfer of interest. So we're here before you all. And that interest amounted to about $18.7 million from the Portland clean energy community benefits fund from fy 2324. And so we're here before you all to sort of put a bow on that process and make the actual formal changes so you all can transfer that interest for use in this current fiscal year. So this is the actual language that's before you all. And and this is the language that would be used to amend the clean energy fund code. This is in chapter 7.07.060. And specifically it's allowing again for another transfer of interest for this current fiscal year from the fiscal year that ended 2023 2024. And with that, this is what I believe and I hope fairly simple, but I want to turn to you all for questions. So, chair zimmermann, it's back to you.
114 Thanks, gentlemen. Let's go to the vice chair.
115 First I just want to make sure that I'm asking this in as explicit a way as possible, even though I think you have covered the answer. What we have before us today just allows for the carryover of interest and the expenditure of that interest. It does not change any of the funding, allowances, allocations, programs. That money can be spent on anything like that. Is that correct?
116 Correct.
117 Thank you.
118 Nothing from Green.
119 Pretty straightforward okay.
120 All right. There's no other questions up here. So with that, if I could get a motion for one of my colleagues to move this to the full council.
121 So moved.
122 Second.
123 Moved by vice chair and seconded by councilor Green clerk, when you're ready, we can call the roll.
124 Avalos I.
125 Pirtle-guiney I Novick.
126 I we already committed to do this, so this is a foregone conclusion. I have to just say that I do feel queasy about using interest from the PCEF fund this way. I'd rather use all of the money, including the interest on clearly psp projects, but I did not come up with alternate ways to fill the budget hole last year, so I'm bound to go ahead and vote and vote for this. But I feel bad about it.
127 I. Greene Zimmerman. I with five eyes. The motion to refer the ordinance document number 2020 6-1011 to city council with a recommendation that it be passed has passed.
128 Thank you.
129 Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. The next meeting of the finance committee will be on Monday, January 27th. It is 136 and we are adjourned.