BOARD WORK SESSION WEDNESDAY, MAY 8, 2013

5:00 – 6:30 PM COLUMBIA ROOM – 6 TH FLOOR

AGENDA

1. Year One Strategic Operations Plan Update* Rachel Devlin, Michael Buonocore 2. Updates: MTW Amendment, Budget, VASH Vouchers Michael, Peter, Jill 3. Section 8 State Legislation Update* Jill Riddle, Ryan Fisher, NW Public Affairs

*Attachment

MEMORANDUM

To: Board of Commissioners

From: Michael Buonocore,

Deputy Executive Director

Rachel Devlin,

Strategic Initiatives Program Director

Date: May 8, 2013

Subject: Year One Strategic Operations

Plan Update

This briefing is intended to update the board on progress related to the Strategic

Operations Plan and to preview the year ahead. The briefing is informational only and no

action is required of the board.

BACKGROUNDBACKGROUNDBACKGROUNDBACKGROUND

This past year served to set the stage for achieving many of the goals in the Strategic

Operations Plan (SOP). As shrinking budgets began requiring difficult decisions around

allocating resources, the SOP served as a reminder of agency priorities and encouraged

increased rigor in evaluating the goals and sustainability of investments. There was

meaningful progress made in many of the SOP initiatives last year, as well as laying the

planning foundation that will be used to guide implementation in FY2014. This memo

provides an overview of Year One accomplishments, and the attached chart, Strategic

Operations Plan Update for FY 2013, provides outcomes for each initiative in more detail.

SUMMARY OVERVIEW BY GOALSUMMARY OVERVIEW BY GOALSUMMARY OVERVIEW BY GOALSUMMARY OVERVIEW BY GOAL

Goal 1: We will deploy resources with greater intentionality and alignment with other Goal 1: We will deploy resources with greater intentionality and alignment with other Goal 1: We will deploy resources with greater intentionality and alignment with other Goal 1: We will deploy resources with greater intentionality and alignment with other

systems whilesystems whilesystems whilesystems while increasing the number of households served.increasing the number of households served.increasing the number of households served.increasing the number of households served.

Despite decreasing resources, Home Forward made significant progress towards both

systems alignment and our commitment to serve more households. Several aligned

projects are underway (Short-term Rent Assistance, Alder Elementary, and Action for

Prosperity – program descriptions are attached for reference if needed) and two are slated

to begin in FY2014 (Family Unification Program extensions and a house for foster youth).

2

Each of these efforts aligns with systems that provide substantial supports for families, in

the form of case management, educational resources, or training/employment services.

The agency does, however, face a challenge embedded in competing definitions of

“households served.” To increase households, we can increase the number of rental

subsidies, or slots, we provide each month (HUD’s definition), or increase the number of

unduplicated families receiving subsidy over the course of the year. We have initiatives

aimed at both of these goals. The newer aligned projects that will begin in FY2014 target

lower monthly subsidies with a goal of increasing slots, while the existing projects aim for a

higher rate of turnover in order to impact more families. The latter projects, such as Alder,

are more costly on a monthly basis but ultimately result in a lower total lifetime expenditure

per family by focusing on housing stability as opposed to affordability. Grappling with this

issue of how to count and report households served over time will help us articulate our

challenges and successes to the board and the community, while still meeting reporting

standards set by HUD.

Home Forward hopes that the new Employment/Education/Training preference will result

in an increase to average tenant rent contributions, thus freeing up resources to fund more

new programs, including some that would support the new framework for the Ten Year

Plan to End Homelessness. In the meantime, systems partners continue to align around

efforts to reduce homelessness, as evidenced when Home Forward joined with

jurisdictional and non-profit partners to ensure all 305 of our VASH vouchers were utilized.

Leveraged funds from partners, in conjunction with Home Forward’s deposit funds, were

used to remove barriers to leasing, and several non-profits offered enhancements to

services provided by Veteran Affairs. As a result, 100 veterans leased up in six months – a

record for VASH.

Goal 2: We will increase the number of housing units for our community through Goal 2: We will increase the number of housing units for our community through Goal 2: We will increase the number of housing units for our community through Goal 2: We will increase the number of housing units for our community through

preservation, developmepreservation, developmepreservation, developmepreservation, development and acquisition.nt and acquisition.nt and acquisition.nt and acquisition.

Goal 2 activities over the past year focused on better positioning Home Forward for

meeting development-related goals. Tools were developed to systematically evaluate

Home Forward’s real estate portfolio and to inform decisions regarding high level allocation

of resources, new funding, disposition, development, and acquisition. Utilization of these

tools helped inform key decisions such as the disposition of St. John’s Woods and the

consideration of other acquisition opportunities.

3

GGGGoal 3: We will strengthen our relationship with the people we serve by increasing oal 3: We will strengthen our relationship with the people we serve by increasing oal 3: We will strengthen our relationship with the people we serve by increasing oal 3: We will strengthen our relationship with the people we serve by increasing

mutual accountability and by improving our ability to connect them to vital services in mutual accountability and by improving our ability to connect them to vital services in mutual accountability and by improving our ability to connect them to vital services in mutual accountability and by improving our ability to connect them to vital services in

the community.the community.the community.the community.

There was significant activity under Goal 3 last year, with work groups poised to implement

additional efforts throughout FY2014. There is very little funding budgeted to specifically

support Goal 3 this year, so teams are identifying cost-neutral activities that can be

integrated into existing operational practices.

The Community Compact, designed to create increased accountability between staff,

residents, and their neighbors, was adopted by the Board of Commissioners, and will be

piloted with both staff and approximately 400 households this year, including those at

Stephens Creek Crossing.

Families Forward implemented initiatives for both youth and work-focused adults. For

adults, the priority for FY2013 was to create a single framework for all of the agency’s

Economic Opportunity efforts, integrating the following four strategies: 1) collecting

information about families through an Employment and Training Interest Inventory, 2)

aligning OHI and GOALS into a single program (now uniformly called “GOALS”) with site-

based and non-site based components, 3) facilitating the hiring of residents and

participants by Home Forward and contractors, and 4) integrating special programs such

as Action for Prosperity into the agency’s ongoing GOALS programs.

For youth, Home Forward decided to align our strategies with the community’s Cradle to

Career efforts, beginning with the goal of ensuring that children enter kindergarten ready to

learn. Home Forward houses approximately 2500 children under the age of 6, or roughly

11% of all children under age 6 who live in poverty in Multnomah County. Studies show

that families living in poverty are three times more likely to face hardships impacting school

readiness and that if children start kindergarten behind they are likely to remain behind.

Our first two strategies are to help families utilize early childhood resources available in the

community, and to ensure families register their children for kindergarten on time, which

allows them to access preparatory programs over the summer.

Aging at Home also began implementation on priority strategies this year, including:

exploring systems alignment with Aging & Disability Services and Health Share, developing

standards for renovating common areas and units to make them more accessible, and

developing new branding and marketing for the Congregate Housing Services Program

(CHSP) in order to increase participation.

4

Goal 4: We will increase efficiency and embrace our new identity by transforming the Goal 4: We will increase efficiency and embrace our new identity by transforming the Goal 4: We will increase efficiency and embrace our new identity by transforming the Goal 4: We will increase efficiency and embrace our new identity by transforming the

organizational structure and culture. organizational structure and culture. organizational structure and culture. organizational structure and culture.

Goal 4 activities for FY 2013 centered on the Corragio assessment of Home Forward’s

culture, structure, leadership and process, which resulted in a deeper understanding of our

current state and the challenges that can impede our execution of initiatives. While

awaiting the results of the assessment, staff assigned to this goal focused on establishing

practices to support employees in achieving the other SOP goals. This work resulted in the

development of an Outcome-Based Planning Process, which is grounded in both

quantitative and qualitative decision making, and will lead the agency to better plan,

implement and manage our work.

Next StepsNext StepsNext StepsNext Steps

With priorities established and many of the necessary tools in place to support

implementation efforts, Home Forward is well-positioned to make significant progress

towards SOP goals in FY2014. While some work at the initiative level has slowed in recent

months as a reflection of budget uncertainties, it hasn’t stopped, and we are poised to re-

engage in the context of the new funding environment.

A key next step is to more fully integrate the SOP with other existing agency initiatives.

Many of the activities in our MTW Plan (safety net for GOALS graduates, Local Blended

Subsidy, Neighbor to Neighbor grants, creating opportunities for families to move to low

poverty areas) could be better incorporated into existing SOP goals. Likewise, the majority

of SOP initiatives can be linked to MTW goals (increasing efficiency, expanding housing

choice, increasing resident employment and self-sufficiency). The integration of all

significant agency initiatives will allow us to define a set of key agency-wide outcome

measures that will provide a quantitative picture of accomplishments across operations.

ATTACHMENTSATTACHMENTSATTACHMENTSATTACHMENTS

2013201320132013----05 SOP Dashboard05 SOP Dashboard05 SOP Dashboard05 SOP Dashboard

Strategic Operations Plan Update for FY 2013Strategic Operations Plan Update for FY 2013Strategic Operations Plan Update for FY 2013Strategic Operations Plan Update for FY 2013

AddiAddiAddiAdditional Information: Program Descriptionstional Information: Program Descriptionstional Information: Program Descriptionstional Information: Program Descriptions

Strategic Operations Plan 2013 Update

Goal 1: We will deploy resources with greater intentionality and alignment with other systems while increasing the number of households served.

Board Liaisons:

Priority Initiative 1: Implement new waiting list preferences and processes for designated rent assistance and public housing programs.

Leads: Dena Ford-Avery, Elise Anderson

Priority Initiative 2: Improve Home Forward’s engagement with systems partners by building necessary infrastructure and by increasing formal relationships, such as through memoranda of understanding and contracts.

Leads: Shelley Marchesi, John Keating

Priority Initiative 3: Develop and implement at least three different rent assistance programs for work-focused households, in collaboration with community partners.

Leads: Rachel Devlin, Jill Riddle

Priority Initiative 4: Add new programs, preferences and priorities that support the community’s “10-Year Plan to End Homelessness Reset”.

Leads: Rachael Duke, Jaclyn Eaton

Goal 2: We will increase the number of housing units for our community through preservation, development and acquisition.

Board Liaisons: Brian Lessler, David Kelleher, Development Committee

Priority Initiative 1: Evaluate and reposition existing projects, with an emphasis on preserving the public housing high rises.

Leads: Mike & Molly

Priority Initiative 2: Establish criteria for performance and households to be served, then acquire 100 new units of housing.

Leads: April Berg, Betty Dominguez

Priority Initiative 3: Establish criteria for performance, partnerships, and households to be served, then develop 100 new units of housing.

Leads: April & Betty

Goal 3: We will strengthen our relationship with the people we serve by increasing mutual accountability and by improving our ability to connect them to vital services in the community.

Board Liaisons: Benita Legarza, Resident Advisory Committee

Priority Initiative 1: Develop and implement a community compact with every household.

Leads: Pamela Kambur,

Priority Initiative 2: Implement the Families Forward project, with youth and adult-related initiatives.

Leads: Kitty Miller, Ian Slingerland

Priority Initiative 3: Implement the Aging at Home initiative.

Leads: Rodger Moore, Rosanne Marmor

Goal 4: We will increase efficiency and embrace our new identity by transforming the organizational structure and culture.

Board Liaisons: Lee Moore, Jim Smith

Priority Initiative 1: Complete a contracted organizational assessment that identifies potential efficiencies and structural realignment, then implement selected recommendations.

Leads: Rebecca Gabriel, Peter Beyer

Priority Initiative 2: Assess critical functions and operations to determine the most sustainable and strategic business model for Home Forward in the coming years, in order to best fulfill our mission.

Priority Initiative 3: Begin planning and implementation of the following organizational development recommendations from the 2012 agency assessment: 1) staff and leadership development and 2) organizational communication.

Priority Initiative 4: Begin planning and implementation of the following organizational process recommendations from the 2012 agency assessment: 1) outcome-based decision making and 2) program / project development and evaluation

As of January 2013

Strategic Operations Plan Update for FY 2013

SOP

Goal

Priority

Initiative

Number

Priority

Initiative Summary of FY 2013 Accomplishments Plans for FY 2014

GOAL

1 1.1

New Waiting

List Preferences

• New preferences adopted for the Section 8 waitlist

o Employment/Education/Training (EET)

o Facing lethal domestic violence

o Disabled youth with expiring Family Unification Program vouchers

• Adopted EET preference at 8 Public Housing family properties, selected based geographic

and unit size distribution, as well as income potential.

• Evaluate whether families may be pulled from the Section 8 waitlist during the

fourth quarter of FY2014.

• Implement EET preference at the 8 selected Public Housing properties,

including notifying applicants currently on the waitlist of the changes.

• Determine whether additional preferences may be added related to reset of 10

year plan to end homelessness

GOAL

1 1.2

Improve

Partnership

Management

• Identified partnership-related policies and tools that need to be developed in order to

better align partnerships with resident needs and effectively evaluate partnerships across

the agency.

• Conducted feasibility analysis of strategies to raise funds in conjunction with aligned

partnerships

• Develop partnership evaluation criteria to be piloted in partnerships being

examined for New Columbia and Stephens Creek Crossing (SCC)

• Draft a Partnership Compact to be piloted at SCC

• Standardize agency policies regarding data sharing and releases of information

• Develop partnership management policies

GOAL

1 1.3

New rent

assistance

programs for

work-focused

households

• Implemented school-based rent assistance at Alder, serving 60 families in FY 2013 (22

households counted towards baseline)

• Increased contribution to STRA, investing nearly $1.6 million in MIF funds.

• Completed initial 3-year commitment to Action for Prosperity Rent Assistance, serving 113

households (43 towards baseline)

• Completed planning for an Oxford House-style model to serve former foster youth who are

working or in school.

• Completed planning for providing time-limited rent assistance for work-focused youth with

expiring Family Unification Program (FUP) vouchers

• Continue alignment efforts with Multnomah County and I Have a Dream at

Alder Elementary School and evaluate the first full year of implementation.

• Continue commitment to STRA in the wake of significant resource constraints,

affirming that STRA has become a core program for Home Forward

• Continue work with Multnomah County and Worksystems, Inc. to strengthen

outcomes for Action for Prosperity (no rental assistance committed for FY 2014

due to sequestration)

• Work with systems partners to select a house for former foster youth and

implement program by June

• Begin issuing FUP extensions over the summer

GOAL

1 1.4

New Programs/

Preferences to

Support 10 Year

Plan

• Worked with jurisdictional partners to complete the framework for the resetting of the Ten

Year Plan to End Homelessness.

• Participate in development of a governance structure for the new plan and the

action planning process.

• Evaluate whether new preferences or additional Program Based Assistance

programs that support the plan can be implemented in FY 2015.

GOAL

2 2.1

Reposition

Existing

Projects

• Received approval for dispositions and related Tenant Protection Vouchers in four high rises

• The Yards successfully exited through Year 15 with favorable terms.

• Began disposition of St. John’s Woods to generate funding for other preservation efforts.

• Produced 9 Capital Needs Assessments (948 units)

• 10-year capital projections were calculated across the Affordable Housing portfolio

• Refinancing on 2 loans created more cash flow

• Finalize disposition and subsidy change for the four high rises

• Finalize sale of St. John’s Woods

• Continue work of the Real Estate Study Group to assess opportunities to better

position the portfolio

GOAL

2 2.2

Acquire 100

new units

• Development Committee established acquisition criteria and priorities and staff began

seeking acquisition opportunities.

• Present acquisition criteria to the Board of Commissioners for approval

concurrently with recommendations for property acquisition

GOAL

2 2.3

Develop 100

new units

• Development Committee established development criteria and priorities and staff began

seeking development opportunities.

• Present development criteria to the board for approval concurrently with

recommendations for property development

• Complete development of Beech Street project, which will count towards this

goal

GOAL

3 3.1

Community

Compact

• Compact adopted by Board in Oct 2012.

• Explored potential partnership with Portland YouthBuilders Media Project to develop a

video for residents which explains the compact

• Pilot the compact with 400 households, including Stephens Creek Crossing, and

evaluate initial roll-out

• Ensure all Home Forward staff sign the compact

• Produce video for residents explaining compact

GOAL

3 3.2

Families

Forward –

Economic

Opportunity

• Refined an Economic Opportunity Services Framework and began work to align GOALS/OHI

• Implement new Employment & Skills Interest Inventory for households coming off the

Section 8 waitlist and a sample of current residents. Used data to recruit for new “Housing

Works” grant.

• Enrolled approximately 100 participants into Housing Works grant; 3 of the first enrollees

have already gained career track employment .

• Doubled the number of residents hired as temps/interns/employees at Home Forward, even

without a formal effort to integrate this strategy

• Complete the alignment of GOALS and OHI into site-based (including Stephens

Creek Crossing) and non-site-based GOALS .

• Continue enrollment into Housing Works with a goal of at least 50 households

gaining employment over the next 12 months.

• Expand the use of the Employment & Skills Interest Inventory to households

coming off Public Housing waiting lists.

• Integrate the “Section 3” efforts to support the hiring of residents and

participants fully into the Economic Opportunity Services Framework

GOAL

3 3.2

Families

Forward - Youth

• Created staff action planning teams, which selected and began planning on two early

childhood strategies

• Mailed language-specific kindergarten registration information to 500 families whose

children should enter kindergarten in September

• Executed a Data Sharing Agreement with Portland Public Schools which will allow us to

measure success with Kindergarten Registration efforts.

• Funded youth to participate in SummerWorks internship program. Home Forward’s 26

youth outperformed the overall cohort and exceeded established performance targets in all

areas.

• Funded five new slots for the two-year Future Connect program. Evaluation of the first

cohort showed Home Forward students with GPAs exceeding the program average.

• Access Portland Public Schools data to identify a baseline for the number of

Home Forward kids registering for kindergarten on time and the results after

two years of outreach to families.

• Execute Data Sharing Agreements with the other five school districts.

• Resume planning for cost neutral early childhood activities that advance the

goals of Families Forward.

• Inform families about future SummerWorks and Future Connect, but Home

Forward will no longer fund slots.

GOAL

3 3.3 Aging at Home

• Completed kitchen and flooring improvements at Unthank Plaza and Grace Peck

• Developed a list of replacement parts (lighting, door knobs, hand held shower nozzles, etc)

that meet Aging at Home standards

• Began working with Energy Trust of Oregon (ETO) to determine if there are incentives to

upgrade lighting and other utility fixtures that would also support this initiative. ETO

conducting energy site evaluations and submitting recommendations.

• Expanded Congregate Housing Services Program (CHSP) to Grace Peck property and

increased program participation by 14%.

• Increased the number of Medicaid-funded participants to 52%, resulting in increased

program income and higher capacity to serve private-pay participants.

• Began partnership development work with Cedar Sinai, State and County Developmental

Disabilities departments, and Aging & Disability Services.

• Hired Institute on Aging to survey CHSP participants for with a goal of developing marketing

strategies to increase enrollment.

• Begin using new replacement parts as needed or at unit turnover (when

funding available)

• Pilot Energy Trust program at Dahlke Manor

• Work with consultant to develop final recommendations for systems alignment

with Aging and Disability Services, Cedar Sinai, and/or Health Share and

determine expansion plans for CHSP.

• Develop standards for renovations to common areas that support this

initiative

• Implement new branding/marketing of CHSP to increase participation.

• Participate in Cedar Sinai’s plans to develop a health clinic in the downtown

area.

GOAL

4 4.1

Organizational

Assessment

• Completion of Corragio assessment, which resulted in a revision of Goal 4 Priority Initiatives

• SOP updated and new workgroups to be formed This activity has been completed.

GOAL

4 4.2

Sustainable,

strategic

business model

• New initiative identified at the end of FY2013 • Start the planning process to assess the business model

GOAL

4 4.3

Organizational

Communication

& Staff/

Leadership

Development

• New initiative identified at the end of FY2013

• Determine how data from the employee survey correlates with the initiative in

order to identify a baseline and metrics for improvement

• Develop and implement mechanisms for staff development (internal and

external training, coaching, online options, etc)

• Develop agency expectations for communication, and train “key agency

communicators.”

GOAL

4 4.4

Outcome Based

Decision-

Making and

Project

Development/

Evaluation

• New initiative identified at the end of FY2013, but progress made under the efforts of

former initiative 4.2

• Created the Inclusion Lens to serve as a filter to ensure decision-making is equitable and

inclusive of a diverse group of people; piloted with GOAL 3 teams

• Developed Outcome-Based Planning Tool and began implementing with Goal 3 teams

• Determine how the data from the employee survey correlates with the

initiative in order to identify baseline and metrics for improvement

• Train key staff to facilitate outcome based planning process

• Define key agency-wide outcome measures (households served, cost per

household, leveraged investments, increased efficiency, etc) across all

initiatives such as the SOP, the MTW plan, and more.

Strategic Operations Plan Update

Additional Information: Program Descriptions

Action for Prosperity: A systems alignment partnership between Home Forward, Worksystems, Inc.,

the Multnomah County Anti-Poverty system, and the Department of Human Services (DHS). Each

system leverages its resources by providing their own core services and utilizing the other partners to

create a holistic service package for clients. This project provides households with rent assistance, case

management, and training/employment services.

Alder School-Based Rent Assistance: The dual-generation project provides targeted rental assistance

to families with children attending Alder Elementary School to help reduce school mobility and provides

case management and employment services to families to help with stability. The school has one of the

highest mobility rates in the County and has been adopted by the I Have a Dream Foundation.

Cradle to Career: A partnership between local businesses, school districts, local government, non-profit

organizations, the faith community, parents, students and community stakeholders to ensure the

sustained success of every child in Portland and Multnomah County from cradle to career. This collective

impact model has chosen to focus on the following goals in the first three years:

• Ensuring that every child in Multnomah County enters kindergarten with the foundation for

learning and life success

• Eliminating disparities in child and youth success by advancing racial educational equity and

social justice in Multnomah County

• Aligning and increasing school and community supports, for children, youth and their families,

• Ensuring more local students enter high school prepared to succeed by leveraging summer as a

key opportunity for learning and engagement

CHSP: The Congregate Housing Services Program (CHSP) is a grant-funded program, subcontracted to

Impact NW, to provide meals, housekeeping services and other supportive services needed by seniors

and people with disabilities in our housing. CHSP program participation is currently available to our

residents living in Dahlke Manor, Grace Peck, Holgate House or Unthank Plaza.

Employment/Education/Training Preference: Home Forward has established a preference on the

waiting lists for Section 8 and eight Public Housing family properties for households that are employed or

actively engaged in education or training. These households will be pulled more quickly from the waiting

list than work-focused households who do not meet the preference eligibility.

2

Family Unification Program (FUP) Voucher Extensions: Home Forward administers 100 Family

Unification Program (FUP) vouchers for households with child welfare involvement or foster youth who

are aging out of or left the child welfare system. FUP vouchers for youth are limited, by statute, to 18

months of assistance. Home Forward is implementing a rental assistance program to extend assistance

to youth who may need a longer period of time to establish stable work and housing.

Future Connect: Future Connect is a Portland Community College initiative that helps low-income high

school students build a pathway to attend college through scholarship money, career guidance and

personal advising. Students receive ongoing support once they are enrolled in college. Home Forward

has funded slots for 10 of our youth to enter this program over the last two years.

GOALS: The GOALS program is Home Forward’s “Family Self-Sufficiency program.” In our FY2014

MTW Plan, we used our MTW flexibility to combine GOALS and the Opportunity Housing Initiative (OHI)

into a single family self-sufficiency program. GOALS is designed to support Section 8 and public housing

residents in increasing their economic opportunity through five years of supportive case management,

with the objective of increasing earned income (and possibly exiting subsidy) at the end of program

participation. GOALS participants are also supported in building assets, via an escrow account or an

individual development account, which they can access for education or employment-related expenses

during program participation or upon successful program completion.

Housing Works: A three-year, $5.5 million grant awarded to Worksystems, Inc. (WSI) in partnership with

Home Forward and the other housing authorities and worksource agencies in the Portland/Vancouver

Metro area to provide training and employment services to housing authority residents. The grant is

modeled on a past collaboration between Home Forward and WSI and will serve 270 Home Forward

residents over the three years.

Inclusion Lens: The Inclusion Lens is a decision-making tool developed by Home Forward’s Inclusion

Council. The tool helps evaluate decisions or project plans from the standpoint of inclusion, equity and

diversity.

Local Blended Subsidy (LBS): Home Forward created the local blended subsidy program through an

MTW activity to improve the financial viability of public housing units. The program combines tenant paid

rent, public housing operating funds, and Section 8 subsidy to support the total unit rent amount.

MIF Funds: MTW Initiative Funds, “MIF Funds,” refers to annual excess operating funding or reserves

that are generated from program efficiencies. MIF is used to support initiatives that advance the goals

and objectives of MTW, as well as our Strategic Operations Plan.

3

Neighbor to Neighbor Grants: A Home Forward grant program, funded by MIF, that offers residents of

public or affordable housing the opportunity to apply for grant money to implement projects that will

increase a sense of community at their property. Funds are administered by Home Forward staff.

Oxford House-style Housing for Former Foster Youth: Home Forward has partnered with New

Avenues for Youth, the Recovery Association Project, Multnomah County, the City of Portland, the

Department of Human Services, and Portland Community College to create a house for former foster

youth who are working or in school. The house will be based on the democratically-run Oxford House

model. Home Forward will provide rental subsidies; New Avenues will coordinate case management, and

PCC will offer Future Connect scholarships to any interested, eligible youth.

Section 3: HUD’s Section 3 program requires that housing authorities and other recipients of certain HUD

funding, to the greatest extent possible, provide job training, employment, and contract opportunities for

low- or very-low income people in connection with projects and activities. Home Forward aggressively

pursues opportunities to connect our residents with training and employment opportunities presented by our

contractors, works with contractors to maximize their capacity and willingness to hire our residents, and

strives to exceed hiring requirements internally.

Short Term Rent Assistance (STRA): Short Term Rent Assistance, or STRA, is a local rent assistance

program that helps families with short term rental subsidies, move-in fees and deposits, utility assistance,

etc. Funds come from multiple local, state, and federal sources, as well Home Forward’s own MIF and

PILOT funds. Under an Inter-Governmental Agreement with the City of Portland and Multnomah County,

Home Forward administers and contracts the funds to non-profit agencies which are responsible for

identifying participating families, determining assistance, and providing appropriate case management

services to stabilize families.

SummerWorks: SummerWorks is a summer internship program through WorkSystems, Inc. that provides

youth aged 16-21 with paid summer internships and soft skills training. Over the past two years, Home

Forward has funded slots for 50 of our youth to participate.

VASH Vouchers: Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing vouchers, or VASH vouchers, are Housing Choice

Vouchers dedicated to homeless veterans, with additional services provided by the Department of Veteran

Affairs (VA). Home Forward currently has 305 VASH vouchers. The local VA office identifies veterans who

are eligible for this assistance. Home Forward’s MIF initiatives include security deposit assistance for

veterans leasing up with a VASH voucher.

MEMORANDUM

To: Board of Commissioners

From: Jill Riddle

Director Rent Assistance

Date: May 8, 2013

Subject: Draft Section 8 Legislation Update – House Bill 2639

This briefing is intended to update the board on the ongoing development of House Bill

2639, which is focused on redefining “source of income” to include Section 8 for purposes

of prohibiting discrimination in selling, renting or leasing real property. This briefing is

informational only; no action is required of the board at this time.

ISSUE

In September 2012, then-Representative Tina Kotek began a process of bringing together

various stakeholders to develop a proposed bill she intended to drop in the current

legislative session. This bill was to be focused on including Section 8 and other forms of

federal or local rental subsidy payments to be considered a source of income as a

protected class; current language specifically excludes Section 8 from that protection.

Since her election as Speaker, Kotek has brought together a group representing statewide

housing authorities, landlord groups, and tenant advocates to define the bill. Home

Forward has been in attendance and actively involved in this process from the initial

meeting.

Speaker Kotek has stated several times that housing is an integral part of statewide health

and education initiatives and even renamed the House Human Services Committee to

“Human Services and Housing” in order to reflect this adjusted focus. Her approach has

been to listen to all parties’ concerns and draft a bill that could be widely supported. She

has broadened it to not only address the source of income issue, but to include state-level

Section 8 program changes that would alleviate landlord concerns.

2

The legislation, now House Bill 2639, has several amendments aimed at making it friendlier

to accept Section 8 participants as renters, so it is not just viewed as an encumbrance to

the landlord community. One example is a Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program,

modeled after Home Forward’s initiative that provides financial assistance to landlords to

mitigate damages caused by Section 8 tenants. While we clearly support the intention of

such efforts, we are working closely with Ryan Fisher of NW Public Affairs and the Oregon

Housing Authorities to try to ensure the language of these amendments is viable for us to

administer. In some cases, the amendments may be overly burdensome for housing

authorities and in some cases, there may even be conflict between federal regulations and

the State program as it is currently defined.

Our guest, Ryan Fisher, will provide the board with more detail and the most current

information on where the process of defining the language of HB 2639 stands.

 Oregon  Housing  Authorities  Housing  Choice  Voucher  Utilization  Snapshot  October  2011  –  April  2012  

 INTRODUCTION  As  conversations  about  the  Housing  Choice  Voucher  program  continue,  the  Oregon  Housing  Authorities  (OHA)  engaged  in  an  outreach  effort  with  their  members  across  the  state.  The  following  provides  broad  overview  of  the  program,  a  summary  of  the  comments  received  from  the  OHA  statewide  meeting,  as  well  as  responses  to  a  non-­‐scientific  survey  with  member  agencies.      

We  appreciate  the  interest  in  the  success  of  this  program  and  welcome  the  coming  conversation.  What  has  been,  to  our  organization,  a  federal  conversation  for  many  years  has  now  become  a  state  conversation  and  we  look  forward  to  the  opportunity  to  build  stronger  partnerships  through  our  efforts  to  improve  a  bedrock  investment  in  our  local  communities.    Please  feel  free  to  contact  Oregon  Housing  Authorities  with  any  questions.    

Ryan  Fisher  (c)  503-­‐968-­‐7161;  (e)  ryan@nwpublicaffairs.com    OVERVIEW  OF  THE  HOUSING  CHOICE  VOUCHER  Communities  are  stronger  when  everyone  has  a  home,  which  is  why  there  are  systems  to  support  people’s  ability  to  find  a  safe  place  to  live.  Housing  tax  credits,  public  housing,  rental  assistance  programs,  down  payment  assistance,  and  even  mortgage  interest  deductions  all  invest  common  resources  into  the  health  and  potential  of  our  communities.      

The  Housing  Choice  Voucher  represents  the  largest  federal  rental  housing  investment  in  our  state.  If  all  of  the  households  whose  lives  are  stabilized  by  vouchers  lived  in  one  area,  it  would  be  Oregon’s  fifth  largest  city.  Without  this  investment,  many  seniors,  individuals  with  disabilities,  and  families  struggling  to  make  ends  meet  would  not  have  stable  housing.      

Created  in  1974,  the  program  has  spanned  seven  presidential  administrations  and  six  recessions.  Political  and  economic  pressures  over  that  time  have  ebbed  and  flowed,  with  revisions  and  additions  to  the  program  coming  from  conflicting  beliefs  and  visions.  The  current  version  of  the  program  is  inelegant  and  sometimes  unwieldy,  yet  essential  to  the  stability  of  our  local  economies  and  communities.      

For  the  past  decade,  the  OHA  has  met  to  share  best  practices  and  discuss  concerns  about  the  structure  and  funding  of  the  Housing  Choice  Voucher  (HCV)  program.  As  an  organization,  we  have  sent  recommendations  to  Housing  and  Urban  Development  and  educated  federal  delegates  on  the  need  to  improve  and  adequately  fund  this  critical  community  investment.  Some  changes  have  been  made,  but  major  national  reform  legislation  continues  to  be  held  up  in  Congress  and  many  waiver  requests  from  local  housing  authorities  have  been  denied.      

 

  2  

Meanwhile,  the  current  program  is  complicated  to  use  and  to  administer.  From  the  tenant  perspective,  it’s  a  more  complicated  process  than  simply  finding  a  place  to  rent  on  the  open  market.  From  many  landlords’  perspectives,  there  is  more  paperwork  and  less  flexibility  on  leasing  terms  than  their  typical  leases.  For  housing  authorities,  demanding  program  requirements  butt  up  against  diminishing  resources.      

Our  state  has  begun  a  conversation  about  how  to  improve  this  critical  but  imperfect  federal  investment.  Tenants  need  more  choices.  Landlords  want  a  stronger  partner.  People  in  our  communities  need  more  opportunities.  OHA  welcomes  this  conversation  to  improve  the  Housing  Choice  Voucher  program.    CHALLENGES  (identified  at  Oregon  Housing  Authorities  statewide  meeting)  Landlords,  tenants,  and  the  housing  authority  face  multi-­‐layered  challenges  to  the  successful  utilization  of  the  Housing  Choice  Voucher  program.  The  following  briefly  outlines  some  of  these  challenges.      

Market  challenges  • High  demand  for  available  housing:  In  many  parts  of  the  state,  the  rental  market  is  tighter  than  most  directors  have  experienced  in  their  careers.  This  

means  that  demand  is  extremely  high,  making  rental  properties  more  difficult  to  find  for  all  renters,  including  those  utilizing  an  HCV.  • Lack  of  new  development:  For  the  last  several  years,  many  communities  have  not  had  readily  available  financing  to  develop  new  rental  properties,  

putting  a  pinch  on  new  development  and  increasing  the  scarcity  within  the  market.  • Housing  Choice  Vouchers  not  accepted  by  all  landlords:  Some  landlords  are  unwilling  to  accept  HCVs  for  a  variety  of  reasons,  further  limiting  the  pool  of  

potential  properties.  • Meeting  HUD  standards  to  accept  Housing  Choice  Vouchers:  Some  rental  units  do  not  meet  HUD  inspection  standards,  thus  precluding  the  use  of  HCVs  

at  those  units.    

Housing  Authority  Challenges    • Diminished  funding:  Federal  funding  to  administer  HCVs  has  been  steadily  decreasing  and  continues  to  do  so.  This  has  resulted  in  staff  cuts  at  local  

housing  authorities  that  impact  tenants  and  landlords.  Staff  reductions  affect  tenant  and  landlord  outreach  and  education  programs,  inspection  turnaround  time,  and  staff’s  ability  to  work  individually  to  address  landlord  and  tenant  concerns.  

• Meeting  past  standards  with  diminished  funding:  At  the  same  time  that  funding  to  administer  the  program  has  decreased,  the  program  requirements  have  not  changed.  Limited  flexibility  to  change  business  practices  and  adapt  to  the  changing  funding  model  results  in  diminishing  or  eliminating  services  designed  to  improve  success  rates.  

• Hard  Choices:  Even  though  the  cost  of  rental  properties  has  risen,  the  pool  of  funds  (i.e.,  rent  subsidies  available  to  landlords  through  vouchers)  has  remained  flat,  as  has  the  number  of  vouchers  that  local  housing  authorities  are  given.  This  funding  dilemma  has  forced  many  local  housing  authorities  to  make  a  difficult  choice:  either  decreasing  the  subsidy  amount  of  each  voucher  in  order  to  maintain  the  number  of  people  they  serve,  or  facilitating  the  same  value  of  the  vouchers  but  reducing  the  number  of  vouchers  given.  

 

Tenant  challenges      • Tenants  face  extreme  poverty:  By  HUD  regulation,  75%  of  the  people  we  serve  on  the  voucher  program  must  make  equal  to  or  less  than  30%  of  Area  

Median  Income  (e.g.,  for  a  family  of  three  in  Multnomah  county  this  equates  to  an  annual  income  of  $19,750  or  less).    This  degree  of  poverty  leads  to  barriers  such  as  lack  of  transportation  to  look  for  housing  and  an  inability  to  pay  multiple  housing  application  fees.    

  3  

• Lack  of  assistance:  Utilizing  an  HCV  requires  some  extra  work  by  the  tenant  that  is  not  required  of  renters  on  the  open  market.  Resources  are  not  always  available  to  provide  the  quality  assistance  some  HCV  recipients  need  in  order  to  successfully  find  housing  in  the  timeframe  that  is  required  by  the  program.  

• Amount  of  vouchers:  Funding  limitations  limit  the  total  rent  a  tenant  can  afford,  creating  challenges  for  people  seeking  a  place  to  live  because  it  further  reduces  the  pool  of  housing  available,  even  with  their  voucher.    

• Barriers  outside  program  parameters:  Due  to  the  economic  crisis,  more  potential  renters  face  challenges  when  going  through  the  leasing  application  process  (e.g.,  foreclosures,  inability  to  make  rent  in  past  leases,  medical  bills,  etc.  causing  a  poor  credit  score).  Tenants  with  vouchers  also  face  these  challenges.  Although  certain  criminal  backgrounds  disqualify  eligibility  for  a  voucher,  persons  with  a  voucher  having  other  criminal  backgrounds  may  not  pass  landlord  screening.  

 MEMBER  OUTREACH  PROCESS  Outreach  Purpose:  As  we  have  the  conversation  about  how  to  improve  the  Housing  Choice  Voucher  program,  we  want  to  educate  partners  and  stakeholders  about  factors  that  impact  services,  partnerships,  and  resources  because  it  is  a  complicated  program  and  understanding  its  layers  is  important  to  identifying  improvements.  The  first  step  of  this  education  was  collecting  some  non-­‐scientific,  qualitative  information  regarding  the  program.  Results  to  this  outreach  are  appended  to  this  paper.      The  outreach  is  a  starting  point  for  a  longer,  more  meaningful  conversation  with  OHA’s  partners.  As  part  of  the  education  process,  we  will  look  for  and  collaborate  on  ways  to  capture  more  meaningful  insight  into  this  program.    Important  Context:  While  this  survey  gives  information  about  the  impacts  of  a  variety  of  combined  challenges,  it  does  not  give  insight  into  which  challenges  are  causing  barriers.  In  many  cases,  it  is  likely  to  be  a  combination  of  multiple  challenges.  At  our  statewide  meeting,  housing  authorities  discussed  a  variety  of  challenges,  noted  in  the  above  summary  (page  2).      

Outreach  Process:  OHA  members  were  asked  to  respond  to  questions  that  would  help  us  gain  insights  into  aspects  of  the  program  that  impact  landlords  and  the  success  rate  of  voucher  holders  across  the  state,  such  as  inspection  times,  availability  of  a  landlord  guarantee  fund,  and  the  number  of  participating  landlords  in  each  local  area.  Broad  details  of  the  outreach  effort  are  noted  below:  

• A  total  of  17  out  of  21  OHA  members  across  the  state  responded  to  the  questions  • Outreach  was  conducted  in  September  2012  and  responses  reflected  activity  between  October  2011  and  April  2012**  

o This  span  of  time  was  chosen  to  ensure  that  clients  who  were  issued  a  voucher  would  have  resolved  their  status  as  either  finding  housing  or  returning  the  voucher  at  the  time  of  the  survey  (September  2012)  

• Members  (either  directors  or  Section  8  staff)  responded  to  questions  by  email  which  they  sent  to  the  Association  manager  who  compiled  the  comments  

 **In  some  cases,  the  time  period  during  which  the  outreach  was  conducted  was  not  ideal:    • Home  Forward,  for  instance,  issued  only  16  vouchers  during  that  time  span.  This  is  an  organization  that  administers  7769  vouchers.  Their  list,  which  has  

been  closed  for  six  years,  was  fully  utilized  during  this  time  period  • Housing  Works,  in  Bend,  reported  that  some  voucher  holders  were  granted  extensions  to  continue  to  search  for  a  voucher.  In  those  cases,  they  may  be  

counted  in  this  report  as  a  “turnback”  when  in  fact,  they  may  have  successfully  used  the  voucher  to  find  housing  

  4  

 TERM  DEFINITIONS  AND  LIMITIATIONS  TO  OUTREACH  This  is  a  non-­‐scientific  survey,  and  the  responses  are  one  of  many  layers  necessary  to  understand  the  HCV  program.  The  data  from  the  survey  does  not  take  into  account  the  differences  between  local  economics  and  housing  markets  across  the  state.  Importantly,  some  numbers  reported  (e.g.,  the  number  of  applicants  who  did  not  use  their  vouchers)  are  given  without  context  and  do  not  show  the  circumstances  behind  the  figures  or  how  they  relate  to  the  broader  market.  Several  examples  of  this  issue  are  noted  in  the  term  definitions  below.    Turnback  rate  vs.  Lease  up  rate  Turnback  rate:  This  attempts  to  calculate  the  percentage  of  people  who  were  issued  a  Housing  Choice  Voucher,  but  were  not  able  to  find  a  place  to  live  within  the  period  of  time  allotted  them  and  had  to  return  the  voucher  to  the  local  housing  authority.  We  have  been  asked  to  share  this  number,  but  have  concerns  with  how  it  might  be  used  for  the  following  reasons:  • We  do  not  have  data  on  why  those  individuals  were  unsuccessful  in  using  the  voucher.  • Many  housing  authorities  have  closed  waiting  lists  because  demand  for  vouchers  is  so  much  higher  than  supply.  It’s  hard  to  pick  a  span  of  time  in  which  a  

significant  number  of  vouchers  are  being  issued  in  every  community,  statewide.  • Different  housing  authorities  have  different  lengths  of  times  that  voucher  holders  can  seek  housing  (60  days,  90  days,  180  days  etc.).  Housing  authorities  

determine  this  length  based  on  local  market  and  social  factors.    Lease  up  rate:  This  calculates  the  number  of  vouchers  currently  being  utilized  to  subsidize  housing  compared  to  the  total  number  of  vouchers  available  to  the  local  housing  authority.  Similar  to  turnback  rates,  this  number  is  dependent  on  the  moment  in  time  that  the  snapshot  is  taken.  Housing  authorities  go  to  great  lengths  to  achieve  a  100%  lease  up  rate  for  each  calendar  year.  This  is  not  easy  for  a  number  of  reasons.  The  results  calculated  in  this  outreach  effort  are  merely  capturing  a  point  in  time,  not  measuring  performance  over  a  span  of  time.    Landlord  participation  Number  of  participating  landlords:  This  tracks  the  number  of  landlords  participating  with  the  program  as  of  October  2012.      Inspection  information:  This  gives  the  average  length  of  time  it  takes  local  housing  authorities  to  complete  an  inspection  from  the  time  they  receive  the  notice  from  the  tenant  that  a  rental  agreement  is  pending.  There  was  some  discussion  about  the  fact  that  there  may  be  an  additional  delay  if  the  tenant  does  not  immediately  return  the  signed  form  that  initiates  an  inspection.  Educating  both  the  landlords  and  the  tenants  about  this  process  can  help  reduce  this  lag.    Risk  mitigation  program:  Some  local  housing  authorities  have  programs  that  can  provide  landlords  access  to  a  guarantee  fund,  if  their  units  are  damaged.  In  order  to  qualify  for  some  of  these  programs,  a  tenant  must  complete  a  certified  course.  Some  housing  authorities  do  not  have  the  resources  to  offer  such  courses.  Some  housing  authorities  partner  with  other  non-­‐profits  that  provide  those  courses.            

  5  

Oregon  Housing  Authorities  Housing  Choice  Voucher  Program  Snapshot  October  2011-­‐April  2012  

Housing  Authority    Washington  

Co.  NE  

Oregon  Yamhill  Co.    

Jackson  Co.  

Lane  Co.     Salem  

West  Valley  

Josephine  Co.  

Clackamas  Co.   NBC/CC  

Housing  Works  

NW  Housing  Authority    

Home  Forward  

City  of  Umatilla    

 Linn/    Benton  

     

Marion  

   

Klamath    

Turnback  Rate        

                                                     

Number  of  vouchers  issued  between  October  '11-­‐April  '12?   246   119   66   254   357   631   187   82   187   119   260   70   16   78  

     

358  

     

273  

     

88  Number  of  vouchers  returned  without  lease  up  between  October  '11-­‐April  '12?   22   26   14   38   20   121   46   13   14   26   88   6   4   49  

       

87  

       

98  

       

10  

Calculated  turnback  rate   9%   22%   21%   15%   6%   19%   25%   16%   7%   22%   34%   9%   25%   63%  

     

24%  

     

36%  

     

11%  

Total  Voucher  Utilization                                                          

     

Number  of  vouchers  currently  available   2,635   801   1343   2002  

2790   2949   699   842   1568   801   1148   1089   7,769   329  

     

2,416  

     

1,182  

     

751  

Current  total  number  of  vouchers  utilized   2589   697   1333   1846  

2792   3048   699   688   1532   697   1148   966   7,372   300  

       

2,330  

       

1,158  

       

751  

Utilization  Rate   98%   87%   99%   92%  100%   103%   100%   82%   98%   87%   100%   89%   95%   91%  

     

96%  

     

98%  

     

100%  

Landlord  Information                                                          

     

Number  of  Section  8  Landlords  your  PHA  currently  work  with   856   334   550   643   750   1353   220   350   632   334   591   407   2,484   160  

               

797  

               

412  

               

400  

  6  

Housing  Authority    Washington  

Co.  NE  

Oregon  Yamhill  

Co.    Jackson  

Co.  Lane  Co.     Salem  

West  Valley  

Josephine  Co.  

Clackamas  Co.   NBC/CC  

Housing  Works  

NW  Housing  

Authority    Home  

Forward  City  of  

Umatilla    

       

Linn/    Benton  

     

     

Marion  

   

     

Klamath    

Inspection  information                                                          

     

Average  unit  inspection  time  (in  days)  between  October  '11-­‐April  '12?   1   3   3   2  

3  to  5   3   5   2   14   2  to  3   10   10   5   N/A  

       

2  

       

5.7  

       

3  

Risk  Mitigation                                                                

Does  your  community  offer  Ready  to  Rent  or  a  risk  mitigation  program  for  landlords?   yes   n/a     yes   no   no   no   no   no   no   no   yes   yes   yes   n/a    

         

yes    

         

no  

         

n/a  

 Guide  to  Areas  Served  by  Housing  Authority  

Housing  Authority   Area(s)  Served    

Washington  Co.   Washington  County  NE  Oregon   Union,  Baker,  Grant,  Wallowa  counties    Yamhill  Co.   Yamhill  County  Jackson  Co.   Jackson  County  Lane  Co.   Lane  County    Salem   City  of  Salem  West  Valley   Polk  County;  Salem  outside  Salem  UGB  Josephine  Co.   Josephine  County    Clackamas  Co.   Clackamas  NBC/CC   Coos  and  Curry;  counties,  City  of  North  Bend  Housing  Works   Deschutes,  Jefferson,  and  Crook    counties    NW  Housing  Authority   Clatsop,  Columbia,    and  Tillamook  counties    Home  Forward   Multnomah  County    City  of  Umatilla   Umatilla,  Morrow,  Gilliam,  and  Wheeler  counties  Linn/Benton   Linn  and  Benton  counties  Marion  Co.   Marion  County  outside  Salem/Keizer  UGB  Klamath   Klamath  and  Lake  counties        

     Responses  were  not  received  from:  

• Douglas  (serves  Douglas  County)  • Malheur  County  (serves  Malheur  and  Harney  counties)    • Mid-­‐Columbia  (serves  Wasco,  Sherman,  Hood  River  counties)    • Lincoln  County  (serves  Lincoln  county)  

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

77th OREGON LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY--2013 Regular Session

A-Engrossed

House Bill 2639Ordered by the House April 17

Including House Amendments dated April 17

Sponsored by Representative KOTEK; Representatives HARKER, HUFFMAN (Presession filed.)

SUMMARY

The following summary is not prepared by the sponsors of the measure and is not a part of the body thereof subjectto consideration by the Legislative Assembly. It is an editor’s brief statement of the essential features of themeasure.

Redefines “source of income” for purposes of prohibiting discrimination in selling, renting orleasing real property. Creates exceptions.

Directs Housing and Community Services Department to develop Housing Choice LandlordGuarantee Program to mitigate damages to dwelling units of landlords caused by tenants receivingtenant-based assistance under federal Housing Choice Voucher Program.

Creates Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program Fund and continuously appropriatesmoneys in fund to department to carry out Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program.

Requires local housing authorities to report annually to department regarding informa-tion provided to Secretary of Housing and Urban Development regarding participation inHousing Choice Voucher Program. Directs local housing authorities to annually reviewinternal procedures and processes and to facilitate participation of landlords in HousingChoice Voucher Program. Creates Statewide Housing Choice Advisory Committee.

Directs department to establish and administer Stable Rental Housing Program to make grantsto qualifying organizations to provide rental and financial assistance to persons at risk of experi-encing homelessness or persons requiring assistance to maintain housing stability.

Creates Stable Rental Housing Account and continuously appropriates moneys in account todepartment to carry out Stable Rental Housing Program.

Directs department and State Housing Council to cooperate with local housing authorities toobtain federal approval and waivers of requirements under certain federal rent subsidy assistanceprograms.

Becomes operative July 1, 2014.

A BILL FOR AN ACT

Relating to housing; creating new provisions; amending ORS 456.561 and 659A.421; and appropriating

money.

Be It Enacted by the People of the State of Oregon:

SECTION 1. ORS 659A.421 is amended to read:

659A.421. (1) As used in this section:

(a) “Dwelling” means:

(A) A building or structure, or portion of a building or structure, that is occupied, or designed

or intended for occupancy, as a residence by one or more families; or

(B) Vacant land offered for sale or lease for the construction or location of a building or

structure, or portion of a building or structure, that is occupied, or designed or intended for occu-

pancy, as a residence by one or more families.

(b) “Purchaser” includes an occupant, prospective occupant, renter, prospective renter, lessee,

prospective lessee, buyer or prospective buyer.

(c) “Real property” includes a dwelling.

(d)(A) “Source of income” [does not include] includes federal rent subsidy payments under 42

U.S.C. 1437f[,] and any other local, state or federal housing assistance.

NOTE: Matter in boldfaced type in an amended section is new; matter [italic and bracketed] is existing law to be omitted.

New sections are in boldfaced type.

LC 2011

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

(B) “Source of income” does not include income derived from a specific occupation or income

derived in an illegal manner.

(2) A person may not, because of the race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national ori-

gin, marital status, familial status or source of income of any person:

(a) Refuse to sell, lease or rent any real property to a purchaser. This paragraph does not

prevent a person from refusing to lease or rent real property to a prospective renter or

prospective lessee:

(A) Based upon the past conduct of a prospective renter or prospective lessee provided

the refusal to lease or rent based on past conduct is consistent with local, state and federal

law, including but not limited to fair housing laws; or

(B) Based upon the prospective renter’s or prospective lessee’s inability to pay rent,

taking into account the value of the prospective renter’s or prospective lessee’s local, state

and federal housing assistance, provided the refusal to lease or rent based on inability to pay

rent is consistent with local, state and federal law, including but not limited to fair housing

laws.

(b) Expel a purchaser from any real property.

(c) Make any distinction, discrimination or restriction against a purchaser in the price, terms,

conditions or privileges relating to the sale, rental, lease or occupancy of real property or in the

furnishing of any facilities or services in connection therewith.

(d) Attempt to discourage the sale, rental or lease of any real property to a purchaser.

(e) Publish, circulate, issue or display, or cause to be published, circulated, issued or displayed,

any communication, notice, advertisement or sign of any kind relating to the sale, rental or leasing

of real property that indicates any preference, limitation, specification or unlawful discrimination

based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin, marital status, familial status

or source of income.

(f) Assist, induce, incite or coerce another person to commit an act or engage in a practice that

violates this section.

(g) Coerce, intimidate, threaten or interfere with any person in the exercise or enjoyment of,

or on account of the person having exercised or enjoyed or having aided or encouraged any other

person in the exercise or enjoyment of, any right granted or protected by this section.

(h) Deny access to, or membership or participation in, any multiple listing service, real estate

brokers’ organization or other service, organization or facility relating to the business of selling or

renting dwellings, or discriminate against any person in the terms or conditions of the access,

membership or participation.

(i) Represent to a person that a dwelling is not available for inspection, sale or rental when the

dwelling in fact is available for inspection, sale or rental.

(j) Otherwise make unavailable or deny a dwelling to a person.

(3)(a) A person whose business includes engaging in residential real estate related transactions

may not discriminate against any person in making a transaction available, or in the terms or con-

ditions of the transaction, because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin,

marital status, familial status or source of income.

(b) As used in this subsection, “residential real estate related transaction” means any of the

following:

(A) The making or purchasing of loans or providing other financial assistance:

(i) For purchasing, constructing, improving, repairing or maintaining a dwelling; or

[2]

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

(ii) Secured by residential real estate; or

(B) The selling, brokering or appraising of residential real property.

(4) A real estate licensee may not accept or retain a listing of real property for sale, lease or

rental with an understanding that a purchaser may be discriminated against with respect to the sale,

rental or lease thereof because of race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin,

marital status, familial status or source of income.

(5) A person may not, for profit, induce or attempt to induce any other person to sell or rent

any dwelling by representations regarding the entry or prospective entry into the neighborhood of

a person or persons of a particular race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, national origin,

marital status, familial status or source of income.

(6) This section does not apply with respect to sex distinction, discrimination or restriction if

the real property involved is such that the application of this section would necessarily result in

common use of bath or bedroom facilities by unrelated persons of opposite sex.

(7)(a) This section does not apply to familial status distinction, discrimination or restriction with

respect to housing for older persons.

(b) As used in this subsection, “housing for older persons” means housing:

(A) Provided under any state or federal program that is specifically designed and operated to

assist elderly persons, as defined by the state or federal program;

(B) Intended for, and solely occupied by, persons 62 years of age or older; or

(C) Intended and operated for occupancy by at least one person 55 years of age or older per

unit. Housing qualifies as housing for older persons under this subparagraph if:

(i) At least 80 percent of the dwellings are occupied by at least one person 55 years of age or

older per unit; and

(ii) Policies and procedures that demonstrate an intent by the owner or manager to provide

housing for persons 55 years of age or older are published and adhered to.

(c) Housing does not fail to meet the requirements for housing for older persons if:

(A) Persons residing in the housing as of September 13, 1988, do not meet the requirements of

paragraph (b)(B) or (C) of this subsection. However, new occupants of the housing shall meet the

age requirements of paragraph (b)(B) or (C) of this subsection; or

(B) The housing includes unoccupied units that are reserved for occupancy by persons who meet

the age requirements of paragraph (b)(B) or (C) of this subsection.

(d) Nothing in this section limits the applicability of any reasonable local, state or federal re-

strictions regarding the maximum number of occupants permitted to occupy a dwelling.

(8) The provisions of subsection (2)(a) to (d) and (f) of this section that prohibit actions based

upon sex, sexual orientation or familial status do not apply to the renting of space within a single-

family residence if the owner actually maintains and occupies the residence as the owner’s primary

residence and all occupants share some common space within the residence.

(9) Any violation of this section is an unlawful practice.

SECTION 2. As used in sections 2 to 6 of this 2013 Act:

(1) “Housing Choice Voucher Program” means the federal tenant-based assistance pro-

gram established under 42 U.S.C. 1437f(o).

(2) “Landlord” means an owner of a dwelling unit that has entered into an agreement

with a local housing authority to receive tenant-based assistance payments under the Hous-

ing Choice Voucher Program and that has entered into a rental or lease agreement with a

tenant determined to be eligible to receive assistance under the Housing Choice Voucher

[3]

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

Program.

(3) “Local housing authority” means a housing authority that has entered into a contract

with the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development of the United States pursuant to

which the housing authority is authorized to make tenant-based assistance payments to

landlords within a designated county or area of operation under the Housing Choice Voucher

Program.

(4) “Tenant” means an individual or a family who is determined to be eligible to receive

tenant-based assistance payments under the Housing Choice Voucher Program and who has

entered into a rental or lease agreement with a landlord.

SECTION 3. (1) The Housing and Community Services Department shall develop and im-

plement the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program for the purpose of providing fi-

nancial assistance to landlords to mitigate damages caused by tenants as a result of

occupancy under the Housing Choice Voucher Program.

(2) Landlords that are eligible for assistance under the Housing Choice Landlord Guar-

antee Program must obtain a judgment against the tenant in either the small claims de-

partment of a circuit court or a circuit court for the county in which the property is located.

Assistance is limited to reimbursement for only those amounts in the judgment that are

related to property damage, unpaid rent or other damages:

(a) Caused as a result of the tenant’s occupancy under the Housing Choice Voucher

Program;

(b) That exceed normal wear and tear; and

(c) That are in excess of $500 but not more than $5,000 per tenancy.

(3) A landlord must submit a claim for assistance to the department within one year of

obtaining a judgment against a tenant pursuant to subsection (2) of this section.

(4) The department may contract with a public or private provider for the administration

of the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program. The department is not subject to the

provisions of ORS chapter 279A or 279B in awarding a contract under the provisions of this

subsection. The department shall establish by rule procedures for inviting proposals and

awarding contracts under this subsection.

(5) The department shall adopt rules to implement the provisions of this section, includ-

ing but not limited to prescribing additional qualifications and requirements that must be

met by landlords and the form of application that must be submitted to the department to

receive assistance under the program.

SECTION 4. (1) When a landlord is determined to be eligible to receive assistance under

sections 2 to 6 of this 2013 Act, the Housing and Community Services Department shall enter

into a reasonable repayment agreement with the responsible tenant that provides for repay-

ment by the tenant to the department of the full or a partial amount of the assistance paid

to the landlord.

(2)(a) Consistent with the requirements of federal law, all local housing authorities that

participate in the Housing Choice Voucher Program shall, upon written notice from the de-

partment that a tenant has failed to repay the amount required under subsection (1) of this

section, be prohibited from approving a dwelling unit for the responsible tenant, and may not

enter into a contract with a landlord that provides for occupancy of the landlord’s dwelling

unit by that tenant at any future time, regardless of the area of operation of the local

housing authority wherein the dwelling unit that sustained the damages was located.

[4]

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

(b) Notwithstanding paragraph (a) of this subsection, this subsection does not apply when

the tenant has made or is making a good faith effort to comply with the repayment agree-

ment.

(3) The department shall, in accordance with ORS chapter 183, provide an opportunity for

the tenant to contest the department’s determination that the tenant has failed to repay

amounts due under a repayment agreement or that the tenant has not made or is not mak-

ing a good faith effort to comply with the repayment agreement. The department shall serve

a notice of noncompliance upon the tenant in accordance with ORS 183.415 that states:

(a) The amount remaining unpaid by the tenant under the repayment agreement; and

(b) That the department may prohibit all local housing authorities, regardless of the area

of operation of the local housing authority wherein the dwelling unit that sustained the

damages was located, from approving a dwelling unit for the tenant in the future and from

entering into a contract with a landlord that provides for the tenant’s occupancy of the

landlord’s dwelling unit by that tenant at any future time.

(4) The department shall waive the requirements of this section for good cause as set

forth in rules adopted by the department.

SECTION 5. (1) There is created within the State Treasury, separate and distinct from

the General Fund, the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program Fund. Interest earned

by the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program Fund shall be credited to the fund.

(2) Moneys in the Housing Choice Landlord Guarantee Program Fund shall consist of:

(a) Amounts donated to the fund;

(b) Amounts appropriated or otherwise transferred to the fund by the Legislative As-

sembly;

(c) Investment earnings received on moneys in the fund; and

(d) Other amounts deposited in the fund from any source.

(3) Moneys in the fund are continuously appropriated to the Housing and Community

Services Department to carry out the provisions of sections 2 to 6 of this 2013 Act.

(4) The department may use moneys in the fund to pay the administrative costs associ-

ated with the fund and with processing applications, making payments to landlords and ad-

ministering repayment agreements under sections 2 to 6 of this 2013 Act.

SECTION 6. (1) Local housing authorities shall report annually to the Housing and

Community Services Department regarding information required to be provided to the Sec-

retary of Housing and Urban Development regarding each local housing authority’s partic-

ipation in the Housing Choice Voucher Program.

(2) Local housing authorities shall annually review internal procedures and processes so

as to coordinate the length of the rental and lease terms with market standards for the

purpose of achieving the maximum use and benefit in the best interests of tenants and

landlords from tenant-based assistance payments under the Housing Choice Voucher Pro-

gram.

(3) Consistent with federal law, local housing authorities shall facilitate participation of

landlords in the Housing Choice Voucher Program by:

(a) Ensuring timely inspection of dwelling units and prompt processing of tenant appli-

cations and tenant-based assistance payments to landlords;

(b) Establishing leases with terms that match the lease length that is standard and cus-

tomary for the dwelling units involved;

[5]

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

(c) Assisting tenants and landlords with service referrals; and

(d) Establishing a process that allows landlords to provide regular input to local housing

authorities.

(4)(a) There is created the Statewide Housing Choice Advisory Committee to be appointed

by the Director of the Housing and Community Services Department. The director shall have

discretion to determine the number of committee members and the duration of membership.

The committee membership must be geographically representative of all regions of this state

and shall include an equal number of representatives for each of the following:

(A) Local housing authorities and their representatives;

(B) Landlords of single and multiple dwelling units and their advocates; and

(C) Tenants and their advocates.

(b) The committee shall:

(A) Advise the department with respect to matters of interest and concern regarding the

Housing Choice Voucher Program;

(B) Discuss and share best practices for maximizing participation by landlords and ten-

ants in the Housing Choice Voucher Program; and

(C) Develop strategies and outcome measures for gauging the effectiveness of the Hous-

ing Choice Voucher Program.

(c) The committee shall prepare and submit a report to the committees of the Legislative

Assembly that have authority over the subject area of housing on the date of the convening

of each regular session of the Legislative Assembly regarding participation in and the effec-

tiveness of the Housing Choice Voucher Program in this state.

SECTION 7. (1) The Housing and Community Services Department shall establish and

administer the Stable Rental Housing Program to provide rental assistance to persons re-

quiring assistance to achieve or maintain housing stability.

(2) Subject to the approval of the State Housing Council, the department shall make

grants from the Stable Rental Housing Account created in section 8 of this 2013 Act to or-

ganizations as defined in ORS 458.610 for purposes of providing:

(a) Rental assistance to persons of low income and very low income, as those terms are

defined in ORS 458.610, who are also identified as being at risk of experiencing homelessness

or who require rental assistance to maintain housing stability.

(b) Financial assistance with expenses found to support housing stability, including but

not limited to application fees, security deposits, move-in expenses, past-due rent, utility

payments, transportation expenses, essential furnishings and any other expenses as pre-

scribed by the department by rule.

(c) Support services to assist persons of low income and very low income who are at risk

of experiencing homelessness or who require rental assistance to maintain housing stability,

and the administrative costs of providing the services, to access housing for the purpose of

achieving or maintaining housing stability.

(3) The department shall, in consultation with and subject to the approval of the State

Housing Council, adopt rules for determining the eligibility of organizations to receive grants

under this section that must, at a minimum, include the requirement that the organization

demonstrate it has the capacity to deliver the assistance and services proposed by the or-

ganization and to measure and report on outcomes related to homelessness and housing

stability.

[6]

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

(4) The department may contract with a public or private provider for the administration

of the Stable Rental Housing Program under this section. The department is not subject to

the provisions of ORS chapter 279A or 279B in awarding a contract under the provisions of

this subsection. The department shall establish by rule procedures for inviting proposals and

awarding contracts under this subsection.

(5) The department shall adopt rules to implement the provisions of this section.

SECTION 8. (1) There is created within the State Treasury, separate and distinct from

the General Fund, the Stable Rental Housing Account. Interest earned by the Stable Rental

Housing Account shall be credited to the account.

(2) Moneys in the Stable Rental Housing Account shall consist of:

(a) Amounts donated to the account;

(b) Amounts appropriated or otherwise transferred to the account by the Legislative

Assembly;

(c) Investment earnings received on moneys in the account; and

(d) Other amounts deposited in the account from any source.

(3) Moneys in the account are continuously appropriated to the Housing and Community

Services Department to develop and implement the Stable Rental Housing Program under

section 7 of this 2013 Act.

(4) The department may use moneys in the account to pay the administrative costs as-

sociated with the account and with making grants under section 7 of this 2013 Act.

SECTION 9. The Housing and Community Services Department shall prepare and submit

a report, after review and approval by the State Housing Council, regarding the status and

outcomes of the Stable Rental Housing Program established under section 7 of this 2013 Act

to the committees of the Legislative Assembly that have authority over the subject area of

housing on the date of the convening of the 2015 regular session of the Legislative Assembly.

SECTION 10. ORS 456.561 is amended to read:

456.561. (1) The Housing and Community Services Department may effect loans, grants and other

funding awards to accomplish department housing programs, subject to any requirement under this

section for review and approval by the State Housing Council of proposals for loans, grants or other

funding awards.

(2) The department shall submit a loan, grant or other funding award proposal arising under

ORS 456.515 to 456.725 [programs] and section 7 of this 2013 Act to the council for review if the

proposal is for:

(a) A housing loan on property that has a purchase price in excess of an applicable threshold

property purchase price established by rule under ORS 456.555 (9); [or]

(b) A housing grant or other housing funding award in excess of an applicable threshold amount

established by rule under ORS 456.555 (10); or

(c) A grant made pursuant to the Stable Rental Housing Program established under

section 7 of this 2013 Act.

(3) The council shall review each loan, grant or other funding award proposal submitted by the

department under this section and approve or disapprove the loan, grant or other funding award

proposal.

(4) Council review of loan, grant or other funding award proposals under this section shall be

held at a public hearing of the council. The council meeting notice required by ORS 192.640 shall

include notice of the loan, grant or other funding award proposal review, the names of the appli-

[7]

A-Eng. HB 2639

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

cants and the subject of the loan, grant or funding award proposal. The council shall provide notice

of a loan, grant or other funding award proposal review to the loan, grant or other funding award

applicant not less than five days before the review hearing.

SECTION 11. The Housing and Community Services Department and State Housing

Council shall cooperate with and assist local housing authorities as defined in section 2 of

this 2013 Act to obtain federal approval, renewal of an existing waiver of federal require-

ments or a new waiver of federal requirements, as necessary to make the use and distrib-

ution of federal rent subsidy and assistance payments under 42 U.S.C. 1437f as efficient and

beneficial as possible to increase the supply of decent, safe, sanitary and affordable housing

for persons of low income and very low income in this state.

SECTION 12. Sections 2 to 8 and 11 of this 2013 Act are added to and made a part of ORS

chapter 456.

SECTION 13. In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriation, there is appro-

priated to the Housing and Community Services Department, for the biennium beginning July

1, 2013, out of the General Fund, the amount of $ , which may be expended for pur-

poses of carrying out the provisions of sections 2 to 6 of this 2013 Act.

SECTION 14. In addition to and not in lieu of any other appropriation, there is appro-

priated to the Housing and Community Services Department, for the biennium beginning July

1, 2013, out of the General Fund, the amount of $ , which may be expended for pur-

poses of carrying out the provisions of sections 7 and 8 of this 2013 Act.

SECTION 15. Sections 2 to 9 and 11 of this 2013 Act and the amendments to ORS 456.561

and 659A.421 by sections 1 and 10 of this 2013 Act become operative on July 1, 2014.

[8]