The Portland metropolitan region has about 75,000 households below the poverty line and eligible for entry into these projects. African-American and Latino households are over-represented in this number. However, the initiative promises to build 3,900 units, only 5% of those eligible.

The “no” side is asking about the inequity of helping 5% of the eligible population at the expense of the 95% of the poor renting at market rates.

We also question whether Metro, which is ultimately a transportation and land use agency with little experience in housing production or housing finance, is doing all it can to boost housing production. We’re currently building 10% less housing than we did in 1990-2007. Greater housing production will moderate rents and prices for all eligible households, not just the lucky few.

Part of the reason is Metro’s rigid urban growth boundary, which has grown only 10% in the last 40 years while the population has grown by 79%. That inaction has led to a slow-down in the single family market. Metro is expected to approve four small UGB expansions this year, but it represents less than one year of housing production. They should make more expansions annually to meet demand.

The other is the City of Portland’s inclusionary zoning regulations, which have shut down the multi-family market. Metro could use its oversight powers to determine that those regulations are contrary to the regional land use plan.

Finally, Metro is financing these 3,900 units with 30-year bonds, which means about 130 units per year will be produced. That’s a drop in the bucket in a region that builds about 12,000 housing units per year. Hence, this proposal will have a minimal effect on the overall housing market.

Gerard Mildner
Portland State University