For the last seven years, Oregon has been roiled to find solutions to secure additional housing. The price of new homes and rentals is steadily rising; renters have complained that the lack of adequate alternatives allows landlords to force them to pay higher rents and enter into agreements that heavily favor the landlord. Moreover, the effects of homelessness are manifest on the streets of many cities and suggest a breakdown in the social order. Housing has become a major, if not the major, political and social issue in the state for the last decade.

From the time she was House Speaker, Gov. Tina Kotek has been a driving force in responding to the so-called “housing crisis” in the form of legislation and state funding. Since 2019, Kotek has proposed, and the Oregon legislature has adopted, multiple solutions to relieve the situation of renters, to provide shelter for homeless persons and to increase the number of housing units, especially to low and moderate income Oregonians.

Let us consider each of these three areas.

Renters have seen benefits as the Legislature imposed statewide rent control, restricted the use of evictions, enacted tenant rights regarding security deposits, fees and the habitability of premises. These changes improve the situation of renters, despite concerns that they discourage construction of new rental units. The number of building permits for new multifamily units in Oregon, which range from basic to luxury housing, was about 5,000 in 2024 and 2025. These numbers are far short of the annual 36,000 new housing units the state declares as necessary. That deficit will not be filled by other forms of housing such as new single-family dwellings.

There are many reasons for these relatively low numbers, but they do show that investors are not lining up to build more units in Oregon.

Regarding homelessness, Gov. Kotek declared a housing emergency in 2023 and saw through legislation that mandated siting of homeless shelters despite local zoning restrictions and provided funding for their operation. Nevertheless, a recent federal report found that, while , approximately 27,200 people experienced homelessness in Oregon in January 2025, a 19 percent increase from the previous year and the second largest increase for any U.S. state.

Federal, state, and local funding for homelessness are likely to decrease as the numbers of homeless persons increase. This is discouraging news.

As to increasing the number of available housing units, it is here that the Oregon Legislature has been most active. Since 2019 Oregon requires that accessory dwelling units and duplexes be allowed in most urban areas and in larger cities that a suite of housing alternatives that increase density be allowed in single-family zones. It has established a statewide housing apparatus that keeps track of existing and proposed housing and allocates housing obligations on local governments to allow their fair share of the regional housing need.

These significant land use law changes were supplemented over the years by other measures designed to preempt local regulations as a means to encourage residential uses , especially those relating to low income or affordable housing. Local governments were admonished to use only “clear and objective standards” to regulate housing, to decide within certain time limits, that larger communities would provide a Housing Production Strategy to assure they were on target to meet their fair share of housing (with the state both assisting them and providing disincentives for failing to do so), allowing housing on certain commercial, public or religious land notwithstanding local zoning, requiring the use of up to 10 “adjustments” from various local zoning requirements in housing cases, encouraging use of Inclusionary Zoning” to give applicants who accommodate affordable housing increased density or other benefits, prohibiting or nullifying private covenants that would restrict certain housing, allowing “one-time” changes to urban growth boundaries and limit or eliminate local hearings or appeals in certain housing development cases. This partial list demonstrates legislative commitment to providing for housing development, a commitment that is, in terms of activity, far more detailed and extensive than that involved with landlord-tenant relations or providing shelters for the homeless.

The question is whether all this activity will produce results. Many of the land use measures are derived from changing state-local land use relationships in California, which does not have a statewide land use program comparable to Oregon’s half-century of experience with the Land Conservation and Development Commission, which has a stronger deference to local controls, and which is even more committed to overcome planning and zoning restrictions to accommodate housing. By waiting so long to do so, California’s efforts are meeting with local resistance and time consuming and expensive litigation which Oregon has largely avoided.

But what has all this activity meant for housing? While it is too early to come to a definitive conclusion, the numbers are revealing. In the last three years, Oregon has not met half of the 36,000 residential dwelling permits it projects as needed. Over half of the residential building permits issued between 2014 and 2023 were for single family housing. The state permitted 14,621 units in 2024, down 33 percent from the 2021 peak of 21,916. Multifamily permits (5-plus units) dropped by over 50 percent from 2022 to 2024. Lower birthrates, slower population increases and higher household formations as younger people strike out on their own puts a strain on housing and households get smaller (they now average 1.9). With all this housing need, the market should be building more housing. Why is this not happening?

The reasons are many, starting with interest rates as public debt and the stock market attract capital, the increased cost of materials and labor, especially after the Iran war, the lack of construction labor availability following immigration sweeps, low income levels that do not compete with other similarly-sized urban areas across the county and a state public financing system that leaves local government infrastructure dependent on bonding (requiring a public vote to raise property taxes) or systems development charges (which raise the cost of housing).

What do not appear to be reasons are litigation (LUBA has almost no urban housing cases) or local delays (there are almost no cases in which local governments have violated state laws against delays). This suggests that what is not needed is more state preemption of local land use regulations. Cities are barely keeping up as it is.

What is needed is money to deal with heavy systems development charges and subsidies to low income and affordable housing. King Canute could not command the tides and the State of Oregon cannot produce more housing by mere fiat.

Edward J. Sullivan is a retired practitioner in land use and municipal law with more than 50 years of experience in these fields. Contact him at esulliva@gmail.com.

Carrie Richter is an attorney specializing in land use and municipal law at the law firm Bateman Seidel. Contact her at 503-972-9903 or at crichter@batemanseidel.com.

The opinions, beliefs and viewpoints expressed in the preceding commentary are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions, beliefs and viewpoints of the Daily Journal of Commerce or its editors. Neither author nor the 91��Ƶ guarantees the accuracy or completeness of any information published herein.

The post Oregon housing challenges persist despite sound and fury | Opinion appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

MEXICO CITY — A fierce protest in Mexico City railing against gentrification and mass tourism was fueled by government failures and active promotion to attract “digital nomads,” according to experts, who said tension had been mounting for years.

The criticism comes after Mexican President Claudia Sheinbaum alleged that the July 4 protest derived from xenophobia, reviving a debate over an influx of Americans in the city.

Many Mexicans say they’ve been priced out of their neighborhoods — in part because of a move made by Sheinbaum in 2022, when she was the Mexico City mayor and signed an agreement with Airbnb and UNESCO to boost tourism and attract digital nomads (remote workers) despite concern over the potential impact of short-term rentals.

Last week, that came to a head. Hundreds of demonstrators, in a largely peaceful manner, marched through tourism centers of the city with signs reading (in Spanish) “Gringo: Stop stealing our home” and “Housing regulations now!”

Near the end of the march, a group of protesters turned violent, breaking the windows of storefronts and looting several businesses. One protester slammed a butter knife against the window of a restaurant where people were hiding, and another person painted “kill a gringo” on a nearby wall.

“The xenophobic displays seen at that protest have to be condemned,” Sheinbaum said on Monday. “No one should be able to say ‘any nationality get out of our country’ even over a legitimate problem like gentrification. We’ve always been open, fraternal.”

The frustrations were built upon years of mass tourism and rising rent prices in large swaths of the city. The influx of foreigners began around 2020, when Americans flooded into the Mexico City to work remotely, dodge coronavirus restrictions and take advantage of cheaper living costs.

In the years since, choice neighborhoods like Roma and Condesa, lush central areas dotted with cafes and markets, have grown increasingly populated by foreign tourists and digital nomads. Temporary housing units are increasingly being rented through companies like Airbnb that cater to tourists.

Rents and living prices have soared, and English has been increasingly common on the streets of those areas. Some groups have described the phenomenon as a sort of “neo-colonialism.”

The Mexico City Anti-Gentrification Front, one of the organizations behind the protest, stated it was “completely against” any acts of physical violence and denied that the protests were xenophobic. Instead, the organization cited failures by the local government to address the root of the problems.

“Gentrification isn’t just foreigners’ fault; it’s the fault of the government and these companies that prioritize the money foreigners bring,” the organization stated. Meanwhile “young people and the working class can’t afford to live here.”

The organization, in its list of demands, called for greater rent controls, mandates that locals have a voice in larger development projects in their area, stricter laws making it harder for landlords to throw out residents, and prioritizing Mexican renters over foreigners.

Mexico’s protest comes on the back of a wave of similar protests across Europe railing against mass tourism. Tensions in Mexico have also been compounded by wider inequalities and the Trump administration targeting Latino communities in the U.S. as it ramps up deportations.

Protesters’ cries against government failures were echoed by experts, who said that surging gentrification is a product of both a shortage of affordable housing in the city and longtime government failures to regulate the housing market.

Antonio Azuela, a lawyer and sociologist, and others said that they do see the protest as a xenophobic backlash to digital nomads arriving in the city, but anger boiled over because of lax housing laws.

“What has made this explode is lack of regulation in the market,” Azuela said.

Mexico City’s government over the course of decades has made few efforts to control development and create affordable housing.

Legislators estimated there are about 2.7 million houses and apartments in the city, but about 800,000 more are needed. New affordable housing developments have arrived at the fringes of the city, said Luis Salinas, a National Autonomous University of Mexico researcher who has studied gentrification in Mexico City for years.

Controls, meanwhile, have been marked by lack of enforcement, and companies such as Airbnb have capitalized, he said.

Today, more than 26,000 properties in Mexico City are listed on Airbnb, according to Inside Airbnb, an advocacy organization that tracks the company’s impact on residential communities through data. For comparison, there are more than 36,000 Airbnb properties in New York City and 19,000 in Barcelona, where protests have also broken out.

“The government has treated housing like it’s merchandise,” Salinas said. The government’s actions “are completely insufficient,” he added. “The federal government needs to be intervening far more nowadays.”

Airbnb said it helped contribute more than a billion dollars in “economic impact” to Mexico City last year and that spending by guests has supported 46,000 jobs in the city. “What’s needed is regulation based not on prohibitions, but on respect for rights and transparency of obligations,” it stated.

Last year, Mexico City’s government approved the most ambitious rent control law since the 1940s to moderate prices and set caps on short-term rentals to 180 nights a year, but Salinas said that enforcement of short-term rental legislation is on pause until after the 2026 FIFA World Cup.

And even then, the country’s government will have to take far greater actions to get the situation under control, Azuela said.

“This isn’t going to end by just reining in Airbnb,” he said. “They’re going to have to do a whole lot more.”

The post Mexico City protest targets gentrification, tourism appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Washington Gov. Bob Ferguson last week signed into law a bill that sets limits on rent increases, making the state among the first in the nation to provide such protection for tenants.

With the rent stabilization measure, House Bill 1217, Washington joins states like Oregon and California that have sought new ways to curb homelessness.

Bill sponsor Sen. Emily Alvarado, a West Seattle Democrat, said the measure sets common-sense guardrails on the state’s rental-housing market “so that hardworking families and older adults don’t get unchecked excessive rent increases.”

“Housing is not a luxury; it’s a basic human need,” Alvarado said at the bill signing. “And everyone in this state deserves a stable and affordable home.”

The measure caps rent increases at 7 percent plus inflation or 10 percent — whichever is lower. The restrictions include single-family homes. The rent-increase cap for manufactured homes is 5 percent. Lawmakers approved the plan on a 54-44 vote, with five Democrats joining the Republican opposition.

Ferguson praised Alvarado and the many advocates across the state who worked hard to get the bill passed. It almost didn’t happen.

The bill successfully moved through both houses, but two amendments added on the Senate floor sent it into a conference committee. Those amendments increased the cap from 7 percent to 10 percent plus inflation and exempted single-family homes. Opponents of the bill argued that developers would leave the state if it became law and said similar policies in Oregon and California added to those states’ financial burdens instead of slowing the homeless crisis.

Oregon’s rent-control bill was passed in 2019 and later updated to cap rent increases at either 7 percent plus the annual 12-month average change in the consumer price index for the U.S. West, or 10 percent — whichever is lower.

The conference committee got the cap down to 7 percent plus inflation or 10 percent — whichever is lower, and restored protection for the 38 percent of renters who live in single-family homes.

“This law is a good beginning,” Alvarado said. “It’s long overdue and it’s urgently needed. Forty percent of the people in the state of Washington are renters or manufactured homeowners and before today they had no protections over how high the rent can go, leading to pain and to devastating destabilization of families and communities.”

Ferguson also signed nine other bills to help homeowners and renters. He said when he campaigned for governor, affordable housing was the top issue voters raised, so he supports bills to help make it easier to secure housing.

“Let’s make this the session of affordable housing,” he said before signing the first measure.

The other measures included limits on certain provisions in rental agreements, notices for mobile home communities, and property tax relief for disabled veterans.

The post Washington caps rent hikes in bid to curb homelessness appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

TIGARD, Ore. (AP) — A group of low-income Oregon seniors is suing their out-of-state property management company, alleging the company deliberately misled them by renting apartments that would soon jump in price.

The class-action suit was filed in Multnomah County Circuit Court this week against Denver-based Mission Rock Residential, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported. The company manages Woodspring Apartments, a federally subsidized building in Tigard.

This January, residents of Woodspring were told that the owner would soon bring the building’s 172 units to market-rate rent.

The suit argues that when San Francisco real estate firm Hamilton Zanze bought the property five years ago, the property managers knew of the plan to raise rent. The lawsuit alleges the property management company intentionally withheld that information and continued to market the units to people as a retirement option.

Michael Fuller, the lead attorney for the plaintiffs, says a judge should consider this a form of false advertising and deem it an “unlawful trade practice.”

The suit names one plaintiff: Cheyenne, who began leasing an apartment in Woodspring in July 2020.

According to the suit, Cheyenne, whose last name is not given in the legal documents, rented the apartment with the expectation that she would be able to stay for decades.

Fuller said he’s asking a judge to issue an injunction ordering the property manager to maintain apartment rents at a rate that is affordable for older people on a fixed income.

Mission Rock did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The post Low-income seniors sue property manager over rising rent appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon has become the first state in the nation with a statewide law capping rent increases. Gov. Kate Brown signed Senate Bill 608 into law on Thursday.

The law takes immediate effect under an emergency provision. Landlords are limited to annual rent increases of 7 percent plus inflation, or about 10 percent total at recent rates.

Tenants are also protected from eviction without cause after they have been in residence for a year.

The move to enact some form of rent control was widely expected after Democrats cemented control of the Legislature this past November. For tenant advocates, Senate Bill 608 was only the first step in a slew of tenant protections they hope to see enacted.

“It is very clear that S.B. 608, while great, has a lot of room for improvement,” said Katrina Holland, executive director of the Community Alliance of Tenants. “It’s one piece of an ever-evolving puzzle that we need to solve our housing crisis.”

The law’s enactment was a landmark accomplishment for tenant advocates, who have scored a series of successes including voting out former Sen. Rod Monroe (a landlord) and elevating allied commissioners in Portland.

Professionals who work with landlords said they’re waiting for the next shoe to drop in the form of tighter rent controls and additional rules on tenant evictions.

“There’s a long history of rent control bills only going in one direction,” said Jim Lapides, vice president of the National Multifamily Housing Council, a trade group that represents landlords and multifamily brokers. “They never go the other way.”

“That’s one large fear among the industry is that this will be the first step in a tighter and tighter regulatory regime,” Lapides added.

Tenant advocates initially requested a tighter form of rent control that would allow only modest rent increases.

“This is an anti-rent-gouging bill,” Holland said.

Tenant advocates will be back for tighter rent controls, Holland said, pointing to renters on fixed incomes who can’t afford to pay more.

“Yeah, we’re going to come back and ask for lower numbers,” she said.

It remains to be seen how the law will affect the rental and multifamily sale markets on the ground. There’s some concern it could hold down values of older multifamily properties.

“Your value on a multifamily (building) is based on income,” said Lindsey Zehel, an advisor with Investors Management Group Northwest. “So if you’re not raising rents like you should, you’ve potentially really taken a bite out of your gain.”

The law could make Oregon multifamily properties less attractive to “value-add” buyers, Zehel said. Those investors often renovate buildings and raise rents before flipping them to other buyers.

The law may prompt some landlords to take whatever rent gains they can support to maintain the values of their investments, Zehel said. It may also cause landlords to more closely watch their operating costs, she said.

Some observers also noted that evicting troublesome tenants could become difficult under the law.

“Before, you could just no-cause evict and say we want you out, and you’re gone,” said Jonathan Singer, a partner at Barg Singer, a boutique commercial real estate law firm. “Now statewide, in addition to Portland, there will be a cost to that.”

The level of allowable rent increases is to be established by state officials no later than Sept. 30, according to the law.

Landlords were largely resigned to new regulations. Some industry groups remained neutral on the bill, and opposition was softened by a series of compromises, including a higher cap on rent increases than in many cities with rent control laws, and provisions such as an exception on rent increases for new tenants in buildings less than 15 years old.

“My sense is folks saw the writing on the wall with the election in 2018, not only statewide but in the city of Portland,” Singer said. “It really changed the landscape, and landlords realized that. It doesn’t mean they like this bill, or are happy with this bill.”

Gary Winkler, managing director of Keller Williams Commercial in Lake Oswego, said there were some “good compromises,” including the inclusion of an inflation index.

“It’s not the end of the world,” he said.

The bill had been pushed by Democratic leaders, including House Speaker Tina Kotek and Senate President Peter Courtney. They celebrated its passage.

“This groundbreaking tenant protection bill will make a real difference for Oregon renters,” Kotek wrote on Twitter. “Thank you to the advocates who made their voices heard and pushed our state to address the housing crisis. Today was one big step forward.”

The post Oregon rent control comes to the fore appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

After failing to advance a rent control bill into law in 2017, Oregon Democrats are optimistic a favorable political landscape will change the result in Salem this session.

With strong majorities in both chambers, House and Senate leaders are moving aggressively on a host of policy priorities.

“I think it will be an activist session,” said John DiLorenzo, a lobbyist for More Housing Now, a trade group of large-scale apartment owners.

A bill co-sponsored by Senate Majority Leader Ginny Burdick, Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson and House Speaker Tina Kotek would cap annual rent increases at 7 percent plus inflation, tied to the Consumer Price Index‘s West region. At current rates, that would limit rent hikes to about 10 percent annually.

“We want to prevent the kind of extreme rent increases we’ve seen throughout the state that lead to displacement and frequently, unfortunately, homelessness,” said Danny Moran, a spokesman for Kotek.

Senate Bill 608 would also protect tenants from eviction without cause, with some exceptions.

The stage was set for rent control by Shemia Fagan’s 2018 primary win over longtime incumbent Sen. Rod Monroe, a landlord who was widely viewed as a roadblock for tenant-protection measures. Fagan now serves as chairwoman of the Senate Housing Committee. She has indicated she intends to move quickly on SB 608.

Political groups are still studying the 2,000-plus bills that were posted to the Legislature’s website ahead of the session’s start on Tuesday. 1000 Friends of Oregon, a Portland nonprofit that runs the pro-housing group Portland For Everyone, has not taken a position on SB 608, Deputy Director Mary Kyle McCurdy said.

The bill would likely have little effect on large, institutional apartment owners, DiLorenzo said.

“If you’re a landlord who’s attentive to the market, you’re probably not going to be raising rents 10 percent,” he said.

Rents in Portland have stabilized after sharp increases in recent years. Average rents slipped 0.2 percent in January compared to a year earlier, according to Apartment List. Median rents for January were $1,120 for a one-bedroom apartment, and $1,320 for a two-bedroom. Statewide, rents fell 1.9 percent during the past year, according to Apartment List.

The rent control bill would most affect landlords who have been leasing their properties at well below market rates, DiLorenzo said, a situation he characterized as “no good deed goes unpunished.”

While some municipalities across the nation have some form of rent control, Oregon could be the first state to implement it. While setting a statewide cap, the bill would leave in place a statewide pre-emption on local rent control programs.

Economists have been broadly critical of rent control, saying such measures tend to depress housing production. Democrats said the bill would provide a level of stability, preventing only major rent spikes.

Other provisions of SB 608 include:

• extending protection from eviction to tenants who have been in place for 12 months or longer,
• limiting rent increases to one per year,
• allowing evictions after three documented violations of the rental agreement in a 12-month period, and
• allowing evictions with 90 days’ notice and payment of one month’s rent if the landlord has agreed to sell the property, if the landlord intends to demolish or convert the rental from residential use, if the landlord intends to undertake major repairs or renovations, if the landlord or a family member intends to occupy the property as a primary residence, or if the unit is unsafe or unfit for occupancy. Landlords with four or fewer units would be exempt from the requirement to pay one month’s rent.

The post Legislative proposal calls for cap on rent hikes appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

A bill that would lift Oregon’s pre-emption on local rent control, require landlords to pay relocation expenses and limit no-cause evictions had a hearing before a Senate committee last week.

In the Senate, the legislation has attracted chief sponsors Michael Dembrow, D-Portland, Sara Gelser, D-Corvallis, and Sen. Laurie Monnes Anderson, D-Gresham.

The House passed the bill, H.B. 2004, on April 4 by a 31-27 vote.

Landlords have fiercely opposed the legislation, fearing it would limit their flexibility to get rid of disruptive tenants and raise rents to fair market value.

“Oftentimes you don’t know a tenant or their entourage until they move into your property,” Alex Ianos, a Portland-area landlord, stated in written testimony. “The no-cause notice allows flexibility to rehab a property and also protect other tenants living on the property. A for-cause eviction is an extremely difficult process.”

The legislation comes on the heels of Portland’s emergency ordinance requiring landlords to pay tenants’ relocation costs. Landlords have challenged the ordinance in court; a ruling has yet to be issued.

Portland tenants have complained of steep rent hikes forcing them to leave their neighborhoods. Advocates say tenants have little protection from sudden displacement. Groups such as the Community Alliance of Tenants have become more vocal as the housing crisis has deepened.

Landlords should use the existing for-cause eviction process, CAT Executive Director Katrina Holland said in an interview.

“We cannot understand why no-cause evictions are so near and dear to someone’s heart,” she said. “If some tenant is violating the lease and bothering other tenants, there is a very clear for-cause statute in our law that allows landlords to hold someone accountable.”

One Portland tenant, Brenna Bell, recalled how she was issued a no-cause eviction in 2004 a week after giving birth to her first child.

“The first month of my daughter’s life became a time of intense stress rather than the period of peace I long imagined,” Bell wrote to legislators.

The bill would also give municipalities the ability to cap rent increases, which are unregulated at present.

The bill appears to be headed for a work session and then a floor vote, said Alison McIntosh, deputy director for policy and communications at Neighborhood Partnerships, a Portland-based nonprofit.

“That is our hope, and we’re working really hard to make that happen,” McIntosh said.

The bill’s hearing Wednesday was before the Senate Committee on Human Services. Bill sponsors were not available for comment on Friday.

The post Tenant protection bill now before state Senate appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon House Speaker Tina Kotek encountered a skeptical audience of apartment landlords and developers on Friday.

Kotek, who is sponsoring a bill that would lift the state’s pre-emption on rent control, said she wants to work together with landlords to craft a policy that works. She was the keynote speaker at HFO Investment Real Estate‘s annual roundtable luncheon held at the World Forestry Center at Washington Park.

“We are all in this together, and vilifying any side of this debate is not helpful,” she said. “I’m very open to pushback, and I’m sure my colleagues are as well.”

Pushback she got. Landlords demanded to know how rent control and tenant protections would help solve the housing affordability crisis, which they blame on inadequate housing construction.

“This is a societal problem, not just an apartment problem,” said Tom Clarey of Tandem Property Management, owner of several apartment properties in the western area of metro-Portland. “We have land-use issues. We have cost issues. We are an easy target.”

Rent control is “low-hanging fruit” for legislators, Clarey sad. He also threatened to finance a campaign against Kotek, a Portland Democrat who has served in the Legislature since 2007 and was easily re-elected in November.

“You don’t know how much money I’m going to donate to get you not elected,” Clarey said.

His remarks drew cheers from the audience.

Kotek said she wants to encourage construction to address the housing crisis in Portland and other Oregon cities. But, she said, a tough budget deficit makes it difficult for the state government to put much money toward those goals.

“If Measure 97 had passed in November, I would have more capability right now to prioritize incentives and new dollars for construction,” she said. “At this point, the pie is not big enough. But you’re absolutely right, if we want to do this, we have to push ourselves to figure out how to do it right.”

Kotek’s mention of Measure 97, which would have taxed large corporations but was rejected by voters, drew groans from the audience.

Kotek and other Democrats have proposed a package of bills to limit rent increases and provide some protections to tenants facing no-cause evictions. One bill would impose a 5 percent cap on rent increases for a year. Another would ban no-cause evictions, while a separate bill would require 90 days’ notice before a no-cause eviction could be carried out.

Apartment owners have largely done well in recent years. Rising rents and low vacancy rates have buoyed the multifamily industry. That has in turn attracted investors – sales volume in the Portland market in the fourth quarter of 2016 was nearly $1.5 billion, far outpacing recent trends, according to data gathered by ABR Winkler Investment Real Estate.

Yet pushback from renters and tenants’ rights groups has gathered steam and attracted the attention of legislators such as Kotek. Last week, tenant advocates were aghast at a 100 percent rent increase at Normandy Terrace, a Northeast Portland apartment complex.

Kotek said constituents who have contacted her said they were served eviction notices after complaining of nuisances such as mold.

“I don’t believe people are lying to me when they tell me these stories,” she said.

No-cause evictions in particular are “ripe for abuse,” Kotek said.

After the meeting, Kotek said she’s willing to talk with business interests on housing issues.

“I’m committed to hearing all sides of this story,” she said. “The landlord groups have been harder to sit down with, so this was an opportunity to hear from the landlords.”

If legislators succeed in lifting the state pre-emption on rent controls, the city of Portland will be tasked with carrying out its own policy.

Housing Director Kurt Creager said he is already thinking of how to structure a rent stabilization board in Portland.

“We’re prepared to act when we’re asked to by either the Legislature or the City Council,” he said.

The post Kotek faces off with landlords, developers appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.

Oregon Democrats think they have an answer to the housing crisis plaguing Portland and other cities. Party leaders are planning to introduce a package of legislation next year to lift a ban on rent control and provide new protections to tenants facing eviction.

The move comes amid rent increases in Portland – one of the hottest rental markets in the nation – and rising housing costs in other cities such as Bend and Eugene.

One renter being affected by the market changes is Portland resident Mary Gullickson. She grew up here, but returned from California in the spring after suffering an injury while performing her job as a set decorator for TV and film productions. Gullickson, 57, said she needs to live close to family because effects of the spinal injury often force her use a wheelchair.

“Coming back to Portland, I’ve just been aghast at what is available in Portland and the prices they’re charging,” she said. “It’s a pillage.”

Gullickson pays $1,050 a month for a 500-square-foot studio apartment in the Kenton neighborhood. After her six-month lease expired recently, her landlord – a property management company – gave her 90 days’ notice of its intent to raise the rent by $200. That would be a 19 percent increase.

“This is what’s happening in Portland,” Gullickson said. “It’s not that they need to raise the rent, but they’re out to get every dime they can.”

However, House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, and other Democrats want to combat such practices by taking legislative action during the 2017 session, which begins Feb. 1.

Policymakers can no longer ignore profit-making at the expense of vulnerable tenants, Kotek said in September remarks to the Oregon Opportunity Network.

“Many developers and property owners are excessively benefitting from this crisis,” she said. “Some will shrug and say it’s simply supply and demand. But that doesn’t make it right. And it certainly doesn’t make it good for the community of Oregonians feeling the full brunt of this crisis.”

Advocates for tenants are gearing up to support the bills.

“The ban on rent stabilization statewide has been a huge barrier for the city of Portland and surrounding areas,” said Katrina Holland, interim director of the Community Alliance of Tenants.

The Portland-metro area had a vacancy rate of 3.5 percent in spring 2016, Multifamily NW reported. A lack of vacancies, particularly for apartments below luxury price points, has driven rents higher for many Portland-area tenants.

Portland registered 8.3 percent annual rent growth for new tenants during the third quarter of 2016, according to MPF Research.

Builders in Portland are busily constructing apartments, but “the bulk of (existing vacancies) are in the luxury market,” according to Holland. The vacancy rate in the market’s middle is significantly lower, she said.

While incentives – such as a month or more of free rent – are being offered for units in several luxury apartment towers, apartments in the market’s broad middle are being snatched up.

Kotek, in an emailed statement, said she wants to invite landlords and developers to “join the conversation.”

“I want to hear their viewpoints, and even better, their solutions,” she stated.

Kotek supports a statewide moratorium on rent increases above a “reasonable percentage,” spokeswoman Lindsey O’Brien said. The details are to be determined.

“We are conducting research and consulting with economists and industry experts to determine what cap to propose,” O’Brien said. “The goal will be to provide some much-needed relief and predictability for renters, while still preserving a reasonable rate of return for landlords and property owners. If landlords aren’t price-gouging, this proposed legislation would not affect them.”

Rent control is just one of a host of housing policies that Democrats are planning to propose at the legislative level in 2017. Kotek is also working to ban no-cause evictions in the state – developing a “just cause” standard that would help stabilize communities and also be fair to landlords, O’Brien said.

Landlords are skeptical of Kotek’s move toward allowing rent control and greater tenant protections in Oregon.

“It’s election season,” said John McIsaac, a spokesman for Multifamily NW, a trade group for apartment owners.

Kotek is running for re-election, but her only opponent is Joe Rowe, a Pacific Green and Progressive candidate. No Republican candidate filed for the 44th House District seat.

Instead of rent control, government should encourage development of affordable units, McIsaac said.

“We support the development of more affordable housing,” he said. “That’s what we want to see happen, and that’s a partnership between government, developers (and) property managers across the board.”

Advocates of ending Oregon’s ban on rent control say the housing emergency is too dire to wait for construction to catch up to renter demand. In Portland, housing construction is about a year behind to meet demand, Josh Lehner, an economist with the Oregon Office of Economic Analysis, wrote in an April report.

“We certainly need to increase the number of units available to meet demand and stabilize rents in the long term, but with an estimated statewide shortage of almost 100,000 units for extremely low-income people alone, it will take years to catch up,” Kotek said in her September speech. “In the meantime, families shouldn’t see lives destroyed simply because some landlords and property owners believe the market will bear it.”

Affordable apartments are bearing the sharpest rent increases, Holland said. Rents for some units have jumped 50 percent or more.

“It’s incumbent upon us as a city to remember that while it’s important to support the market, the market is comprised of people, and there are real human needs that need to be met,” Holland said. “There’s some real collateral damage when we’re talking about waiting for the market to cool off.”

Opponents fear rent control and tenant-protection measures could lead developers to slow or stop their plans to build apartment units. Holland said such worries are overblown, because developers will want to earn revenues from their properties.

“I find it hard to believe people will avoid building because of rent protection or tenant protection,” she said.

The post As housing costs escalate, solutions are sought appeared first on Daily Journal of Commerce.