Elected-in-charge: Dan Ryan
Bureau or Office Director: Shannon Callahan
We are tracking three reports and six recommendations
The audits assessed short-term rental regulation, the housing bond, and urban renewal in the Lents neighborhood. We reported in 2020 that Housing implemented our recommendation to provide specific information about the underlying rationale for housing bond decisions. The Bureau implemented one recommendation, is in the process of implementing four recommendations, and has not implemented one.
Highlight from Last Year
We recommended that Housing obtain short-term rental data from booking agents or from other publicly available sources, develop a process to monitor the market, and evaluate the effects of short-term rentals on housing. The Bureau has made progress on collecting the data it needs to measure the effects of short-term rentals on the housing market.
To Do
We recommended that the Bureau include housing bond ballot measure commitments in its project selection criteria for future projects and report on service to those priority communities. Housing had not solicited any new projects during our initial follow up period, but Bureau management said future solicitations and reporting will explicitly include all communities identified in the ballot measure.
Short-Term Rental Regulation: Enforcement is lax and effect on housing is unknown
Report published August 8, 2018 | Follow-up report | Contact Alexandra Fercak
Our 2018 audit of Portland's short-term rental regulation found that only about 22 percent of units were registered, and the effect on housing availability and affordability was unknown. We made recommendations to improve data collection and enforcement and monitor the effect of short-term rentals on the housing market. In 2019 the City reported that it reached a data-sharing and registration agreement with a key rental agent and passed an ordinance requiring compliance from all agents. In 2020, the City made progress using publicly available rental data to enforce restrictions on hosts with multiple listings and hosts in commercial areas. However, the Bureau of Development Services was still developing software that will be used to analyze the data and enforce the rental registrations. The bureau did not prioritize enforcement during the pandemic. The Housing Bureau started reporting on short-term rental activity but still needs to work on measuring its impact on the housing market.
On this audit there were two recommendations in process.
Portland Housing Bond: Early implementation results mostly encouraging
Report published June 19, 2019| Follow-up report | Contact Martha Prinz
The City promised voters in 2016 that a $258.4 million housing bond would serve seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities. Our 2019 audit found that the Portland Housing Bureau didn't adequately include those groups in project selection criteria, but the project selection criteria it used appeared to be applied consistently. We also found that outreach aimed at getting tenants into City-owned affordable units used a targeted approach, with early data showing two completed bond projects serving diverse populations. We followed up on two outstanding recommendations the Bureau said were in process at the one-year mark. The Bureau did not encourage developers and property owners to attract seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities, but said that one project was slated to serve those populations.
On this audit there was one recommendation implemented, one in process, and one not implemented.
Lents Urban Renewal: 20 years of investment with minimal evaluation
Report published February 12, 2020 | Follow-up report | Contact: Minh Dan Vuong
Our 2020 audit found that Prosper Portland's and the Housing Bureau's investments in Lents had mixed results when compared against the City's ambitious goals. Prosper Portland had not comprehensively assessed or reported how its investments totaling more than $200 million since 2001 changed Lents.
On this audit there was one recommendation in process.
Not Implemented Recommendation Details
We recommended the Housing Bureau evaluate the effectiveness of actions to reach housing bond target populations for non-City-owned projects. This was important because the City was transitioning away from owning housing and counting on other entities to meet the bond's goals. At the time of the audit, the Bureau had not developed a plan to ensure groups the bond was intended to serve received housing. The Bureau said it planned to require potential developers and property owners to do outreach to seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities, but it did not do so. Additional documents prepared by the Bureau as projects moved along also did not include each of the populations prioritized by the bond measure. (Portland Housing Bond: Early implementation results mostly encouraging)
In Process Recommendation Details
We recommended the Housing Bureau work with Council to add measuring the effects of short-term rentals on its housing goals to City Code and regulations. Council adopted an ordinance in 2018 requiring all residential long-term rental housing units to register with the City's Revenue Division. The data will be used by Housing to establish a baseline inventory of long-term rental units. This inventory will be used to compare to inventory of short-term rentals operating in the city. Housing managers said they will use the data to inform policy and decision-making. (Short-Term Rental Regulation: Enforcement is lax and effect on housing is unknown)
We recommended the Housing Bureau obtain short-term rental data from booking agents or from other publicly available sources, monitor and report data, and evaluate effects on housing. Housing obtained short-term rental data from a company that tracks listings of various booking agents. Housing incorporated descriptive statistics from this dataset in the 2019 State of Housing report and said it will be included in the 2020 report. Housing said it will monitor changes in the long-and short-term rental markets. (Short-Term Rental Regulation: Enforcement is lax and effect on housing is unknown)
We recommended that the Housing Bureau emphasize bond ballot measure commitments and report on service to the priority communities. Initial information from the two completed projects showed they were serving seniors and people with disabilities, although those communities were not specifically targeted for help during project development. The Bureau said it plans to serve seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities in an upcoming project. (Portland Housing Bond: Early implementation results mostly encouraging)
We recommended that the Housing Bureau continue to periodically measure economic results for the goals they set, update goals as needed, and report progress to the public. Housing took steps to improve reporting, but the pandemic put some work on hold. In the past year, the bureau took some steps to meet our audit recommendation but stressed that they do not expect their programs to affect broad economic results. Prosper and Housing published a Lents Five Year Action Plan Close-Out Report and presented it to various groups before the shutdown began in 2020. (Lents Urban Renewal: 20 years of investment with minimal evaluation)
Implemented Recommendation Details
We recommended providing specific information about the underlying rationale for housing bond decisions. The Housing Bureau produced an annual report, quarterly newsletters, and a press release to inform the public and other stakeholders of bond activities. The Bureau's project descriptions on the housing bond website make the rationale for each project clearer than we found in our 2019 audit. The Bureau also developed new reporting templates to be used in quarterly reporting to its Bond Oversight Committee. (Portland Housing Bond: Early implementation results mostly encouraging)
Data Notes
At the end of every audit report, we issue a series of recommendations intended to make programs work even better. This report includes the status of Bureau recommendations since 2018, which was the beginning of our new follow-up process. We prepared it with a few audiences in mind:
- City Council can use it to identify bureaus that may need additional resources or support in order to implement recommendations.
- Bureau directors can use it to assess bureau performance and to determine if any changes in policy or procedure are necessary.
- Bureau management and staff can use it to track recommendation status across audits to develop work plans and priorities.
- General public can use it to monitor the status of recommendations related to topics of interest and to compare performance across bureaus.
This report includes recommendation status as of December 31, 2021.
Translated reports
Reports from this year and most of 2021 are available in four languages: Spanish, Vietnamese, Chinese, and Russian. We are translating new reports as they’re released, but older reports may not be available in a language other than English. If you would like to request a translated version of a report, please contact Leslie Chaires.
Links
- Short-Term Rental Regulation: Enforcement is lax and effect on housing is unknown
- Portland Housing Bond: Early implementation results mostly encouraging
- Lents Urban Renewal: 20 years of investment with minimal evaluation