danger
Presidents Day closure

Most City of Portland offices will be closed Monday, Feb. 17, to observe Presidents Day.

information
Portland is a Sanctuary City

Find sanctuary city resources from the City of Portland's Immigrant & Refugee Program, including free legal services and state resources for reporting hate crimes, bias incidents, discrimination, and violations of Oregon's sanctuary laws.

Ombudsman’s review finds City has partly implemented recommendations to reduce harm of complaint-driven property maintenance enforcement system

Report
Blue sky and clouds over houses and trees in a neighborhood in east Portland, Oregon.
The City has taken steps to address the inequitable impacts of property maintenance enforcement, but the complaint-based system continues to harm vulnerable homeowners.
Published
In this article

Read this memo to Portland Permitting & Development Interim Bureau Director David Kuhnhausen and supplemental graphics as a PDF:

This report follows up on our 2021 report, City’s reliance on complaints for property maintenance enforcement disproportionately affects diverse and gentrifying neighborhoods.


In November 2021, the Ombudsman’s Office published a report entitled “City’s reliance on complaints for property maintenance enforcement disproportionately affects diverse and gentrifying neighborhoods.” The report examined the City’s complaint-driven system for enforcing rules about how residents should maintain their homes. It noted a consistently high rate of complaints to the Ombudsman’s Office about these issues and highlighted stakeholder concerns about a system that can result in heavy fines and burdensome liens on economically vulnerable property owners.

The report presented data demonstrating that complaint-based enforcement disproportionately affects communities of color and neighborhoods vulnerable to gentrification. It noted that many exterior maintenance, nuisance, and zoning regulations reflect subjective concepts of livability and attractiveness and that the system is rooted in the history of racial oppression. The report found that the City’s response to complaints did not worsen but also did not reduce the disparate effects of the complaint-driven system. The report also cited data suggesting that the complaint-driven system is inefficient. 

The report’s recommendations, which were directed to the Commissioner-in-Charge of Development Services, were as follows:

  1. Commit to eliminating the disparate outcomes of the complaint-driven property maintenance system as soon as practicable and with urgency; 
  2. Immediately engage with the communities that have been adversely affected by the property maintenance enforcement system to seek and act on their recommendations for: 
    1. Whether there is a role for government in the regulation owner-occupied dwellings beyond public health and safety;
    2. Equity-driven revisions to the property maintenance and condition standards for owner-occupied properties, including maintenance, nuisance, and zoning standards in Titles 29, 33, and any other relevant City Code titles;
    3. How to equitably enforce property maintenance standards for owner-occupied properties;
    4. How to equitably fund enforcement of property maintenance standards for owner-occupied properties;
  3. Assign a project manager to facilitate engagement and propose reforms to City Council and Bureau managers.

In an official response, Commissioner-in-Charge Dan Ryan and Bureau of Development Services Director Rebecca Esau agreed with the recommendations. They acknowledged the disparities and barriers created for marginalized community members through enforcement fees and liens. 

This document will refer to “the Bureau” when referring to both the Bureau of Development Services and Portland Permitting & Development (PP&D), the bureau that was created on July 1, 2024, as part of the City’s effort to streamline permitting processes. PP&D brought in staff from the Bureau of Development Services, which was phased out.

We follow up on our recommendations when they are not immediately implemented. We reached out to obtain an update after giving the Bureau a chance to make progress on the implementation of the recommendations. We spoke to Bureau managers and examined Bureau policy and program documents, as well as data from the Revenue Division, and reviewed community member complaints to our Office. 

We note that the Bureau has taken steps to address some of the harmful and inequitable impacts of the complaint-driven system for enforcing property maintenance standards. This includes a policy to de-prioritize enforcement of housing violations that are not critical to health and safety for owner-occupied properties. Some of the Bureau’s efforts to address our recommendations might have advanced further if it had not experienced budget cuts in recent years. But the Bureau has resisted making similar changes to nuisance and zoning enforcement, despite documented harm. It did not immediately engage with affected communities to obtain their input on needed reforms or designate a project manager to lead this work. And the system at its core continues to be based on complaints, which our 2021 report demonstrated is an inefficient system that undermines equity and fairness. 

We continue to hear from vulnerable homeowners who experience negative impacts of complaint-driven enforcement, including emotional stress caused by growing liens and heightened tensions with neighbors who file complaints. Examples include an elderly homeowner with a disability who was fined for violating zoning rules because of a trailer located in the driveway, where a relative with serious medical issues was living. Another elderly homeowner with a disability had a large lien on their property for having a storage container too close to the property line, among other violations. The Bureau makes use of other tools besides enforcement, but we see opportunities for this to happen more often, as well as to critically assess the underlying rules that form the basis for enforcement. 

Recent amendments to the City’s “odor code” offer a positive example of revising code to address inequitable impacts. Developed by the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability at the direction of the Commissioner-in-Charge, Carmen Rubio, and approved by City Council in November 2024, the changes came after public outcry in February 2024 when a Vietnamese restaurant shut down following repeated complaints from one individual and subsequent City enforcement. According to the amendments, the Bureau will investigate only if they receive five or more individual complaints from five or more people within 30 days. Complainants must live within 150 feet of the property line. An odor detected for less than 30 minutes is exempt from the rules and certain kinds of businesses will be exempt. 

These changes highlight the potential to tackle disparate outcomes with a sense of urgency, although they affect only a small percentage of code enforcement cases. A similar effort to rethink the relationship between complaints and enforcement of property maintenance rules at owner-occupied properties would benefit even more Portlanders.Our Office will remain engaged on these issues and develop new recommendations where appropriate for PP&D and for the Bureau of Planning and Sustainability, which writes the zoning code. 

As the City transitions to a new form of government, new leadership has an opportunity to take a fresh perspective on the City’s property maintenance standards and the balance between reactive enforcement and proactive support for economically vulnerable homeowners. 

Our assessment of the status of recommendations we made in 2021 is detailed below. 

One recommendation from the Ombudsman’s 2021 report has been partly implemented, one is in progress, and one has not been implemented

Recommendation 1: Commit to eliminating the disparate outcomes of the complaint-driven property maintenance system as soon as practicable and with urgency.

Status: Partly implemented

Icon of a clipboard with two of four items checked off.

In their response to the Ombudsman’s 2021 report, the Commissioner-in-Charge and Bureau Director stated their commitment to equitable outcomes and to dismantling systemic racism in its systems, processes and services, including the property maintenance code and systems for enforcing this code. More recently, the Bureau’s Racial Equity Implementation Plan for 2023-2025 and several policy documents recognize the past harm that enforcement, fines, and liens have caused Black homeowners and members of other historically underserved and marginalized communities.

The Bureau has made systemic changes to help reduce the harmful and inequitable impacts of complaint-driven enforcement. Some of these changes were underway before the publication of our report. They include a 2020 policy to no longer enforce violations related to certain older unpermitted work at owner-occupied properties. Another policy that came into effect in 2022 de-prioritizes enforcement in owner-occupied housing cases with less than six non-critical property maintenance violations. According to a Bureau manager, the 2022 policy has allowed the Bureau to shift resources from enforcement at owner-occupied properties to rental properties. But they have not yet analyzed the impact of that policy because the Bureau’s information management system does not easily identify whether a property is owner-occupied. In addition, the COVID pandemic caused disruption with normal case handling processes for almost two years, affecting the comparability of year-to-year data. 

The 2022 policy does not apply to nuisance cases, which account for approximately half of the Bureau’s total caseload, or to zoning violations. 

Also in 2022, the Bureau adopted an amended policy to waive enforcement fees for owner-occupied property owners who meet income criteria. A revised lien reduction review policy that came into effect the same year makes it possible to reduce liens to zero for homeowners with closed enforcement cases who are experiencing financial, medical, or other hardship. The Bureau’s Empowered Communities Program continues to work with homeowners who are Black, Indigenous, or people of color, or who have disabilities, to come into compliance after receiving violation notices. One member of the Bureau’s equity team does some proactive work with homeowners about how to comply with Code requirements.

The Bureau has also taken one-off actions to relieve the financial burden of liens for some homeowners. It partnered with the Housing Bureau in 2023 to use approximately $200,000 in grant funds focused on stabilizing homeowners in East Portland to cover 51 outstanding nuisance abatement liens for 45 low-income and BIPOC homeowners. Such liens are not eligible for reduction because the City incurs out-of-pocket costs when hiring contractors to abate nuisances. While having liens paid off was positive for the affected homeowners, this was an unplanned, one-time use of funds initially intended for other purposes. Also in 2023, the Bureau offered large reductions on older outstanding liens over $10,000 for certain types of closed compliance cases. 

However, no significant changes have been made to the standards outlined in Code that specify how property owners should maintain their properties. The Bureau continues to rely on complaints to trigger inspections for potential violations. A homeowner found in violation of code can still incur fines if the violation is not corrected, and unpaid fines can result in a lien on the property. 

The Bureau’s Neighborhood Inspections Team, which oversees implementation of the property maintenance regulations in Title 29, continues to rely on fines, penalties, and liens for much of its revenue, despite the Bureau’s efforts to obtain more General Fund budget support. 

As of June 2023, the total amount of liens on owner-occupied residential properties was approximately the same as in 2021, nearly $11 million. Our analysis of this data shows that liens tend to be larger and more numerous in ZIP codes with lower-value homes and where certain communities of color live. Specifically, areas with greater percentages of homes valued below $50,000, from $50,000 to $99,000, and from $200,000 to $300,000 were strongly associated with higher numbers of liens. Areas with greater percentages of homes valued below $50,000 and from $200,000 to $300,000 were strongly associated with larger lien amounts. Areas with greater Latinx populations were moderately associated with larger lien amounts, and areas with greater Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander populations were moderately associated with higher numbers of liens. 

This reflects the continued need to address the disparate impacts of enforcement. With more equitable enforcement, there would be no correlation between liens and home value or race or ethnicity. 

Despite the Bureau’s commitments and positive steps taken, the continued reliance on complaints as the basis for enforcement, which has been shown to adversely affect communities of color and neighborhoods vulnerable to gentrification, has not been tackled with the sense of urgency that we emphasized in this recommendation. 

Recommendation 2: Immediately engage with the communities that have been adversely affected by the property maintenance enforcement system to seek and act on their recommendations for:

a. Whether there is a role for government in the regulation of owner-occupied dwellings beyond public health and safety. 

b. Equity-driven revisions to the property maintenance and condition standards for owner-occupied properties, including maintenance, nuisance, and zoning standards in Titles 29, 33, and any other relevant City Code titles. 

c. How to equitably enforce property maintenance standards for owner-occupied properties.

d. How to equitably fund enforcement of property maintenance standards for owner-occupied properties.

Status: In progress

Hourglass icon

Efforts were not immediately undertaken to engage with affected communities to seek and act on their recommendations on the topics outlined in the recommendation. A community engagement position on the Bureau’s equity team was cut in 2023. The Bureau plans to do more robust community engagement as part of the implementation of its Racial Equity Plan. In April 2024, it began to partner with the Housing Bureau’s Rental Services Office to plan and implement community engagement, code changes, and equity-driven programs as part of its effort to shift resources from enforcement at owner-occupied properties to rental properties. This will include exploring the feasibility of designing an improved property compliance model that is less reliant on complaints.

To fully implement this recommendation, the Bureau should ensure that it follows through to conduct robust community engagement efforts with the communities that are adversely affected by enforcement of property maintenance standards for owner-occupied properties, in particular communities of color, and that it seeks their recommendations on the questions enumerated in the recommendation. 

Recommendation 3: Assign a project manager to facilitate engagement and propose reforms to City Council and Bureau managers.

Status: Not implemented 

Purple warning triangle

No Bureau staff were specifically assigned to facilitate engagement and propose reforms related to the property maintenance enforcement system. Noting the Bureau’s significant budget and staff cuts, the Bureau manager indicated that rather than assigning a project manager, the Neighborhood Inspections Team will continue to work as a team on implementing its Racial Equity Plan, including the community engagement component. The same Bureau manager has overall responsibility for the above-mentioned partnership with the Housing Bureau’s Rental Services Office to plan and implement community engagement, code changes, and equity-driven programs as part of its effort to shift resources from enforcement at owner-occupied properties to rental properties. A steering committee was formed to manage the joint work. However, not assigning a dedicated project manager may increase the risk that day-to-day coordination will be insufficient to ensure meaningful engagement that leads to proposals for reforms.


Supplemental graphics: Liens tend to be larger and more numerous in ZIP codes with lower-value homes and where certain communities of color live

Figure 1. There is a very strong relationship between the percentage of homes valued less than $50,000 and the number of liens 

Scatterplot showing percentage of homes vs. Number of liens.
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: The number of liens is per 100,000 owner-occupied households per ZIP code.

Figure 2. There is a strong relationship between the percentage of homes valued from $50,000 to $100,000 and the number of liens 

Scatterplot showing Percentage of homes vs. Number of liens
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: The number of liens is per 100,000 owner-occupied households per ZIP code.

Figure 3. There is a strong relationship between the percentage of homes valued from $200,000 to $300,000 and the number of liens 

Scatterplot showing Percentage of homes vs. Number of liens
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: The number of liens is per 100,000 owner-occupied households per ZIP code.

Figure 4. There is a very strong relationship between the percentage of homes valued less than $50,000 and the total amount of liens 

Scatterplot showing Percentage of homes vs. Amount of liens
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: The amount of liens is per 100 owner-occupied households per ZIP code.

Figure 5. There is a strong relationship between the percentage of homes valued between $200,000 and $300,000 and the total amount of liens 

Scatterplot showing Percentage of homes vs. Amount of liens
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: The amount of liens is per 100 owner-occupied households per ZIP code.

Figure 6. Lien amounts tend to be larger in areas with greater Latinx populations

Two maps show that certain neighborhoods of Portland had a higher value of liens.  These often overlapped with neighborhoods with higher Latinx resident populations. Read details at Supplemental Graphics page linked below.
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: ZIP codes do not precisely match City boundaries. ZIP codes largely outside of city boundaries that had no liens are excluded.

Figure 7. Numbers of liens tend to be higher in areas with greater Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander populations

Maps show that the number of liens was higher in some neighborhoods in Portland, and these often corresponded with neighborhoods with higher populations of Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander residents. Read details at Supplemental Graphics page linked below.
Source: Ombudsman’s Office analysis of City lien data and American Community Survey 5-year estimates (2022). Note: ZIP codes do not precisely match City boundaries. ZIP codes largely outside of City boundaries that had no liens and Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander populations less than 10 were excluded.

Find details of the data used to make these two sets of maps at our supplemental graphics details page.


Back to top