We are talking about all kinds of housing.

People across the nation and especially here in Oregon understand the dire need for housing. We’re talking housing of all kinds: affordable, the new “missing middle” housing, housing for seniors, multigenerational housing, starter homes, and so much more. As the pressure mounts and housing prices increase, officials on every level of government are looking for pressure release valves. 

Oregon’s state economist recently testified before state lawmakers on the dire need for more housing: the state needs to build 29,500 units annually to meet the demands. Oregon currently is not doing enough to meet that demand. 

The lack of housing doesn’t just affect the number of houseless folks on the street or how much folks are paying for their housing-- it has far reaching ramifications. Primarily, without more opportunities for people to own their homes our cities, counties, and state governments are left far short of the money they need to support infrastructure and many other vital services that rely on property taxes. In a society where the greatest opportunity for generational wealth creation is home ownership, everyone should be incentivized to own their own homes. 

As we create more rental housing, apartments and houses alike, we’re making housing for folks, yes, but at what cost? The cost is our schools and city services are impacted heartily. Renters don’t pay property taxes (and nor should they!) but instead of allowing more and more investors to build more and more rental properties, governments should be incentivizing the opportunity to buy. 

While the housing crisis worsens, local municipalities and now most recently, the State of Oregon have come up with new ideas on how to get relief from the dire housing situation we’re in. Some of them are supporting tiny homes on wheels (THOWs) or a new “Moderate Income Revolving Loan program” to give more interest-free money to developers to build the homes. 

While a spaghetti on the wall approach is what it takes, one single approach won’t address the multi-faceted problems with housing. Additionally, we must address these problems intersectionally to truly reflect everything that goes into addressing the issue. 

For example, the new Moderate Income Revolving Loan program, while good for getting housing built, the property taxes from the houses built with this money will go back to the State of Oregon for the fund, get it-- revolving. Notably,the money will not go back to the local governments or anyone else who are now going to have to handle increased burden on the electrical grid, water and sewer infrastructure, and schools. And to boot, many localities have approved Multi Unit Property Tax Exemption (MUPTE) plans to encourage building. This means local governments and school districts will be left holding the bag, and the State of Oregon is clawing back that money. Why can’t we claw back some of the profits the developers are making on our taxpayer investments? Why do they get to keep all of the profits and use taxpayer money to get them across the finish line, ultimately at the cost of our communities in the long run? 

Additionally, to make this housing “work” there has to be increased investment in the infrastructure that will service these new homes: water, sewer, electrical, and internet access just to name a few. In many portions of the state, the electrical grid is referred to as “non-servicable” meaning it's so old it cannot be updated or repaired. It has to be replaced. Where is the funding for that? A new house means nothing if we can’t handle any more draw on the grid. 

When it comes to water and sewer, very few cities in Oregon have capacity to take on any new burden to the system. If investments are not made into our wastewater system, cities are left again holding the bag and are unable to allow more homes to be built. 

When it comes to Tiny Homes On Wheels, or THOWs, it's a great way to increase density but again, at what cost? So far, the City of Portland is leading the way on this policy and it has proven effective at getting some folks into shelter who couldn't otherwise make it work. However, there is direly limited information and tracking on this. We don’t know how many THOWs are in Portland city limits. And, when a home puts in a THOW, let’s say, in their backyard, property taxes are not adjusted to reflect the increased burden on the infrastructure. 

Theoretically, and maybe this is happening now and we have no way of knowing, someone can have multiple families living in THOWs on the same property with a commensurate burden on city infrastructure and schools, with no increase in the support they're giving to the local infrastructure. While this is technically a solution, it does not address major problems in our system and perpetuates existing funding issues for our communities. 

Housing policy should be rooted in symbiotic relationships and equity. Housing doesn’t have to be the extractive process that it is: we can provide housing that is safe and affordable. We just can’t continue to perpetuate solutions that don’t inherently address the systemic issues. We can’t continue modes of operation that leave one person holding the bag. We can all contribute to our communities. And frankly, we must if we are to make it out of the hole we’ve dug for ourselves. 

We didn’t get here overnight, but it will take innovative solutions and new approaches. Approaches that aren’t rooted in perpetuating the system that got us here. Or solutions that rely on government funding that may never come. Community based and community driven solutions are the future. Top down decisions leave communities high and dry with worsened conditions for everyone.