Oregon housing costs rise to $540,000 per unit as 1997 law shields financial details
A 1997 public records exemption prevents the disclosure of itemised expenses and contractor profits for low-income housing projects, limiting scrutiny of a $1.4 billion state allocation.
Oregon has allocated an unprecedented $1.4 billion to low-income housing developers over the past five years, with the cost of developing each subsidised apartment nearly doubling to $540,000. Despite this significant expenditure and a growing homeless population, detailed financial records remain largely inaccessible to the public. Dozens of additional projects are currently lined up for an extra $850 million in state funding, with federal tax credits expected to provide further support.
The opacity of these funds stems from a 1997 state law exemption approved by the Oregon Legislature. At the time, the state housing agency had a staff and budget one-fifth the size of its current operation. Former deputy director Lynn Schoessler argued during a public hearing that disclosing financial records might reveal whether a corporation was "ripe for takeover or a buyout," leading lawmakers to almost unanimously agree to shield the documents.
Under the current exemption, Oregon Housing and Community Services redacts itemised expenses, including construction material costs, contractor profits, and fees paid to lawyers and brokers. A spokesperson for the agency stated that while they know the cost per unit, square foot, and bedroom for each development, this data is not subject to disclosure. In one instance, the agency redacted a list of languages spoken by potential tenants and explanations of financial risks for three Portland apartment projects, although the local housing authority, Home Forward, later released these details without redaction.
Critics argue that this secrecy hinders the ability to analyse spending efficiency. Jason Ward, an economist at the Rand Corp., noted that cost information about subsidised housing is typically public in 17 states, with New Jersey being the only other state to deny such data. Ward said that when costs rise and outcomes do not improve, there is a strong public case for opening these records to scrutiny by taxpayers and policymakers.
In contrast, neighbouring states have released similar data without hindering development. In Washington state, officials have repeatedly shared financial information with developers and the media, with one official noting that developers are aware the information is public and it has not been an issue. In California, where the Los Angeles Times revealed in 2020 that some units cost over $1 million, Governor Gavin Newsom signed legislation in July to slash development fees. The Portland area’s regional government also publishes costs for projects funded by a local bond, showing some units have reached $900,000 apiece.
The state housing agency’s director, Andrea Bell, said in an emailed statement that she is committed to transparency and expects her agency to be accountable to the public. However, she stated that the agency takes seriously its responsibility to comply with the exemption in Oregon records law. Bell added that the agency is assessing ways to proactively share construction costs so they are more readily available. In the meantime, the agency charged ProPublica $130 for the cost of collecting and redacting documents, denying a fee waiver request on the grounds that preserving public resources serves the general public interest.
