Assessment of the Impediments to Fair Housing and Fair Housing Plan Strategies Eugene and Springfield, Oregon April 13, 2010 2 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 3 Table of Contents I. Introduction ............................................................................................................................ 5 II. Fair Housing Law ..................................................................................................................... 5 III. Community and Demographics ................................................................................................ 9 IV. Fair Housing Complaints ....................................................................................................... 26 V. Identification of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice................................................................ 33 Impediments to Fair Housing ...................................................................................................... 35 4 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 5 Fair Housing Plan I. Introduction Eugene and Springfield, neighboring cities, have a long history of cooperation as they work together to address increasing the supply of low and moderate income housing and furthering fair housing choices. The two jurisdictions formed a consortium to receive federal HOME funds. Elected officials from both jurisdictions serve on the Intergovernmental Housing Policy Board. The joint Consolidated Plan and this Fair Housing Plan are other examples of the jurisdictions working together. The federal Fair Housing Act requires the Secretary of HUD “to administer the Department’s housing and community development programs in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing.” The Housing and Community Development Act of 1974 and the National Affordable Housing Act, as amended, govern the administration of CDBG and HOME funding and require participating jurisdictions to certify that they will affirmatively further fair housing. In order to uphold its commitment to affirmatively further fair housing and meet its federal obligation to engage in fair housing planning, Eugene and Springfield have jointly produced this document which examines laws, demographics related to population, housing and housing choice. Eugene and Springfield conducted an “Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice” that identifies road blocks affecting fair housing choice. II. Fair Housing Law Laws have been adopted at the federal, state and local level to provide protection for people seeking housing. Federal Law The Civil Rights Act of 1866 states, “All Citizens of the United States shall have the same right in every State and Territory, as is enjoyed by White citizens thereof, to inherit, purchase, lease, sell, hold and convey real and personal property.” Between 1866 and 1968 the law was interpreted only to prohibit racial discrimination in housing by government or public action, such as restrictive zoning and enforcement of restrictive covenants. In 1968, the US Supreme Court ruled that the Act prohibited “all racial discrimination, private as well as public, in the sale or rental of property.” Also, in 1968, specific fair housing legislation was enacted in Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968. The private housing market in the USA was, for the first time, subject to federal laws prohibiting discrimination. Title VIII prohibits discrimination in the provision of housing based on race, color, religion, sex or national origin. These population groups are known as “protected classes”. Title VII, as amended, is now known as the Fair Housing Act. The law also requires that people with disabilities be allowed to 6 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan make “reasonable modifications” to housing at their own expense; that “reasonable accommodations” be made in rules, policies, practices, and services to allow people with disabilities access to and use of a dwelling, and; that housing intended for occupancy on or after March 13, 1991 be constructed so that it can be made accessible. Under the Fair Housing Act, the following actions are illegal if based on an individual’s race, color, religion, national origin, sex, familial status, or disability. • Refusing to rent or sell a dwelling after a bona fide offer has been made • Refusing to negotiate for the sale or rental of a dwelling • Setting different terms, condition, or privileges related to the sale or rental of a dwelling or to use the facilities or services provided in conjunction with a dwelling • Saying a dwelling is unavailable for rent or sale when it is available • Making a profit by convincing owners to sell or rent properties based on fear of declining property values because members of a protected class are moving into a neighborhood (an action known as “blockbusting”) • Advertising the availability of a dwelling I a way that implies a preference for a certain type of buyer or renter, or places a limitation on the use of a dwelling for certain groups • Denying access to or membership in any multiple listing serve, real estate brokers association or other organization in the business of selling or renting housing, or setting different terms or condition for membership in such organizations • Refusing to make a mortgage loan • Refusing to give information about loans • Setting different terms or conditions for loans • Discriminating in the appraisal of property • Refusing to purchase a loan or setting different terms for the purchase of a loan • Interfering in any way with a person’s exercise of their fair housing rights The Fair Housing Act exempts coverage from three types of housing: • Religious organizations or private clubs, which own or operate housing (for other than commercial purposes) may give preference to members of the organization in the sale, rental, or occupancy of that dwelling • Dwellings whose owner does not own more than three single-family homes and does not use the services of a Realtor or broker in renting or selling the home. This does not exclude the owner from compliance with the laws pertaining to discriminatory advertising or retaliation. • Housing for people aged 62 or older and housing for people aged 55 and older is exempt from the prohibition against discrimination based on familial status. This housing is still subject to the Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 7 prohibitions against discrimination based on membership in other protected classes and in regard to advertising and must meet specific criteria to be so designated. When there are complaints, the Fair Housing Act establishes a process for a HUD administrative law judge to review complaints in cases that cannot be resolved by an agreement between the parties and sets financial penalties where a charge of discrimination is substantiated. Cases may be closed when the complainant cannot be located, refuses to cooperate or withdraws their complaint with our without resolution Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 659A of the Oregon Revised Statutes prohibits discrimination in the sale or rental of housing based on race, color, religion, natural origin, sex (gender), disability, familial status, marital status, sources of income or sexual orientation. The Oregon Family Fairness Act (2007) grants domestic partners the same benefits as married persons. The Oregon Equality Act (2007) prohibits discrimination based on sexual preference or gender identity. Local Ordinances The City of Eugene added ethnicity and gender Identity to its list of protected classes. The City of Springfield has not adopted legislation that adds any additional protected classes. 8 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 9 III. Community and Demographics Eugene and Springfield are located in central Lane County, in western Oregon. Eugene is the second largest city in Oregon with an estimated 157,100 residents. Springfield is the state’s 9th largest city with an estimated 58,085 residents. Eugene and Springfield are separated by Interstate 5, one of the main transportation corridors on the west coast. The communities are approximately an hour’s drive from the Pacific Ocean. Located in the southern tip of the Willamette Valley, Eugene and Springfield are situated near two major rivers, the Willamette River which runs through the community and the McKenzie River which flows along Springfield’s northern border and then joins the Willamette north of Eugene. Figure 1 Eugene-Springfield Metropolitan Area 2009 10 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Population Population data shows a 1.4% growth rate between 2000 and 2009. The combined population was 157,352 in 2000 and in 2009 is estimated at 215,185. Eugene and Springfield have experienced a 12.8% increase in population since 2000. The combined cities female-to-male ratio is about equal, with 51% females and 49% males. Table 1, Population Trends, 1970-2009 – Cities of Eugene and Springfield Eugene Springfield Eugene - Springfield % Change 1970 79,028 26,874 105,902 1980 105,664 41,621 147,285 39.1% 1990 112,669 44,683 157,352 6.8% 2000 137,893 52,864 190,757 21.2% 2009 157,100 58,085 215,185 12.8% Data sources: US Census Bureau; Portland State University 2008, 2009 Certified Population Estimates; 1970-2008 Data compiled by Lane Council of Governments Age distribution for Eugene and Springfield shows that based on 2007 estimates, 84% of the population is over age 15, 12.6% of the population is over age 65, and over 5% is under five years of age. The populace over age 65 has increased numerically since 1990 but is decreasing in its percentage of the total population. The majority of population is within the 25 to 65 age group. Table 2, Comparison of Age Distribution, 2000 to 2007 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield 2000 2007 2000-2007 % of Total Population % of Total Population % Change Under 5 years 11,694 6.1% 11,206 5.4% -4.2% 5 to 14 years 23,485 12.3% 22,330 10.8% -4.9% 15 to 24 years 37,028 19.4% 37,972 18.4% 2.5% 25 to 44 years 55,856 29.3% 59,386 28.8% 6.3% 45 to 64 years 40,614 21.3% 49,104 23.8% 20.9% 65 to 84 years 18,555 9.7% 20,426 9.9% 10.1% 85 years and over 3,525 1.8% 5,542 2.7% 57.2% Total Population 190,757 100% 205,966 100% Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, DP-1; ACS 200-2007, General Demographic characteristics Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 11 Racial and Ethnic Composition While the majority of the area’s population is white (86.1%) there is a consistent trend that this has been decreasing as a percent of the total residents in the community. The Latino population has doubled since 1990, and increased nearly 42% between 2000 and 2007. The white, non-Latino population comprises 83.5 % of the total combined Eugene and Springfield population. People who reported two or more races, versus one single race, represent 3% of the community. Table 3 Racial and Ethnic Composition, 2000 to 2007 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield Eugene-Springfield 2000 2007 Total Population As a % Total Population Total Population As a % Total Population White 168,271 88.3% 177,399 86.1% White, Non-hispanic identity 164,003 86.1% 171,899 83.5% Hispanic 10,326 5.4% 14,650 7.1% Hispanic Ethnicity and/or Racial Minority* 26,525 13.9% 34,067 16.5% White, hispanic identity 4,268 2.2% 5,500 2.7% Black or African American 1,899 1.0% 2,557 1.2% American Indian and Alaska Native 1,843 1.0% 3,708 1.8% Asian 5,074 2.7% 8,620 4.2% Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander 509 0.3% 278 0.1% Some other race 4,778 2.5% 6,773 3.3% Two or more races 8,154 4.3% 6,631 3.2% Total Population 190,528 100.0% 205,966 100.0% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000, Summary File 3, Table P7; ACS, 2005-2007, Table B0200 ; *This data field represents people identifying on the Census 2000 as being of a racial minority and/or Hispanic/Latino Ethnicity 12 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Immigrant and Migrant Populations Historically the Eugene Springfield area has had an overwhelmingly large white population. Since the 1970’s the minority population has slowly increased as a percentage. Some of this has been due to the growth and diversity of the University of Oregon. Some has been due to an increase in Asian populations. There has also been a significant increase in Latino populations throughout country, and particularly along the west coast. With a larger number of minorities becoming local residents, the issues concerning immigrants and migration are of growing significance, especially in regard to fair housing. Discrimination against foreign-born populations can be under-reported for many reasons, including fear of deportation and language barriers. These populations may face discrimination in housing opportunity because of language barriers and cultural biases. It is notable that In Eugene, 6.6% of the 2000 population was foreign-born; compared to 5.1% in 1990. The population increased to 7.7% in 2006. In Springfield the number went from 2.7% in 1990 to 4.9% in 2000. There isn’t comparable data available in Springfield for 2006. The majority of the population immigrating to the Eugene, Springfield area was born in Latin America and Asia. Table 4a Foreign Born Population as a Percent of Total Population, 1970-2006, Cities of Eugene and Springfield Table 4b Total Foreign Born Population, 1970-2006, Cities of Eugene and Springfield Eugene Springfield Eugene Springfield 1970 3.7 2.0 1970 2,838 535.0 1980 5.4 2.3 1980 5,714 964.0 1990 5.1 2.7 1990 5,747 1,195.0 2000 6.6 4.9 2000 9,131 2,566.0 2006 7.9 N/A 2006 11,528 N/A Data source: HUD SOCDS Data source: HUD SOCDS Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 13 The following map illustrates concentrations of populations born outside the United States, There are significant concentrations of non-English speakers and foreign-born in close proximity to the University of Oregon and in other locations where there is known to be student housing. There is also a concentration in West Eugene when, at the time the data was collected, there was a large Korean-owned manufacturing plant that included Korean’s in its workforce. Table 4c. , World Region Of Birth Of Foreign Born, 2006-2008 - City Of Eugene Total Population 153,769 As A % Of Total Population Foreign-Born Population, Excluding Population Born At Sea 11,770 7.7% Europe 1,799 1.2% Asia 5,492 3.6% Africa 296 0.2% Oceania 155 0.1% Latin America 3,164 2.1% Northern America 864 0.6% Data Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 ACS, Social Profile 14 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 15 Poverty is a barrier to housing choice. 24% of residents who are foreign born are in poverty in Eugene Springfield. This is higher than those born in the state (20%), those born in another state (18%) and Natives born outside the United States (15%) Table 5 Place of Birth and Poverty Status, 2006-2008 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield Cities of Eugene and Springfield % of Total Population for Whom Poverty Status is Determined Total Population for Whom Poverty Status is Determined 201,669 Below 100 percent of the poverty level (14% of total) 38,838 19.3% 100 to 149 percent of the poverty level 20,414 10.1% At or above 150 percent of the poverty level 142,417 70.6% Born in state of residence: 87,781 43.5% Below 100 percent of the poverty level (20% of born in state) 17,676 8.8% 100 to 149 percent of the poverty level 9,252 4.6% At or above 150 percent of the poverty level 60,853 30.2% Born in other state in the United States: 97,064 48.1% Below 100 percent of the poverty level ((18% of born in another state) 17,378 8.6% 100 to 149 percent of the poverty level 9,303 4.6% At or above 150 percent of the poverty level 70,383 34.9% Native; born outside the United States: 2,589 1.3% Below 100 percent of the poverty level (15% of Natives born outside USA) 386 0.2% 100 to 149 percent of the poverty level 189 0.1% At or above 150 percent of the poverty level 2,014 1.0% Foreign born: 14,235 7.1% Below 100 percent of the poverty level (24% of foreign born) 3,398 1.7% 100 to 149 percent of the poverty level 1,670 0.8% At or above 150 percent of the poverty level 9,167 4.5% Data source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 ACS, Table B6012 16 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 17 Cultural Hubs The community has areas that stand out distinctly as “cultural hubs.” One long-standing hub is the University of Oregon campus area, which has a dynamic and diverse population brought together for academic pursuits. Another is the Blair Boulevard commercial area, which serves the Trainsong, Whiteaker, and northeast tip of the West Eugene neighborhoods. The central area of Springfield is a third hub, primarily for those who speak Spanish. Within these neighborhoods, there is a large concentration of racial and ethnic minorities. As a result these hubs include restaurants, grocery stores, lending institutions and other businesses that support the growing Latino/minority population. Areas of Racial and Ethnic Concentration An ‘area of racial concentration’ is defined as an area where the percentage of persons of racial minority and/or Latino ethnicity is at least ten percentage points higher than the percentage of persons in the category as a whole. The cities of Eugene and Springfield had a combined Latino and minority population of 16.5% in 2007. However, at the time of writing this Plan, Census Bureau data for 2007 was not available for mapping purposes, so the Latino and minority percentage of 13.9% from 2000 was used. This percentage defined the threshold at which a disproportionate concentration existed and was calculated at 23.9%. There were numerous Census 2000 blocks and block groups in the cities of Eugene and Springfield where the percentage of Latinos and minorities was greater than 23.9%, as depicted on the Map. In 2000, there were 122 Census blocks where over 23.9% of the population identified with a racial minority and/or Latino ethnicity, and of those, eight Census blocks had populations with over 50% Latinos and minorities. There were seven Census block groups identified as having racial minority and Latino population concentrations. Language Spanish is the second most common language in Eugene and Springfield. The greatest concentrations are found in Eugene’s Whiteaker and Trainsong Neighborhoods and in central Springfield areas. In the area as a whole, over 5% of the community speaks a form of Spanish, and 28% of this population does not speak English well or at all. There is also evidence that the Spanish-speaking population is dispersed throughout the community. This may suggest that while language is a barrier to housing, it is also overcome by many. This increase in the population who do not speak English results in a language barrier and an impediment to fair housing. 18 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 19 Minority Homeownership The number of minorities and Latinos who own their own homes is substantially lower than the majority population. The white population in Eugene and Springfield has a closer balance between the numbers of renters and homeowners, with 53% owning their own homes. 35.2 % of Latinos and 39.7% of racial minorities own homes. The need to promote minority and Latino homeownership is important. Obstacles faced by the Latino and minority populations may include lower incomes, cultural, and language barriers. These obstacles inhibit access to successful homeownership. Table 6 Tenure by Race and Latino Ethnicity, 2006-2008 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield    Renter  As a % of Housing  Units  Owner  As a % of Housing  Units  Total  Housing  Units  Latino  3,131  64.8%  1,700  35.2%  4,831  Minority Race  5,175  60.3%  3,414  39.7%  8,589  Black* 433  62.9%  255  37.1%  688  American Indian, Alaska      Native  603  47.7%  662  52.3%  1,265  Asian*  1,774  62.8%  1,053  37.2%  2,827  Native Hawaiian   N/A     N/A     N/A  Other Race  1,005  60.5%  657  39.5%  1,662  Two or More Races 1,360  63.3%  787  36.7%  2,147  White, Non‐Latino  34,700  46.3%  40,271  53.7%  74,971  White 36,348 46.9%  41,113 53.1%  77,461 Data source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 ACS, Table B25003 A- I; * Data only available for Eugene; N/A: data not available for both cities 20 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 21 Population with Disabilities The Census Bureau defines a disability as a condition that lasts over six months. The Census Bureau classifies disabilities into a number of sub-categories including sensory, physical, mental, self-care, go- outside-home, and employment disabilities. People with a disability may have limited housing choices because of their disability, because they need assistance, or because their ability to earn an adequate income is limited by their disability. Table 7 U.S. Census Bureau Classifications Of Disabilities Sensory Disability Severe vision or hearing loss, deafness, blindness. Physical Disability Limited physical activity, such as walking, climbing stairs, lifting, or reaching. Mental Disability Trouble learning, remembering, and concentrating Self-Care Disability Difficulty performing certain activities around home, such as dressing, bathing, or moving around. Go-Outside-Home Disability Difficulty leaving home alone to perform activities, such as grocery shopping or doctor visits. This question was reported for people over age 16. Employment Disability Disability that makes it hard to perform at a job or business. This question was reported for people over age 16. In Eugene and Springfield, 31,708 people, nearly 17% of the population, has a disability. Table 8. Population with a Disability, 2005-2007 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield Total Population Age 5 and over Population with a Disability Population with a disability as a % of Total Population Age 5 and over 5 to 15 years 24,604 2,035 8.3% 16 to 64 years 143,016 20,155 14.1% 65 years and over 22,311 9,518 42.7% Total Population (5 years and over) 189,931 31,708 16.7% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2005/07, Select Social Characteristics Disability Status is of the civilian, non-institutionalized population 22 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Employment impacts on housing The lack of an adequate income is a barrier to housing choice. The Eugene and Springfield area is currently experiencing a spike in unemployment (Table 9). In 2009 unemployment reached double digits. Many employed people are experiencing reduced hours or are in a job where they must adjust to earning a lower wage. Table 9 Unemployment Rates, 2000 to 2009 - Lane County Jan Apr Jul Oct Annual 2000 5.1 5.1 5.6 5.5 5.4 2001 5.8 6.5 6.7 7.6 6.8 2002 7.6 7.3 6.9 6.9 7.1 2003 7.2 8.8 8.4 8.0 8.0 2004 7.6 7.4 7.3 7.1 7.3 2005 6.3 6.4 6.1 5.8 6.2 2006 5.5 5.5 5.6 5.2 5.4 2007 5.3 5.2 5.1 5.2 5.2 2008 5.2 5.3 6.5 8.1 6.6 2009 10.7 13.4 12.2 12.0 NA Data source: State of Oregon Employment Department, www.qualityinfo.org; Seasonally Adjusted Data Rental vacancy rates have remained low (estimated at 3-4%) particularly among the less expensive portion of the housing market. The result is households with reduced income are struggling to retain or obtain housing. Households with children typically have greater expenses and, due to family size and potential illegal practices, experience greater challenges in securing affordable rental housing. 35.6% of the labor force has children under age 17 (Table 10). Table 10 Labor Force Statistics, 2000 to 2009 - Lane County Total Labor Force 111,567 Number of Females Age 16 and Over in Labor Force 53,087 Percent of Females age 16 and Over in Labor Force 47.6% Number of People in Labor force with Children under age 6 13,208 Percent of Labor Force with Children under age 6 11.8% Number of People in Labor force with Children age 6 to 17 Years 25,390 Percent of Labor Force with children age 6 to 17 22.8% Number of People in Labor force with Children under age 17 38,598 Percent of Labor Force with children under age 17 34.6% Data source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2006-2008 ACS Economic Profiles Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 23 Travel to Work Transportation to employment can limit housing choice. Driving is the most common method of travel to work. For those who cannot drive or do not have cars, Eugene and Springfield are served by the Lane Transit District is one of the top-rated bus transit systems in the nation. All LTD busses are wheelchair accessible and also are fitted with racks for bicycles. The bicycle racks enable someone to ride to and from a bus stop if they live too far away. The 2007 American Community Survey provides data for Travel to Work. Table 11 Travel to Work, 2007 – Cities of Eugene and Springfield Transportation to Work Eugene Population Percent Springfield Population Percent Workers age 16 and over 73,576 100 35,317 100 Drove Alone 49,194 66.7 20,137 79.5 Carpooled 5,370 7.3 2,581 10.2 Used Public Transit 3,993 5.4 491 2 Other means or worked from home 15,019 20.1 2108 8.3 Source: LCOG; American Community Survey, 2008 Income The following table is adjusted for 2006 dollars. It illustrates consistent increases in gross rents over time and greater increases in the value of homes. It also illustrates that median incomes are not keeping up with housing costs. This limits housing choice. Table 12 Median Income and Housing Costs, 1970 to 2007 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield (adjusted for 2006 dollars for rentals and 2005 dollars for ownership) City of Eugene City of Springfield Median Income Median Housing Measures Median Income Median Housing Measures Year Household Family Gross Rent Owner's Value Household Family Gross Rent Owner's Value 1970 $29,306 $54,910 $603 $93,401 $40,534 $46,555 $582 $66,835 1980 $41,539 $56,554 $609 $164,412 $41,245 $46,946 $636 $122,085 1990 $41,245 $55,526 $656 $112,291 $35,657 $41,346 $652 $77,894 2000 $43,382 $58,722 $727 $177,951 $39,970 $46,466 $681 $137,561 2007 $40,207 $56,555 $733 220,600 $37,395 $44,083 $650 159,900 1970-2007 % Change 37.2% 3.0% 21.6% 136.2% -7.7% -5.3% 11.7% 139.2% Data: HUD; U.S. Census Bureau ACS; Gross Rent: 1970-2000: HUD SOCDS; Gross Rent: 2005/07: Census ACS; HUD SOCDS Note: Household gross rent calculations exclude single-family rental units on 10 acres or more of land. Household owner's value calculations exclude housing units on 10 acres or more of land, housing units with a business or medical office on premises, housing units in multifamily buildings (i.e. condos), and mobile homes. Single family condo houses, however, are included only for 1990; For data 1970-2000: Household Gross Rent in 2006 dollars, Household Owners Value in 2005 dollars, Median Family Income in 2006 dollars and Median Household income in 2006 dollars 24 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Table 13 Household Types, 2007, and Rate of Change, 2000-2007 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield The median household income for Eugene is $40,207 and for Springfield $37,395. As shown in Table 15, the median incomes for the non-white populations are typically lower and indicate an imbalance in the community. The minority and Latino populations in Eugene have high poverty rates (Table 16), even though the median household incomes are so variable. Table 14 Median Household Income, 2000 and 2007- Cities of Eugene and Springfield City of Eugene City of Springfield Median Household Income $40,207 $37,395 Data source: U.S. Census ACS 2005-2007 Table 15 Median Household Income by Race and Ethnicity 2000 and 2007- Cities of Eugene and Springfield Eugene Springfield 2000 2005/07 2000 2005/07 American Indian and Alaska Native Alone $30,699 $26,385 $40,368 $44,722 Asian $12,010 $35,689 $26,477 $39,777 Black or African American $26,875 $45,337 $33,542 $0 Hispanic /Latino $26,961 $24,022 $30,787 $23,834 Native Hawaiian and other Pacific Islander $27,083 $0 $33,250 $0 Other Race $26,449 $25,000 $29,458 $25,086 Two or more races $25,804 $34,141 $25,278 $0 White Alone $37,197 $40,947 $33,427 $37,387 White, not Latino $37,195 $41,213 $33,423 $37,810 Source: Census 2000, Summary File 3, Table P152 Source: American Community Survey,, 2005/07, 3-Year Estimates, Table 19013 Eugene Springfield Cities of Eugene and Springfield 2007 % Change 2000-2007 2007 % Change 2000-2007 2007 % Change 2000-2007 Family Households 32,453 3.7% 13,915 3.2% 46,368 3.6% Non-Family 30,033 12.0% 8,438 19.9% 38,471 13.7% Female householder, no husband present 5,898 4.1% 3,066 4.2% 8,964 4.1% Single Person, Living Alone 21,089 14.4% 6,646 27.7% 27,735 17.4% Householder 65 Years and older, living alone* 5,409 -0.7% 1,878 17.4% 7,287 3.4% Occupied Households 62,486 7.5% 22,353 9.0% 84,839 7.9% Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau: Census 2000 DP1; ACS 2005-2007 Select Social Characteristics; *Census 2000& 2005/07 identifies the Householder as living alone for age 65+; HUD definition Elderly households: 1 or 2 person household, either person 62 years old or older. Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 25 The date in Table 16 illustrates that minority populations are more likely to be in poverty. Table 16 Poverty Rates, Populations & Subgroups 2007 - Cities of Eugene and Springfield Eugene Springfield Total Population* As a % of Total Population* Below Poverty Level % in Poverty Total Population* As a % of Total Population* Below Poverty Level % in Poverty White 121,071 85.5% 21,760 18.0% 47,993 87.6% 8,468 17.6% Black or African American 2,014 1.4% 346 17.2% -** -** -** -** American Indian and Alaska Native 2,115 1.5% 1,015 48.0% 1,398 2.6% 90 6.4% Asian 7,262 5.1% 2,052 28.3% -** -** -** -** Native Hawaiian -** -** -** -** -** -** -** -** Other Race 4,006 2.8% 1,436 35.8% 2,604 4.8% 634 24.3% Two or More Races 4,995 3.5% 1,250 25.0% 1,453 2.7% 397 27.3% White Alone, Not Latino 117,576 83.0% 20,941 17.8% 46,218 84.3% 7,773 16.8% Latino 9,279 6.6% 3,078 33.2% 4,815 8.8% 1,380 28.7% Total Population 141,588 100.0% 27,859 19.7% 54,800 100.0% 10,137 18.5% *Total population is the population for whom poverty status is determined. This is the population that is included in poverty status counts. Not included are populations in dorms, group quarters, and other group living arrangements; ** Sample size too small; Data sources: U.S. Census Bureau, ACS 2005-07, Table C17020, B3002 26 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan IV. Fair Housing Complaints The fair housing data used in this analysis was obtained from a variety of local, Federal, and State sources along with information from the Fair Housing Council of Oregon’s hotline. Disabilities, race, ethnicity, and familial status were the primary basis for the complaints filed officially and received on the fair housing hotline. Bureau of Labor and Industries and HUD The State of Oregon Bureau of Labor and Industries (BOLI) Civil Rights Division handles fair housing discrimination complaints. Since 2008 BOLI has had a cooperative agreement with HUD to accept complaints. In 2008-09 11 complaints were filed from Eugene and Springfield. One involved race, three involved national origin and seven involved disabilities. Status: Two complaints were settled. Six were dismissed because there was no substantial evidence and two are still open. Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO) Eugene and Springfield contract with the Fair Housing Council of Oregon (FHCO), which provides a fair housing hotline service. The hotline provides information and referrals, and receives complaints about housing and possible violations of fair housing rights. The hotline is a method for the Cities to work with residents facing potential housing discrimination, even if a formal complaint is not filed. The Fair Housing Council provides periodic fair housing trainings which are open to government staff, nonprofits and the public. The most recent occurred at the Eugene Public Library in February 2010. The FHCO works as an advocacy and educational organization for fair housing rights in Oregon. When they receive complaints on possible housing discrimination they investigate to determine validity. After the investigation, the FHCO refers the case to the appropriate agency for enforcement, if necessary. FHCO uses several different methods in this determination of the validity of discrimination claims. If it is possible, the FHCO will “test” the claim. This involves sending someone to the property who matches the characteristics of the complainant, except for the characteristic being tested for. This method of testing allows the FHCO to see if discrimination is present. Another method of testing is “audit tests.” These are used when a property has received several complaints, even if there are no present claims. If the claim is one that cannot be tested, such as accommodation for populations with disabilities, then the FHCO might refer the complaint to the appropriate agency. Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 27 City of Eugene Human Rights Commission (HRC) The HRC works to preserve and protect the civil rights of Eugene’s residents. They provide an additional avenue to hear concerns related to discrimination. The FHCO reported that in Eugene in 2008-2009 they received 33 complaints related to Fair Housing issues. These were primarily related to accommodation for people with disabilities. Most were resolved with information to the tenant or the landlord. Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) Analysis In 1975, Congress enacted the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (HMDA) and the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC) provides this information. The data contains information from local financial institutions to track lending patterns which may indicate if housing discrimination is taking place. Loans are described as “originated” and “not originated” in this analysis. A loan that is originated has been approved and closed. A loan that is not originated may have faced several reasons for not closing. These can include denial, the application file was incomplete and closed, the loan application was accepted, but not approved, or the loan was withdrawn. The information for Eugene and Springfield was obtained in two different ways from the FFEIC website and is mapped below. The data at the census tract level are inconclusive in determining if discrimination is present in institutional lending practices. The geographical distribution of loans does not translate to discrimination because of the different variables involved in loan approval. The data does illustrate that there are fewer applications for loans in areas that where over 20% of the population are minorities. Even in the census tracts with higher concentrations of minorities, the concentrations are not high. Additionally, while there are higher concentrations of minorities in some locations, most of the housing in those locations are renter occupied and lower-income. These variables contribute to a lower loan application rate due to lack of homeowner housing and lower income levels. 28 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Table 17 Mortgage Loan Detail by Census Tract, 2008 – Eugene –Springfield MSA Data table sorted based on if a tract had over 15% minority population, a median income between 80% and 120% of the MSA, and over 30% of loans not originated. Highlighted tracts met all three conditions. Census 2000 Tracts % Minority Med Income as % of MSA Median Total Applications Total Not Originated Total Originated % Not Originated 000200 7 121 64 34 30 53.1% 000404 10 103 28 14 14 50.0% 001001 5 123 33 17 16 51.5% 001002 8 122 38 19 19 50.0% 001101 11 107 174 97 77 55.7% 001700 6 113 73 34 39 46.6% 001801 8 129 202 85 117 42.1% 001803 7 103 48 20 28 41.7% 001804 6 122 54 24 30 44.4% 001902 14 78 58 22 36 37.9% 001903 12 75 42 16 26 38.1% 001904 10 82 51 25 26 49.0% 002001 6 112 39 16 23 41.0% 002002 11 94 50 19 31 38.0% 002101 13 76 25 9 16 36.0% 002102 17 68 98 59 39 60.2% 002201 7 114 50 25 25 50.0% 002202 9 145 112 41 71 36.6% 002300 9 112 140 61 79 43.6% 002401 10 144 61 16 45 26.2% 002403 9 127 72 28 44 38.9% 002404 8 108 68 36 32 52.9% 002501 14 99 99 44 55 44.4% 002502 10 94 271 125 146 46.1% 002600 12 91 82 30 52 36.6% 002700 14 98 58 21 37 36.2% 002800 13 91 49 20 29 40.8% 002901 15 125 58 21 37 36.2% 002902 9 104 51 16 35 31.4% 003000 11 149 54 20 34 37.0% 003101 11 125 208 142 66 68.3% 003102 17 113 68 27 41 39.7% 003201 14 67 45 26 19 57.8% 003202 17 100 43 18 25 41.9% 003300 16 84 91 44 47 48.4% 003400 15 72 74 26 48 35.1% 003500 9 109 91 40 51 44.0% 003600 11 100 45 21 24 46.7% 003700 20 98 8 5 3 62.5% 003800 25 49 7 4 3 57.1% Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 29 Table 17 Mortgage Loan Detail by Census Tract, 2008 – Eugene –Springfield MSA Data table sorted based on if a tract had over 15% minority population, a median income between 80% and 120% of the MSA, and over 30% of loans not originated. Highlighted tracts met all three conditions. Census 2000 Tracts % Minority Med Income as % of MSA Median Total Applications Total Not Originated Total Originated % Not Originated 003900 14 60 11 6 5 54.5% 004000 16 69 13 6 7 46.2% 004100 13 86 38 14 24 36.8% 004200 26 50 24 13 11 54.2% 004300 13 85 125 62 63 49.6% 004401 18 87 79 32 47 40.5% 004402 11 169 135 42 93 31.1% 004403 24 61 80 31 49 38.8% 004500 16 89 80 30 50 37.5% 004600 10 109 43 17 26 39.5% 004700 8 118 40 18 22 45.0% 004800 18 60 32 17 15 53.1% 004900 9 164 40 10 30 25.0% 005000 11 113 74 25 49 33.8% 005100 12 95 41 12 29 29.3% 005200 9 118 24 11 13 45.8% 005300 11 135 40 16 24 40.0% 005400 10 140 74 27 47 36.5% Data source: FFEIC HMDA Aggregate Table 4-2, Report Date: 6/19/2009 30 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Loan Type by Race and Income Level Analysis of loans based on race shows that white and combined white/minority populations have a higher loan origination rate compared to minorities alone. The loans that were originated for the white and white/minority population were on average 70% of loan applications, while minority population loan completion and non-origination percentages fluctuate. Table 16 Conventional Home-Purchase Loans, 1-4 Family and Manufactured Homes, 2008 Number of Applications Received Number of Applications Originated Percent of Loans Originated Ethnicity, Gender and Income Latino 128 51 39.8% Not Latino 3295 1783 54.1% Joint (Latino/ Not Latino) 53 26 49.1% Ethnicity Not Available 305 149 48.9% Minority Status White Non-Latino 3083 1682 54.6% Others, Including Latino 359 163 45.4% Data source: FFEIC HMDA Aggregate Table 4-2, Report Date: 6/19/2009 Table 17, Conventional Home-Purchase Loans, 1-4 Family and Manufactured Homes, 2008 Number of Applications Received Number of Applications Originated Percent of Loans Originated American Indian, Alaska Native 12 3 25.0% Asian 70 32 45.7% African American, Black 16 4 25.0% Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander 10 1 10.0% White 3276 1758 53.7% Two or More Minority Races 2 2 100.0% Joint, White/Minority Race 83 51 61.4% Race Not available 312 158 50.6% TOTAL 3781 2009 53.1% Data source: FFEIC HMDA Aggregate Table 4-2, Report Date: 6/19/2009 The conclusion in the analysis of the HMDA data for Eugene and Springfield is that there are no patterns in lending by institutions which translate into discrimination. However, the indication that minority populations have lower loan non-origination rate combined with the concentrations of minorities in areas Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 31 where there are few, if any, loan applications, indicates a need in the community for the identification of and removal of the barriers to homeownership for minorities. Table 18 Income Of Loan Applicants , 2008 Less Than 50% Of Msa/Md Median 193 72 37.3% 50-79% Of Msa/Md Median 675 308 45.6% 80-99% Of Msa/Md Median 496 266 53.6% 100-119% Of Msa/Md Median 457 258 56.5% 120% Or More Of Msa/Md Median 1897 1080 56.9% Income Not Available 6 63 25 39.7% Data source: FFEIC HMDA Aggregate Table 4-2, Report Date: 6/19/2009 32 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 33 V. Identification of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice Impediments to Fair Housing Choice are defined as any actions, omissions, or decisions taken because of race, color, religion, sex, disability, familial status, or national origin that have an effect of restricting housing choice or the availability of housing choice. The Analysis reviews laws, regulations, administrative procedures and practices. It assesses how laws affect the location, availability and accessibility of housing while considering conditions, both public and private, affecting fair housing choice for all protected classes within the jurisdiction. Eugene and Springfield recognize that there are many obstacles that prevent residents from attaining or retaining housing. The costs of housing and the incentives to develop, maintain or rehabilitate housing are affected by both public and private sector policies. Public sector policies may include taxation, land use regulations, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and urban growth boundaries. Private sector practices may include the tightening of lending standards and practices, housing discrimination and other issues that directly or indirectly affect an individual’s housing choice. 34 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Conduct of the Analysis This analysis builds on the Impediments Analysis that was completed by each jurisdiction, separately in 2005. It considers information, strategies, and goals contained in the 2010 Consolidated Plan. Staff from Eugene and Springfield reviewed documents and information from the following sources and agencies to inform this analysis. • Fair Housing Council of Oregon • Lane Council of Governments • Eugene Human Rights Commission • US Census Bureau • HUD • Consolidated Plan 2010 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 35 Impediments to Fair Housing Impediment: There is an inadequate supply of affordable housing. Nearly 50% of renter households and over 25% of owner households are cost-burdened by their housing (they spend over 30% of their income for housing). This is due to a combination of factors including inadequate income, a shortage of subsidized housing, and an array of factors that add to housing costs including taxes, utility costs, interest rates, special fees and assessments. Strategy: Continue to aggressively pursue additions to the supply of affordable housing through the use of government subsidies and incentives. Continue to leverage available resources to the extent feasible in order to create additional affordable housing units. Continue to work with governmental and community partners to identify job creation opportunities and other programs that provide income support. Impediment: Suitable sites for future low-income housing construction are difficult to find, are expensive to acquire, and some may have constraints that limit development opportunities. The availability of affordably developable land has diminished within the Eugene and Springfield Urban Growth Boundaries as the population has grown. Eugene is currently in the midst of land assessments to determine if an adequate supply of buildable residential land is available for the next 20 years. Springfield has recently completed an assessment and found that land is available. The availability of existing land for building housing presents several obstacles. These are defined in four criteria: (1) Is the land serviced? (2) Is the land available? (3) Is the land properly zoned? (4) Is the land affordable? Some of the land use obstacles experienced in multi-family developments include: • Infill developments experience challenges that add cost and difficulty when required to meet the same standards as suburban style “green-field” developments. These include the higher cost of construction when staging on a constrained site, the expense of vertical construction, constraints from setbacks and existing neighboring buildings. In Eugene’s bicycle parking requirements can be difficult to meet on smaller sites. There is also the loss of economy of scale that is often available with larger developments. • Parking standards typically require up to one parking space for each unit. This requirement may inhibit the development of housing due to the larger land requirement. This can be a major obstacle in the redevelopment of existing land. Some options to reduce parking for public- benefit housing in Eugene were eliminated during the 2001 code revisions. In 2009 they were partially recovered in land use code amendments, particularly for elderly and subsidized housing. 36 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan Strategies: As land supply policies are debated, consider the impacts on cost, which could impact Fair Housing choice. In Eugene, continue the City’s landbank program, which acquires sites for future low-income housing. Identify Land Use Code provisions that may have a negative impact on the development of low-income housing as some problems may be identified in the course of reviewing land use actions. Build on the efforts of Eugene’s proposals for Opportunity Siting, which is intended encourage quality in-fill housing. Work towards modifying infrastructures standards or authorizing the use of new technologies to significantly reduce the cost of housing. Consider expedited or “fast track” permitting and approvals for all affordable housing projects. In Springfield consider explicit parking requirement waivers for affordable housing developments, fast track permitting for affordable housing developments and as-of-right density bonuses. Additional proposals include reducing or waiving system development charges, and exemptions from property taxes. Impediment: There is a limited awareness of fair housing policies in the broader community There will consistently be a need to increase the level of knowledge in the community regarding fair housing rights due to the growth of protected class populations in the Eugene and Springfield area. Strategy: Increase fair housing education and expand outreach to protected classes More fair housing education and resources in the community will increase awareness. This strategy includes providing information that will target landlords, protected classes, involve agencies that serve these protected classes, and encourage greater citizen participation through better education and advertising. The following examples would aid in this regional educational effort. ƒ Supply bilingual and alternative-format fair housing materials in locations where there are higher concentrations of protected classes. ƒ Promote fair housing policies and resources through public service announcements and advertisements (radio, TV, newspaper, and bus advertisements). ƒ Provide educational materials to all landlords through the annual Eugene billing that is tied to the Eugene Rental Housing Code fee ƒ Supply community education materials to protected class organizations. ƒ Supply protected class service organizations with fair housing information so they can disseminate it to their target population. ƒ Schedule educational meetings for property managers on fair housing rights. Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan 37 Impediment: There are market conditions and housing industry practices that increase housing costs or decrease housing choice. The local rental vacancy rate for Eugene and Springfield has been low for over 20 years and is currently estimated to be between 3% and 4%. [This estimate is based on interviews in February 2010 with several large property management companies and an appraisal firm]. Many existing vacancies are found among the most expensive units and also reflect the inevitable vacancies that occur as housing transitions from one tenant to the next. Regionally, new construction of multi-family housing has primarily occurred in the neighborhoods close to the University of Oregon because they are able to command higher rental rates, making the construction economically feasible. Because tenants compete for housing, landlords often charge application fees and costly move-in charges, such as expensive deposits, in addition to first and last month rents. Over 40% of renters are low-income. Many landlords now use credit reports as part of their screening. Fair housing complaint data has historically indicated circumstances where housing was denied due to past history, regardless of credit rehabilitation. Another practice that limits choice includes either industry standards or codes which place occupancy restrictions on extended or large families. Populations with disabilities also encounter resistance to accommodation. Strategies: Use federal ARRA, Homeless Prevention and Rapid Re-housing (HPRP) funds and help homeless or at-risk households with move in costs. Funds for this type of assistance are also allocated through private donations, the City of Eugene, and the federal Emergency Food and Shelter Fund. Work with community agencies, such as St. Vincent dePaul’s Renter Rehabilitation Program and NEDCO’s ABC’s of Home Buying Program, to train renters to repair their credit and learn how to succeed and stabilize in housing. Eugene adopted an incentive program (MUPTE) which offers a ten-year property tax exemption for new construction of multi-family housing within a targeted geographic area. The boundary was expanded in 2008 to include some traditionally low-income neighborhoods in a mass-transit oriented area. Eugene also offers a 20 year Low-income Housing Tax Exemption (LITE). Impediment: There are cultural differences and language barriers which inhibit access to fair housing. Cultural differences and language barriers are impediments to fair housing. Even though language itself is not a protected class, it parallels with national origin, ethnicity, and/or race in housing discrimination. As Eugene and Springfield’s minority populations continue to grow and become a more significant percentage of the community, increasing cultural differences and language barriers become in impediment to Fair Housing. Additionally, large families and households with low-incomes are 38 Eugene-Springfield 2010 Fair Housing Plan challenged to find suitable affordable housing. In some cultures, including some Asian and Latino, large households are common and it is not uncommon for more than one family to live together. Strategy: Strengthen communication with organizations that provide services to racial and ethnic minority populations. Cultural and language barriers in this community may be most evident in the Latino population because of its increasing size, but there are also other populations, including Asian and African-American, who may face discrimination based on ethnicity, race, or their national origin. There are resources in the community that can be utilized as a platform to begin a dialogue with ethnic and racial minorities. Examples include the NAACP, CentroLatino Americano, and the Eugene Human Rights and Equity office. Outreach can provide the foundation for strategies to address this impediment. A step in responding to this impediment is to recognize that when adequate communication is absent due to language barriers, discrimination can easily arise intentionally or unintentionally. Therefore, organizations that are involved with populations that speak languages other than English are encouraged to seek translation services related to tenant and landlord communication. Communicating with organizations that advocate for protected classes can result in people learning about fair housing rights, and provides government staff with a valuable network within the community to help in gauging the extent of fair housing violations. Impediment: E-mail and the Internet have become vital to access housing opportunities and subsidy programs, providing a barrier for those without computer access at home. Strategy: Eugene and Springfield provide free Internet access at their public libraries and other City facilities. Eugene, through the use of a telecom grant, is placing computers and providing high-speed Internet service at the twelve locations of social services that serve homeless and very- low-income populations. Impediment: People with disabilities who have special housing needs have limited choices and are often constrained by their lower incomes. Strategy: Eugene and Springfield have housing rehabilitation loan programs and also programs targeted to the removal of architectural barriers. Additionally, both jurisdictions support the acquisition and creation of affordable housing which includes homes designed with special features for people with disabilities. The Fair Housing Council of Oregon provides information on all aspects of Fair Housing, including information for people with disabilities.