Panelists back state housing infrastructure program in HB 3031, urge flexibility on density and rules

The House Committee on Housing and Homelessness opened testimony Wednesday on House Bill 3,031, a governor-backed proposal to create a permanent program at Business Oregon to fund transportation, water, wastewater, stormwater and site development costs that block housing projects.

Matthew Schawbold of the governor’s office introduced the bill; Nate Stice of the Regional Solutions team described program structure and priorities, saying the fund would provide loans, forgivable loans and grants and that the governor has requested $100 million in her budget for the program. Stice told the committee the bill is designed to “help local governments unlock new housing production” and to allow Business Oregon to coordinate state and federal funding through existing one‑stop processes.

Stice and other presenters gave examples where infrastructure costs had stalled housing projects: in Hood River, a $3 million infrastructure barrier affected a 30‑unit project; in Coos Bay an estimated $4 million could unlock roughly 505 housing units. The draft dash‑1 amendment includes density minimums that scale by community size — for example, 17 units per net residential acre in metro areas and as few as five units per acre in communities under 2,500 people — and prioritizes grants for projects serving households at or below 80% of area median income.

Supporters said the programic approach would produce predictable, equitable funding and help projects already in the pipeline. Kevin Cronin of Housing Oregon said infrastructure costs are among “the biggest obstacles to getting affordable housing built” and cited OHCS data that there are more than 120 affordable rental projects in various stages of the pipeline.

Cities and local governments overwhelmingly expressed support for the concept but urged changes to technical eligibility and administrative design. Amy Pepper, development engineering manager for the city of Wilsonville, and several city witnesses asked for flexibility on deed‑restriction language and noted legal limits on what cities can require developers to accept without compensation. Several small cities and rural participants asked for rural set‑asides and for grant mechanics that avoid placing large reimbursement risks on local general funds.

Dustin Nielsen of Hood River urged advance commitments rather than strict reimbursement models, saying small cities can be put in strained positions when they must pledge general fund backing to secure reimbursement grant outcomes. Michael Martin of the League of Oregon Cities summarized a common concern: density and affordability covenants in the bill could limit effectiveness in smaller cities unless the committee and Business Oregon retain rulemaking flexibility.

Nonprofit and developer witnesses said funds would unlock thousands of homes. Jackie Keogh of Rooted Homes described Central Oregon projects that are “shovel ready” except for infrastructure; Locke Litwork, a workforce housing developer, said the program would enable cottage communities and small multifamily projects in rural cities where sewer or water upgrades are missing.

Multiple witnesses requested that details such as affordability enforcement mechanisms, density thresholds and program eligibility be handled in administrative rulemaking to preserve flexibility. Committee members signaled continued amendment work: sponsors said dash‑2 amendments were in preparation and described consultations with cities, districts, developers and other partners. The public record will remain open for 48 hours for additional written comments, and committee staff said more discussion will follow before the bill returns for committee action.