Salem council adopts six-year housing production strategy after amendment

The Salem City Council on May 27 adopted a six-year Housing Production Strategy (HPS) intended to guide local actions to meet state housing goals and the city’s housing needs. The council approved resolution 2025-11 after an amendment that directs staff to prioritize a zoning-code evaluation and report back this year and to provide a council report on permitting improvements and developer feedback.

The strategy is Salem’s required response to a 2019 state mandate. Eunice Kim, the city’s long-range planning manager, told the council the draft contains 17 actions across regulatory, financial, and land/partnership approaches to increase housing production, preserve existing housing and advance fair and equitable housing outcomes. “Adoption of the housing production strategy does not actually implement any of the 17 actions,” Kim said; it establishes an implementation framework and timelines for follow-up projects the council will review individually.

Why it matters: The city’s housing needs analysis estimated roughly 25,000 new units between 2015 and 2035, and recent permit activity shows the city is close but not yet meeting annual targets. Councilors and public commenters pressed for clearer priorities, near-term timelines, and accountability measures so the plan leads to concrete new housing rather than remaining an exploratory list of options.

What the council asked for: After public testimony from builders, neighborhood groups and housing advocates, the council adopted an amendment (moved and seconded on the record) requiring staff to complete an evaluation of proposed zoning-code changes by the end of 2025 and to deliver a council report summarizing stakeholder feedback and the evaluation of permitting-process improvements. Kim said code amendments and permitting reforms will be developed through public engagement, and that any specific ordinance proposals would return to the council for formal adoption.

Implementation and flexibility: The HPS lists near-, medium- and long-term actions and includes metrics staff will use to track progress. Kim said each action will proceed through its own decision and adoption process; if an action becomes infeasible (for example due to funding), staff can propose replacements to the state during the required midterm report in 2029. She also told council the city is already doing many items in the HPS and hopes to receive state credit for ongoing work.

Public input and commission review: The planning commission recommended additional detail and refinement before adoption, citing a need to prioritize among the 17 actions. Multiple neighborhood groups and technical commenters asked for more focused, cost‑effective choices and for the city to prioritize actions that can be implemented with existing staff and funding. Builders and the Mid Valley Association of Realtors urged the city to concentrate on regulatory and procedural reforms — specifically zoning revisions and permitting streamlining — that they say most affect how quickly housing gets built.

Next steps: Staff will proceed with the prioritized tasks and return to council for discrete decisions on code amendments, system development charge methodology updates, community land trust support and other items. The council directed annual monitoring and a midterm review to report progress to the state.

Ending: The council adopted the HPS with the amendment and directed staff to carry out the near-term tasks and reporting schedule; individual projects arising from the strategy will be brought back to council for formal action and public hearings as required.