Washington County outlines rapid growth in housing programs and plans for bond and supportive‑housing funds amid revenue uncertainty

The Washington County Department of Housing Services told the budget committee it has expanded rapidly over the past four years to administer dozens of rental‑assistance programs and to develop affordable housing with regional partners. The department manages more than a dozen rental‑assistance programs and, together with the Housing Authority of Washington County (HAWC), serves thousands of households through vouchers, long‑term rental assistance and supportive‑housing programs.

Why it matters: The county’s housing work involves both operating assistance (vouchers, rapid rehousing, outreach) and capital development (affordable units funded through Metro and other bond programs). Both operating revenues and capital financing are subject to regional and federal revenue trends; reductions in those sources would affect the county’s ability to preserve and operate housing and supportive services.

Key figures and programs: Staff reported the Housing Authority and department manage multiple programs including about 2,723 Housing Choice Vouchers, 272 Veterans Affairs vouchers, 687 supportive housing or rapid rehousing vouchers, and more than 1,100 homes owned by HAWC plus investments or influence on more than 2,100 additional homes with community partners. The Metro affordable‑housing bond directly allocated about $118 million to Washington County, supporting dozens of projects and exceeding initial unit goals.

Supportive Housing Services (SHS) and forecast risk: Staff described SHS—the regional voter‑approved supportive‑housing measure—as the most volatile funding source discussed. Metro’s five‑year revenue forecast was revised downward in December, reducing anticipated county revenue and prompting a right‑sizing of operations and one‑time investments. The FY2025–26 proposed SHS budget reduces the baseline by roughly 17% and relies in part on one‑time carryforward funds to smooth the transition while preserving core capacity: shelter beds, motel shelter operations, outreach, housing navigation and about 1,500 people in long‑term rental assistance.

Capital, preservation and ownership: Staff emphasized preservation of existing regulated affordable housing as a priority. The county created a Housing Production Opportunity Fund (initially FY2016–17 and subsequently augmented) to help fill funding gaps on multifamily projects; staff said that fund will expire once its current resources are expended. The Housing Authority may own some projects; proceeds from sales or dispositions flow back into regulated affordable housing programs. Staff said details on ownership share, sales and projected proceeds would be provided in writing on request.

Uncertainty from federal and regional changes: Staff repeatedly cautioned that proposed federal executive‑order language, possible HUD changes and Metro’s reforecasting of SHS tax revenues create planning uncertainty. The committee heard that Metro’s economist lowered the five‑year forecast by more than $50 million in December, and Metro may issue further downward revisions. Staff described quarterly revenue reports and Metro oversight as ongoing monitoring tools.

Ending: The department presented a dual focus: sustain existing programs built during the emergency expansion years, and prioritize preservation and strategic investments while adjusting services to align with a lower ongoing operating base.