Multnomah County commissioners press Metro for clarity after council votes to rework Supportive Housing Services tax

Multnomah County commissioners used an Oct. 24 board meeting to press Metro Council—s recent action to alter the Supportive Housing Services (SHS) tax and to seek more detailed fiscal and governance analysis before endorsing changes.

Justin Black, the county—s director of government relations, briefed the board on Metro Council Resolution 245436, which directs Metro staff to bring a policy package in December that could regionalize the SHS program, expand allowable uses to include affordable housing, change the tax—s threshold indexing and reduce the rate. Black said Metro is considering indexing the income threshold to CPI, rebasing the threshold (for example to $150,000 individual / $225,000 joint) and an immediate rate cut to 0.9% with a possible additional drop to 0.75% by 2030. He also described a potential 15–20 year extension of the tax beyond its current 2030 sunset.

"If Metro were to only do the rebase and then indexing, it would be an $8.6 million reduction to services for Multnomah County," Black told the board, citing the county—s internal modelling based on Metro forecasts. He estimated a 10% immediate reduction would remove about $9 million and a 25% cut could reduce county funds by roughly $22 million, while indexing alone could reduce Multnomah County revenue by about $1.9 million in the FY26 forecast.

Commissioners across the political spectrum raised questions about the proposals— operational effects. Commissioner Stegman called indexing "standard practice" but said he opposed surrendering local budget authority; Commissioner Brim Edwards said the threat of Metro withholding funds if a county—s local implementation plan did not meet Metro—s KPMs (key performance measures) was "insanity," arguing that service providers require stable revenue commitments. Commissioner Myron emphasized the need to return the SHS program to its original focus on deep wraparound services for people with severe disabling conditions and to strengthen measurable fidelity to Housing First and care-team approaches.

Several commissioners asked for more detailed, up-to-date revenue forecasts and for analysis showing how each proposed change would translate into programmatic impacts locally. Black said Metro—s next revenue forecast was due by Dec. 1 under the current IGA, and that Metro had not yet produced a chart showing the combined effects of multiple policy changes. Chair Jessica Vega Peterson said she had asked Metro to convene leadership-level meetings with county and partner representatives before the end of the month and signaled the county would remain engaged in negotiations.

Commissioners also debated governance. Black described Metro—s plan to consolidate existing oversight bodies into a single 20+-member Housing and Homelessness Policy Advisory Committee, with Metro Council retaining authority to approve KPMs. Commissioners warned that consolidating authority and removing equal county representation could limit local discretion in budgeting and implementation and could require renegotiation of intergovernmental agreements if ballot measures conflict with the existing IGA between Metro and the three counties.

Several commissioners expressed support for targeted elements of Metro—s proposals — for example, indexing thresholds to protect taxpayers from bracket creep and dedicating funding for affordable housing — while emphasizing that those changes must not hollow out funding for services that address the most acute needs. "I think indexing is good... but I do not think we have to give our authority to Metro," Commissioner Brim Edwards said.

The board did not take a formal vote on Metro—s proposals at the meeting. Chair Vega Peterson directed staff to seek updated forecasts and analyses and to continue engagement with Metro and other counties in advance of Metro—s planned December action.

What—omes next: Metro staff are expected to return to the Metro Council in December with a policy package; Multnomah County commissioners requested fiscal impact details and a clearer governance proposal to inform any position the board may take.