we won some of what we wanted.

We successfully beat back the amendment we opposed, and passed a version of the amendment we supported, for a generally good (though incomplete) reform of Portland’s historic preservation codes to make them more inclusive, less restrictive, and less arbitrary. Below are some of the arguments from our 2021 campaign.

Historic Preservation isn’t Portland’s only value.

Preserving some historic structures is a great part of an equitable, green and growing city. But because historic districts make most infill housing difficult and can be easily abused by wealthy neighborhoods looking to block change, Portland needs to consider the social, economic and environmental tradeoffs when a historic district is created.

Unfortunately, at the request of a narrow slice of Portland homeowners, Commissioner Mingus Mapps has proposed hoisting the city’s single-issue Historic Landmarks Commission to the same status as the multidisciplinary Planning and Sustainability Commission when it comes to making recommendations about the creation and editing of historic districts.

Mapps’ proposal is amendment 5 to the Historic Resources Code Project, a major update to Portland’s code governing historic districts. We’ll be testifying against it (and for amendments 1, 2 and 7, which offer modest pro-housing improvements) at city council’s final hearing on the project on Dec. 15.

Here are the amendments we care about most on Dec. 15

#2. (Commissioner Rubio): Would streamline the review process and slightly reduce uncertainty for regulated affordable housing proposals in historic and conservation districts. We support it.

#5. (Commissioner Mapps): Would hoist the single-issue Historic Landmarks Commission to the same status as the multidisciplinary Planning and Sustainability Commission when it comes to recommending historic district changes to council. We oppose it.

Template Testimony

You can use this testimony as inspiration for your own distinct remarks, as a template to build upon, or as a plug-and-play form letter. What’s most important is that you testify.

Mayor Wheeler, Commissioners,

My name is _______ and I live in [your neighborhood or region of Portland]. I join Portland: Neighbors Welcome in supporting Amendment 2, which would ease the creation for regulated affordable housing projects, and opposing Amendment 5.

Forcing the Historic Landmarks Commission and Planning and Sustainability Commission to issue competing proposals for historic districts would create redundant public processes and public confusion if the recommended boundaries are different. More importantly, it would put a single-issue body, the HLC, on par with a multidisciplinary body, the PSC. The HLC has a valued role to play, but as the body that oversees the comprehensive plan, the PSC is qualified to weigh the city’s interests in historic preservation against its many other interests.

I also urge the city to honor the many community organizations that have raised concerns about the undemocratic nature of landowner-controlled National Register districts by supporting state legislation that would redirect preservation efforts toward local districts. Unlike National Register districts, local districts have democratic oversight from a body — the city council — that is legally allowed to consider any factors other than historic preservation, and can consider the interests of tenants as well as landowners.

Thank you.