Pipeline/2026-039
Ordinance Enacted 192173

Amend Chronic Nuisance Property Code to address human trafficking, gun violence, and administrative challenges (amend Code Chapter 14B.60)

Final ActionMateriality · Tier CReadiness · Ready With Caveats
Official record
What is being decided?

Amend Chronic Nuisance Property Code to address human trafficking, gun violence, and administrative challenges (amend Code Chapter 14B.60)

What happens next?

Derived from official scheduling fields

Where has it appeared?

7 Council session appearances; latest May 6, 2026.

Decision standard · Rules v1

Decision readiness

Ready With Caveats

This measures whether decision-relevant information is visible. It does not measure whether the proposal deserves approval.

Decision definition

The requested action could not be determined.

Unknown
Legal instrument

Official text was found in the reviewed record.

Complete
Financial impact

The official impact statement includes financial information.

Complete
Funding source

Funding information appears in the impact statement; inspect the source for precision.

Complete
Supporting documents

No linked attachments were found on the official page.

Unknown
Implementation

Implementation language appears in the official text.

Complete
Document stability

Stability requires at least two observed snapshots; the system will update this after another ingestion.

Unknown
Alternative

Not found in the reviewed official text.

Assumption

Not found in the reviewed official text.

Risk

Not found in the reviewed official text.

Dependency
  • Chronic unlawful activity constitutes a nuisance and should be subject to abatement.The City has a substantial and compelling interest in protecting the health, safety and welfare of its citizens and the neighborhoods affected by chronic nuisance activity.The legal processes presently available do not adequately control chronic nuisance activity nor its detrimental effects on citizens and neighborhoods where chronic nuisance activity occurs.Refining the current regulatory scheme will alleviate the problems created by nuisance activity through early intervention and abatement.NOW, THEREFORE, the Council directs:Amend City Code Chapter 14B.60 as shown in Exhibit A.
Evidence
  • Crimes and conduct related to human trafficking and gun violence in particular should be further defined and included as Nuisance Activities considered in the designation of a Chronic Nuisance Property.Workload and resource management challenges require that an extended timeframe, from 30 days to 90 days, for documenting Nuisance Activities and fulfilling administrative actions is necessary to successfully implement Chronic Nuisance Property code as a tool.Similar challenges with workload and resource management, as well as updates to the City Charter, require that administrative responsibilities be shifted from the Chief of Police or Precinct Captain to the City Administrator or their designee(s).Evidence exists that crime is often geographically centered and connected either directly or indirectly to specific properties across Portland.Chronic unlawful activity of various kinds on and near affected property adversely affects the health, safety and welfare of citizens, and diminishes the quality of life in neighborhoods where this chronic unlawful activity occurs.
  • There is evidence that some of these businesses are either negligent or complicit in the human trafficking occurring on and around their properties.
Information Request

Not found in the reviewed official text.

Outcome Measure

Not found in the reviewed official text.

Official material

Documents

0 linked files
Official page textRead

The City of Portland ordains.Section 1. The Council finds:The first chronic nuisance property ordinance was introduced in 1992 by then Commissioner, subsequently Congressman, Blumenauer. It was approved by council and added to city code on December 23.In 1993, Commissioner Kafoury introduced the Pattern of Disruptive Activities on Business Property Ordinance. It was approved by council and added to the city code on April 7.In June 1996, Council unanimously approved a revised Chronic Nuisance Property Ordinance with a one-year sunset clause. That ordinance combined the Pattern of Disruptive Activities on Business Property Ordinance and the original Chronic Nuisance Property Ordinance and added several types of criminal conduct to the list of events that would cause a property to be defined as a chronic nuisance. The Chronic Nuisance Property code was then permanently codified in 1997 with Ordinance 171188.There have been no substantive updates to the Chronic Nuisance Property code since Council passed Ordinance 171188 unanimously in May of 1997.Crime, nuisance activities and the City's approach to enforcement have evolved significantly since 1997, and Title 14.60 Chronic Nuisance Property needs updating to provide flexibility and clarity to the city administration, public safety professional, and the judicial system in effectively addressing nuisance activities and chronic nuisance properties.The current definition of Nuisance Activities is too narrow to allow the City to address many properties which common sense would describe as a chronic nuisance. Crimes and conduct related to human trafficking and gun violence in particular should be further defined and included as Nuisance Activities considered in the designation of a Chronic Nuisance Property.Workload and resource management challenges require that an extended timeframe, from 30 days to 90 days, for documenting Nuisance Activities and fulfilling administrative actions is necessary to successfully implement Chronic Nuisance Property code as a tool.Similar challenges with workload and resource management, as well as updates to the City Charter, require that administrative responsibilities be shifted from the Chief of Police or Precinct Captain to the City Administrator or their designee(s).Evidence exists that crime is often geographically centered and connected either directly or indirectly to specific properties across Portland.Chronic unlawful activity of various kinds on and near affected property adversely affects the health, safety and welfare of citizens, and diminishes the quality of life in neighborhoods where this chronic unlawful activity occurs. Chronic unlawful activity constitutes a nuisance and should be subject to abatement.The City has a substantial and compelling interest in protecting the health, safety and welfare of its citizens and the neighborhoods affected by chronic nuisance activity.The legal processes presently available do not adequately control chronic nuisance activity nor its detrimental effects on citizens and neighborhoods where chronic nuisance activity occurs.Refining the current regulatory scheme will alleviate the problems created by nuisance activity through early intervention and abatement.NOW, THEREFORE, the Council directs:Amend City Code Chapter 14B.60 as shown in Exhibit A.

Meeting-specific record

Motions, amendments & votes

6 vote records
AmendmentWithdrawn

Motion to amend Exhibit A as shown in Koyama Lane and Novick 1: Moved by Novick and seconded by Clark. Motion withdrawn.

AmendmentFailed

Motion to amend Exhibit A as shown in Novick 7: Moved by Novick and seconded by Clark. (Aye (3): Pirtle-Guiney, Novick, Green; Nay (8): Kanal, Ryan, Morillo, Clark, Zimmerman, Avalos, Smith, Dunphy; Absent (1): Koyama Lane). Motion failed to pass.

AmendmentFailed

Motion to amend Exhibit A as shown in Kanal 1: Moved by Kanal and seconded by Green. (Aye (4): Kanal, Morillo, Green, Avalos; Nay (6): Ryan, Novick, Clark, Zimmerman, Smith, Dunphy; Absent (2): Pirtle-Guiney, Koyama Lane). Motion failed to pass. Passed to second reading as amended May 6, 2026, at 2:00 p.m.

Amendment

Motion to amend Exhibit A as shown in Novick 3, 4, 5, 6 and Pirtle-Guiney 3: Moved by Pirtle-Guiney and seconded by Novick. Vote not called.

MainFailed

Motion to refer the item to the Community and Public Safety Committee: Moved by Kanal and seconded by Avalos. (Aye (4): Avalos, Kanal, Morillo, Green; Nay (6): Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Novick, Clark, Dunphy; Absent (2): Smith, Zimmerman). Motion failed to pass.

Motion to divide the question to vote on Novick 3, 4, 5, 6 and Pirtle-Guiney 3 separately: Moved by Kanal. Vote not called.

Amendment

Motion to amend Exhibit A in the Ordinance as shown in Novick 1 and 2: Moved by Novick and seconded by Smith. (Aye (4): Smith, Kanal, Zimmerman, Novick; Absent (1): Morillo)

MainPassed

Motion to refer the Ordinance, as amended, Document Number 2026-039, to City Council with the recommendation it be passed: Moved by Novick and seconded by Smith. (Aye (3): Smith, Zimmerman, Novick; Nay (2): Kanal, Morillo)

Motion to amend Exhibit A as shown in Kanal 1: Moved by Kanal and seconded by Green. (Aye (4): Kanal, Morillo, Green, Avalos; Nay (6): Ryan, Novick, Clark, Zimmerman, Smith, Dunphy; Absent (2): Pirtle-Guiney, Koyama Lane). Motion failed to pass. Passed to second reading as amended May 6, 2026, at 2:00 p.m.

Failed4 yes · 6 no · 2 absent

Motion to refer the item to the Community and Public Safety Committee: Moved by Kanal and seconded by Avalos. (Aye (4): Avalos, Kanal, Morillo, Green; Nay (6): Pirtle-Guiney, Ryan, Koyama Lane, Novick, Clark, Dunphy; Absent (2): Smith, Zimmerman). Motion failed to pass.

Failed4 yes · 6 no · 2 absent
Official impact statement

Money & effects

Purpose & background

This ordinance amends the existing Chronic Nuisance Property code (Chapter 14B.60) to provide flexibility and clarity to the city administration, public safety professionals, and the judicial system in effectively addressing nuisance activities and chronic nuisance properties. It also expands the list of Nuisance Activities that can be considered in the designation of a Chronic Nuisance Property to include additional violations related to human trafficking and gun violence.This work initially began in 2024 by the City Attorney's office in collaboration with the Portland Police Bureau and the Multnomah County District Attorney's office. Due to workload and resource challenges, PPB faces difficulties in documenting and fulfilling the administrative requirements of the current Chronic Nuisance Property code. The current code requires documentation of three nuisance activities as well as sign off by the Chief of Police or Precinct Commander on initiating the Chronic Nuisance Property procedure all within 30 days. This update would change the threshold to require two documented nuisance activities and sign off on the procedure by the City Administrator or their designee(s) within 90 days. The City Administrator's designee(s) could remain with the PPB rank and file or the authority could be placed in another resource with more bandwidth.The request for changes to this code also came from the Multnomah County District Attorneys' office as they looked for additional tools to address human trafficking, especially at motels and businesses along 82nd avenue. There is evidence that some of these businesses are either negligent or complicit in the human trafficking occurring on and around their properties. This tool works to hold them accountable, leading with proactive solutions followed by real consequence if no abatement takes place.The inclusion of Abatement Measures (14B.60.035) and changes to Commencement of Actions; Remedies; Burden of Proof (14B.60.040) sections of Chapter 16B.60 are responsive to questions from the judicial branch on how to best administer abatement requirements in the current code. This guidance provides the courts with an expectation from the city on what we would like to require from property owners in abating nuisance activities.

Economic & real estate impacts

As this code and tool already exists, we do not expect significant economic and real estate development impacts. Increased public safety through the abatement of Nuisance Activities present at Chronic Nuisance Properties could lead to an improved economic and real estate development environment. Fewer Chronic Nuisance Properties also create safer and stronger business and residential corridors.

Community impacts

Areas most likely to have Chronic Nuisance Properties impacted by these code changes are more likely to be lower income and more racially diverse, specifically the area surrounding 82nd Avenue. By abating the Nuisance Activities associated with these properties the surrounding communities will experience improved public safety and livability. We have heard repeated calls from the community to utilize this tool, and expanding its application will help to answer those calls. We expect that these changes may be unpopular with owners of property that may now be more likely to be designated a Chronic Nuisance Property, namely owners of motels.

Financial & budgetary impacts

As this code and tool already exists, we do not expect significant financial or budgetary impacts from this legislation.

100% renewable goal

This legislation has no impact on the City's goal of meeting 100 percent of community-wide energy needs with renewable energy by 2050.

Follow-through

Implementation & accountability

Responsible organization

The reviewed source does not identify a responsible City organization.

Binding direction

Chronic unlawful activity constitutes a nuisance and should be subject to abatement.The City has a substantial and compelling interest in protecting the health, safety and welfare of its citizens and the neighborhoods affected by chronic nuisance activity.The legal processes presently available do not adequately control chronic nuisance activity nor its detrimental effects on citizens and neighborhoods where chronic nuisance activity occurs.Refining the current regulatory scheme will alleviate the problems created by nuisance activity through early intervention and abatement.NOW, THEREFORE, the Council directs:Amend City Code Chapter 14B.60 as shown in Exhibit A.

Observed
Append-only history

Timeline

  1. DOCUMENT PUBLISHED

    Observed in the official source.

  2. Council Action

    Passed as amended

  3. Council Action

    Passed to second reading as amended

  4. Council Action

    Continued as amended

  5. Council Action

    Rescheduled

  6. Council Action

    Referred to City Council as amended

  7. Council Action

    Continued

  8. Council Action

    Continued