Portland City Council launched its first ever oversight hearing Thursday, April 23, to determine why the administrative branch of the city did not disclose millions of dollars in unspent housing funds for several months last year.
On November 20, 2025, the City Council approved a routine budget adjustment called the Fall Technical Ordinance Adjustment (TAO). The same day, roughly an hour prior to the final vote, the administrative side of the city government informed councilors that the Portland Housing Bureau (PHB) had nearly $21 million in unbudgeted funds. The money was first reported by the Oregonian on November 21. That left some councilors wondering why they were not informed prior to the budget adjustment, as the city tried to overcome a roughly $16 million shortfall.
Thursday’s hearing, in the Finance and Government Committee of the Whole, circled around questions of who knew about the money, when, and why councilors were not informed earlier. But it was also a notch on the belt of a young municipal charter that seeks to increase transparency and accountability to the public.
“We’re here on behalf of the people who put us here, and who need to know that their government is accountable to them, and that we, their representatives, will ask questions and investigate discrepancies on their behalf,” District 2 Councilor Sameer Kanal, who chairs the committee, said.
In February, the City Council requested records related to the unbudgeted money, and called for an oversight hearing to determine why the Council was not apprised of the funds. Under the city charter, the Council approves the city’s budget, and the city administrator is required to keep the elected body “fully informed.”
Councilors grilled top administrative staff during the hearing, including Deputy City Administrator Donnie Oliveira, and the Portland Housing Bureau’s Interim Director Michael Buonocore. Chief Financial Officer Jonas Biery and City Budget Director Ruth Levine also fielded questions. Former City Administrator Michael Jordan was in the role during the actions in question, but was not present at the hearing. Raymond Lee, the current city administrator, wasn’t working for the city yet during the period under review.
District 4 City Councilor Mitch Green grilled Oliveira at the start of the hearing, setting a timeline of events on when he knew about the funding and when he decided to tell the Council. The questions were related to a slew of public records released for the hearings, particularly a condensed, 17-page set among thousands of pages contained in the records. Many were held under attorney-client privilege.
Both Biery and Oliveira repeatedly told councilors the exact amount of the initial unbudgeted funds was unclear, and they did not want to alert councilors until they knew the precise amount. Biery and Oliveira said they had low confidence that the $12 million amount was correct, and didn’t want to share incomplete information. Still, other executive staff were kept in the loop about the potential for significant funds.
Bureau director’s discovery triggered months-long probe
As the Mercury previously reported, the former director of the Housing Bureau, Helmi Hisserich, told Oliveira as early as July 2025 that funds may have accumulated in the Rental Services Office over a three-year period prior to her tenure. By August, Hisserich alerted Oliveira of nearly $12 million in unspent funds. Wilson, former City Administrator Jordan, and Biery were notified of the $12 million in early September. At Oliveira’s request, Hisserich created a spending plan for the $12 million and sent the plan in a memo to Oliveira on October 18. But complicating matters was that Hisserich was placed on a 21-day administrative leave without cause on October 30.
District 3 Councilor Angelita Morillo questioned why Oliveira had notified Wilson’s office of the initial $12 million in unspent funds on November 14, without notifying councilors. That’s the day after the administrators were alerted that the city would be fulfilling a public records request submitted by Oregon Public Broadcasting, which would include Hisserich’s memo. In the following days, Skyler Brocker-Knapp, the director of Portland Solutions—which oversees the mayor’s shelter program—submitted a spending plan to reallocate the money in the budget adjustment. Still, the Council was in the dark, amid a heated budget debate.
Oliveira said he then learned of an additional $9 million—bringing the total to nearly $21 million—on November 17, days before the Council approved the budget adjustment on November 20. The Housing Bureau had recommended the $9 million be reserved to cover the annual costs of operating the rental office that collects the funds, but it remains unclear whether top administrative brass was made aware of the reserve. None of the administrative officials disputed the timeline during the hearing, and public records back up the claims.
Councilors fear administrative “bottleneck” presents lingering risk
During the hearing, administrative staff promised better communication and transparency in the future. But new records obtained by the Mercury show an ongoing effort to keep councilors away from bureau experts amid their budgeting process.
The mayor’s proposed budget dropped earlier in the week, and councilors are undergoing a similar process as last year, trying to address a $160 million budget shortfall.
A February 24 memo sent by Tracy Warren, deputy city administrator of Portland’s City Operations service area, advised staff not to directly answer questions from councilors requesting meetings to discuss budget priorities. The memo was also forwarded to another deputy city administrator on March 12.
“At this time, please do not accept or schedule meetings with Council members or their staff that are focused on budget development, priorities, or resource requests,” the memo said.
Warren’s office did not respond to the Mercury’s request for comment at the time of publishing.
Lee reiterated the intent in a March 18 memo, indicating he and deputy city administrators wanted councilors’ budget questions to be filtered through them, rather than staff who lead day-to-day bureau operations.
“I recognize and appreciate the importance of direct engagement between Council offices and bureaus, and we will continue to support multiple opportunities for information sharing, including work sessions, one-on-one discussion and coordination with the City Budget Office,” the memo said.
City spokesperson Cody Bowman said the expectations are intended to support a “disciplined and transparent process and to ensure Council receives accurate and consistent information as they deliberate on the budget.”
Bowman added that Lee “remains committed to providing Council with timely, coordinated information that supports transparency and sound decision making” noting the process is meant to help organize requests, reduce duplication of efforts and streamline commentary.
Green said he’s concerned that without significant changes, the same issues will arise, and erode public trust.
“I understand the need to have clarity and coordination, but I’m worried that these memos indicate that we’re moving in the wrong direction,” Green said. “What we learned today in our oversight hearing is that DCAs appear to be functioning as a bottleneck, preventing rather than facilitating the flow of critical information.”
Councilor Angelita Morillo told the Mercury in an email that the oversight hearing revealed how the Council’s power as the budget authority is “being whittled away” by the executive branch.
“In order to have a truly representative government, Councilors must have the same access to information as our counterparts in the Executive,” Morillo said. “I am concerned to hear that as we’re exposing these barriers, new ones are being put in place.”
Some councilors appeared less concerned about the withheld Housing Bureau information, but engaged in questioning the administration. Councilor Elana Pirtle-Guiney (District 2), who was council president at the time the funds were discovered, said she’s interested in what can change, moving forward.
“One of the most important things for a body like this is figuring out how to make things better, not just for us, but for Portlanders,” she said.
She asked Biery if the city would be in a different place if it had known about the funds in the fall, rather than after the budget adjustment, to which Biery replied, “from a purely budget and financial perspective, we would be essentially exactly where we are.”
Councilor Dan Ryan (District 2) said the hearing should transition toward the new government adopting best practices.
“This is a continuous work that Portlanders are demanding from us, and I hope we use this as a case study not a shame study, to continue to learn from how we can improve and go forward,” Ryan said.
But the hearing could still prove consequential for a bureau that has seen significant turnover in recent years.
Councilor Eric Zimmerman (District 4) took the opportunity to praise the “professional instinct” of Buonocore, the interim housing director, while challenging current Housing Bureau staff who he said either need more training or should not continue in their role.
“I want to say very clearly, you have my full support in the direction that you want to go; to either invest time in that redevelopment or that training, or to clean house as you see fit,” Zimmerman told Buonocore.
And in a press conference after the hearing, Kanal pointed out that some Portlanders already experienced the consequences of the money not being allocated last fall, particularly for low income renters who could have accessed the funding outlined in early recommendations.
“There’s a number of people that have probably been evicted in the last six-ish months that wouldn’t have been otherwise,” Kanal said.
The April 23 meeting was the first time Council has used its oversight authority since being elected in 2025 after city charter changes. Councilor Green, who sponsored the oversight resolution, told the Mercury he was not satisfied with what he heard, and more oversight may be in order. But he defended Housing Bureau staff.
“The staff at the Portland Housing Bureau do excellent work,” Green said. “I think that sort of criticism needs to happen at a much higher level in the city. We need to have really tough questions at the DCA level and above on whether or not the practices‚ our policies in place, are being followed, and whether or not our values of the city are being followed.”
In the hearing, Biery pointed to longstanding practices that leave the city at risk for similar issues arising again, particularly if the budget office does not see increased staffing. Wilson’s proposed budget cuts the budget office by $562,000 and would cut three full-time positions, while five other positions would be moved into other city offices.
“We will continue, I predict, to see these kinds of anomalies for the long term until we get serious about investing in that administrative infrastructure in the city,” Biery said.