Cold shelter location finalized, HAC votes to bring housing discrimination ordinance to council

The location for Oxford’s cold shelter was confirmed during the city’s Housing Advisory Commission (HAC) meeting Oct. 2. Commission members also discussed permanent housing options and a newly proposed ordinance prohibiting housing discrimination based on income.

Cold shelter and permanent housing

According to Jessica Greene, assistant city manager, 5223 College Corner Pike – which previously housed Butler Behavioral Health offices – has been finalized as the location of the cold shelter.

The cold shelter will only be open from December through February, prompting HAC members to discuss the possibility of Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH), which aims to provide permanent housing for unhoused individuals. 

According to the Ohio Department of Behavioral Health (ODBH) website, PSH “is meant to enable the special needs population to live as independently as possible in a permanent setting.”

HAC members Anne Bailey and Jock Pitts were supportive of using the cold shelter as a “pilot program.”

Pitts added that “it does sound like a prudent course to observe (the cold shelter),” he said, “and see how this goes before we obligate money to something that we’re unsure of.”

Housing discrimination ordinance

Greene also presented a draft of an ordinance which prohibits housing discrimination based on income.

According to the draft of the ordinance, the city defines “source(s) of income” to include acquisitional means such as social security, unemployment compensation and child or spousal support.

In the draft, the city prohibits – among other misconduct – the imposition or application of different rental terms and conditions based on income.

Those who violate the ordinance, according to the draft, are guilty of a first-degree misdemeanor.

As the ordinance is complaint-driven, HAC members expressed concern over the effectiveness of such an ordinance. 

Bailey asked how exactly the ordinance would be enforced, to which Greene explained that it is common for cities to subcontract with a partner for enforcement. Greene also suggested the city’s Civil Rights Commission to potentially be an “appropriate place for complaints.” 

Greene added that based on her research of similar ordinances implemented in other cities, enforcement has proven “very, very hard.” Greene gave a hypothetical example in which a landlord could refute a complaint of discrimination, instead claiming the space is simply “‘off-line for repairs.’”

Councilor and HAC member Amber Franklin said that once the ordinance is in place and “then you see the loopholes and the ways that people can circumvent it,” Franklin said, the document could be amended and brought back “with a little bit more teeth.”

Councilor and HAC member Jason Bracken added that the ordinance could provide “more incentive (and) motivation” for individuals to report on and fight against discriminatory housing practices.

Members voted to, as Pitts said, “endorse the intent of this ordinance” to go before city council during its Oct. 21 meeting.

The commission’s next meeting is scheduled for Nov. 6.