HB 3144 expands Oregon’s restrictions on private covenants and planned-community governing documents that limit housing types on residential land. The bill makes unenforceable recorded deed restrictions that would allow a single-family dwelling but prohibit middle housing, accessory dwelling units, manufactured dwellings, or prefabricated structures, subject to the bill’s effective-date rules. It also extends similar limits to planned community governing documents, barring provisions that would prohibit or unreasonably restrict housing otherwise allowed by zoning, and specifically adding protections for manufactured dwellings and prefabricated structures on lots, including ADUs.
The bill also updates the sunset date for earlier 2019 law provisions from January 2, 2027 to January 2, 2031, extending the duration of those housing-access rules. In practical terms, HB 3144 affects real property instruments, homeowners’ association rules, and other governing documents by reducing the ability of private restrictions to block housing types that local zoning already permits. It is aimed at increasing housing choice and making it easier to site additional or alternative dwelling types on eligible land.
Impact
HB 3144 amends ORS 93.277 and ORS 94.776 to invalidate certain deed restrictions and planned-community rules that interfere with the development or siting of housing types allowed under zoning, including middle housing, accessory dwelling units, manufactured dwellings, and prefabricated structures. It also extends the repeal date for related 2019 statutory sections to 2031, preserving the state’s preemption of private covenants that restrict housing supply and diversity. The bill primarily affects property owners, homeowners associations, developers, and buyers seeking to place or build these housing types on residential lots.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad support overall, passing both chambers with comfortable margins and unanimous committee do-pass votes. The vote history suggests a generally favorable view of the measure as a housing-supply and housing-choice policy. The absence of committee transcript material limits insight into detailed debate, but the floor votes indicate that most lawmakers supported the bill’s approach to limiting private restrictions on housing.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the balance between housing expansion and private property or association control. Opponents may view the bill as further limiting the ability of deed holders, planned communities, and HOAs to enforce neighborhood standards or architectural restrictions, while supporters likely see those restrictions as barriers to needed housing options. The recorded votes show some opposition on the House and Senate floors, indicating that concerns about local control, covenant enforcement, or neighborhood character remained present even though they did not prevent passage.