Senator Pham convened the Senate Committee on Housing and Development on Feb. 17, 2025, to examine Oregon’s severe-weather emergency sheltering program, hearing testimony from the Oregon State Resilience Officer, state and county emergency managers and multiple shelter providers about capacity, staffing, rural access and recent state investments.

The hearing underscored that severe-weather sheltering is saving lives but faces growing demand from hotter summers, more ice storms and longer outages. "Emergency weather shelters save lives," said Jonna Papa Efdemieux, Oregon State Resilience Officer. The committee heard provider examples of large activations in the Portland area, transportation and access barriers in rural counties, and steps the Oregon Department of Human Services (ODHS) has taken to build local capacity.

Why it matters: witnesses said extreme-heat and extreme-cold events are becoming more frequent, increasing calls on a system many described as a patchwork of contracted shelters, volunteer-run sites, faith partners and public buildings. The state medical examiner reported 10 hyperthermia/hypothermia deaths in January and 16 in July 2024; speakers said that count understates the risk. Panelists described gaps in staffing, training, secure locations and rural transportation that limit access when shelters open.

Key facts and testimony

- Scope and trends: State resilience and emergency management officials said climate-driven extremes are driving year-round sheltering needs, including cooling centers in summer and warming centers in winter. Jonna Papa Efdemieux, Oregon State Resilience Officer, told the committee that heat deaths now exceed cold-weather deaths in Oregon and that sheltering has become a year-round effort.

- Deaths and public-health data: The committee heard that the state medical examiner counted 26 severe-weather deaths in 2024 (10 in January, 16 in July), a figure speakers said is likely an undercount.

- System described as “patchwork”: Providers and the state said local governments lead sheltering but often rely on a mix of contracted providers, nonprofits, faith-based partners and volunteers. That mix creates variability in staffing, services and notification to the public.

- Advance notice and staging improved operations: Do Good Multnomah staff described two recent activations. Amber Johnson, program manager, said Multnomah County provided 720 beds over a recent two-night activation, with 115 of those beds provided by Do Good Multnomah. Alex England, program manager at Do Good Multnomah, credited earlier notice and a pre-staged, secure location with allowing the group to set up, publicize the site and operate without “crisis mode.” "When you're able to have that expanded amount of time ... that is extremely helpful," Amber Johnson said.

- Large-scale county operations and limits: Multnomah County emergency management reported large multi-day operations in recent years. Chris Voss, director of Multnomah County Emergency Management, said recent winters and heat events produced large shelter counts: the county’s largest single event sheltered about 1,356 people and earlier events sheltered about 1,250; a recent two-day activation sheltered roughly 920 people (final counts pending). Over roughly two years the county reported about 15 severe-weather activations, 76 distinct shelter openings, more than 17,000 guests and roughly 27,000 meals served.

- Staffing and volunteer limits: Panelists said many shelters depend on volunteers and staff who lack extensive shelter training, creating safety and medical triage concerns. Multnomah County said county government and partner contractors together provide most staffing; county officials warned large events require thousands of staff shifts (the county reported roughly 11,000 staff shifts in recent activations).

- Rural access and transportation gaps: Claudia Limon of the Community Action Program of East Central Oregon described rural barriers: her region covers more than 8,000 square miles and transportation is a major obstacle for people living far from shelters. CAPECO (Community Action Program of East Central Oregon) reported two year-round shelters with combined capacity of about 88 and two severe-weather shelters that open with a combined capacity of about 35, which providers said does not meet need. Limon also described clients in rural/remote sites with limited ability to perform activities of daily living and said short-notice activations strain staffing and caregiving capacity.

- Fairgrounds and resilience hubs: Witnesses identified county fairgrounds as important large-capacity options, especially for wildfire evacuations and animal sheltering. ODHS Office of Resilience and Emergency Management Director Ed Flick described the state’s resilience-hub grant program (an approximately $10,000,000 appropriation from the 2023 session) and said the agency is awarding grants to fairgrounds, senior centers, churches and other community organizations to build trusted neighborhood sites that can serve routinely and during emergencies.

- State supports and limits: Ed Flick described ODHS work to preposition equipment caches, trailer-mounted heaters and mobile resources and to fund programs such as medical-respite shelter pilots. He said ODHS has four main responsibilities including mass care (shelter, feeding, water); continuity of benefit programs; long-term recovery; and legislatively directed resilience work. Flick said ODHS provides grants, pre-incident contracts and a Mass Care Response Team made up of ODHS employees who volunteer for shelter activations. He also said the office once operated shelters directly but no longer has the staffing to operate them statewide.

- State statutes and appropriations referenced: witnesses referenced Senate Bill 762 (air-quality sheltering responsibilities after the 2020 fires), a 2021 appropriation identified in testimony as "1536" that expanded warming/cooling support (testimony described a $2,000,000 appropriation), and House Bill 3409 (2023) as the statutory origin for resilience hub work. The testimony said hundreds of resilience-hub applications were received, with roughly $180,000,000 requested against $10,000,000 available.

Committee discussion and provider requests

- Providers asked for clearer and earlier public notification when shelters will open so outreach teams can bring people in and shelters can staff effectively. Do Good Multnomah credited a week’s notice for markedly improved operations in a recent activation.

- Providers asked counties or the state to help with neighborhood-level communications so shelter staff do not have to serve as ad hoc public-relations intermediaries with neighbors.

- Rural providers requested state or county solutions for transportation, caregiving/medical-aid staffing and motel-room options where shelters do not exist.

- Several witnesses urged the state to clarify what ODHS can and cannot operate, with Multnomah County emergency management recommending the state consider retaining operational capacity to open and run shelters when local jurisdictions are overwhelmed.

Decisions and outcome

- The Feb. 17 hearing was informational; no formal votes or binding actions were taken. Panelists and committee members discussed policy options, state investments and local needs; next steps were described as follow-up coordination rather than formal directives.

Ending

Committee members said they would continue coordination between ODHS, county emergency managers and shelter providers to refine notification practices, staffing support, funding priorities for resilience hubs and rural transportation solutions. The meeting was adjourned by Senator Pham.