Quick facts
Portland rolled out Human Resources Administrative Rule 6.15 on January 1, 2026, creating paid “Immigration, Naturalization, and Citizenship Leave.” Eligible city employees can use up to 40 hours per year, paid, for immigration related legal matters for themselves or qualifying family or close associates. The city codes the time as IMLV and keeps the employee on regular payroll while the leave is used.
Who can use it
The leave is available to city workers and may be used not only for the employee but also to support a spouse, child, parent, sibling, or someone with a “close association” like family. In short, it covers the employee and a broad set of people connected to them.
What activities are covered
Allowed uses include meeting with immigration or criminal defense attorneys, attending naturalization interviews or tests, appearing in state or federal criminal court, deportation hearings, and matters involving alleged unlawful detention tied to immigration status. Deportation hearings are explicitly listed, so paid time off can be used when someone faces removal proceedings.
Privacy and limits on oversight
HRAR 6.15 bars supervisors and managers from asking about immigration status, citizenship, or country of birth. Employees are told not to provide that information unless state or federal law strictly requires it. Requests are recorded in payroll but underlying details are shielded, and managers are warned against exchanging specifics in email. That is a strong privacy wall combined with a leave type tied directly to immigration law matters.
Budget timing and context
The roll out occurs while Portland faces a projected budget shortfall of roughly $66 to $67 million for the 2026 2027 fiscal year. So the city added a new paid benefit that will be paid with public funds at a time when officials say money is tight.
Why this matters to conservatives
From a conservative perspective this raises predictable concerns: new taxpayer funded benefits, expanded paid leave categories, and restrictions on managerial oversight. Critics will note the combination of a generous paid leave tied to immigration proceedings with a privacy rule that limits employer inquiry, and they will ask whether this is the right priority while budgets are strained.
WE’D LOVE TO HEAR YOUR THOUGHTS! PLEASE COMMENT BELOW.
JIMMY
Find more articles like this at steadfastandloyal.com.
