Last fall, the Portland City Council passed an ordinance requiring warning signs on about 1,600 brick buildings likely to collapse in a major earthquake. Supporters argued that residents in Portland, where a massive Cascadia subduction zone earthquake is overdue, are entitled to information about buildings in which they live, work or regularly visit.

It was a sound argument.

Now Portland NAACP leaders, renters’ rights groups and building owners are calling on city leaders to rescind the rule, claiming it creates a “lien” on the properties and could disproportionately hurt communities of color. They worry the signs will scare customers from businesses, children from schools and parishioners from churches. They argue building owners won’t be able to sell at market rates or secure loans for improvements, meaning developers could buy them at deep discount and displace low-income renters.

Despite those concerns, city leaders should stand firm in the decision they made. The signs are about sharing basic information about the safety of a building – information that’s been publicly available for years in a city database, incidentally – to help customers, families, parishioners and renters understand potential risks.

This is the painful part of living in a city preparing for a catastrophic earthquake. Portlanders haven’t had to worry about tornadoes or hurricanes or other natural disasters since Mt. St. Helens erupted in 1980. We’ve been lucky. But it’s time for us all to get better prepared and that process will be difficult, both with changes needed at home and with increasing government policies.

The new ordinance does include fines for building owners who don’t post signs that warn: “This is an unreinforced masonry building. Unreinforced masonry buildings may be unsafe in the event of a major earthquake.” But there’s no lien for failing to post the sign. And while it’s true that the signs could be off-putting to a buyer, that’s not a defensible reason for hiding information about the safety of a building. Besides, the list of such seismically shaky “unreinforced masonry” buildings is one that bank appraisers, insurance adjusters and real estate inspectors likely already consult.

California has had a similar law requiring warning signs on certain buildings for nearly 30 years. A few cities, including Berkeley and San Francisco took the law further, mandating costly retrofits on buildings – a requirement that Portland leaders have put off for 20 years.

In hopes of easing the transition, Portland officials plan to lobby state lawmakers this legislative session in hopes of securing grants or loans to help owners pay the high cost to stabilize the buildings built between 1870 and 1960.

Yet Rev. E.D. Mondainé, president of the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People’s Portland chapter, claims he and dozens of other pastors never received notice that theirs were among the 38 churches on the list. That is concerning, considering city officials maintain they sent letters to all building owners in 2015.

Ultimately, Mondainé says many black residents don’t trust the city, which indeed has a long history of racist housing and zoning policy. He says the requirement should be shelved until more conversations happen that include members of Portland’s African American community. There is time, however, as churches and nonprofits have until 2020 to post the warnings.

Other building owners must put up signs by March. A group of building owners has sued, seeking to block the new rule. John DiLorenzo, who represents the owners and also owns an affected property, says the different deadlines for owners of buildings with the same issues is unfair. He also argues the city should be responsible for notifying residents with a flier or brochure.

A massive earthquake would likely devastate much of the inner city, where Portland’s oldest and architecturally significant buildings are more common. All residents would be affected in various ways. As we prepare, the city must continue to focus on including a broad swath of residents and community leaders.

And the signs are a good start. It’s not a letter, flier or email that can get lost in transit. The ordinance, which also requires notifications for new and existing tenants, is the best assurance that residents will be alerted to potential risks.

To be sure, the City of Portland has a long way to go to earn back the trust from communities hurt by redlining and numerous other racist policies of the past. The city has made many mistakes. And, more than likely, it will again.

But requiring that Portlanders have information to help make important decisions for themselves and their families isn’t among them.

-- Laura Gunderson for The Oregonian/OregonLive Editorial Board