The Portland City Council on Monday unanimously passed a series of modest reforms intended to address housing insecurity in Maine’s largest city, but turned down additional measures being advocated by the mayor.

Mayor Ethan Strimling wanted the council to pass proposals that were previously turned down by his own Housing Committee. However, the council enacted the package of five reforms that were recommended unanimously by the five-member panel.

Councilor David Brenerman, who served as the committee’s vice chairman, said he was disappointed that the committee didn’t focus more attention on finding ways to encourage the development of more affordable housing.

“The Housing Committee sought a practical middle ground that emphasizes tenant education,” Brenerman said.

The package of five reforms adds a “Tenant Housing Rights” section to a city ordinance. It increases the amount of notice for rent increases from 45 days to 75 days, establishes a seven-member tenant-landlord commission, increases education of tenants and landlords by requiring both to sign a document explaining at-will tenancy, and creates a leaflet of rights and responsibilities for both parties, among other things.

Strimling, along with Councilors Spencer Thibodeau and Jon Hinck, wanted the city to be more aggressive by extending the notice period to end an at-will tenancy and by requiring landlords to participate in the state housing voucher program, which is currently a voluntary program.

The council voted 6-3 against Thibodeau’s so-called leeway program, which would require landlords to give 90-days notice to terminate an at-will tenancy. Currently state law allows landlords to do this in 30 days.

Thibodeau’s proposal would have allowed landlords to reduce that notification to 60 days by paying the tenant $500, or to 30 days by paying $1,000. However, the majority of the council was concerned about adding to the financial burden of many smaller landlords, who may rent one or two units to help meet the mortgage

Strimling’s bid to require landlords to participate in the state housing voucher program fell by a closer margin of 5-4, with Councilor Justin Costa voting in support. Strimling showed the council four apartment listings explicitly stating that housing vouchers are not accepted.

“You are automatically told you cannot rent this apartment,” Strimling said. “I think that is discrimination and it’s legal.”

Councilor Jill Duson, however, doubted that the proposal would provide any meaningful relief for tenants, since a landlord could accept an application from a housing voucher holder but still not rent to the person. That would force the tenant to file a complaint with the Maine Human Rights Commission.

“I may make myself look great riding in on a horse, but I’m not really,” Duson said. “It’s a false offer.”

The Southern Maine Landlord Association supported the committee’s reform package but opposed the suggested amendments.

Some renters and low-income housing advocates were disappointed, however.

“If current law had been working, we wouldn’t have asked for this (anti-discrimination) provision,” said West End resident Gwynne Williams, referring to the housing voucher proposal. “It would send a strong signal to the market that the city of Portland does not support discrimination and will enforce rules against it.”

Strimling appointed the Housing Committee shortly after taking office last year. He stacked it with five members, as opposed to other committees with three members, to increase the likelihood that any policy recommended by the group would pass through the nine-member council.

The committee was charged with developing regional solutions to the housing crunch, tweaking zoning and permitting rules to encourage more housing construction, identifying city-owned parcels for housing development, and planning for five new housing-first projects for the chronically homeless.

The committee held a series of meetings to gather information from experts, stakeholders and area residents. Neighborhood leaders and housing advocates began highlighting the need to address housing security, which has dominated the committee’s discussion to this point.