The District of Columbia is currently facing a contentious debate regarding tenant rights, particularly in relation to the recent introduction of Mayor Muriel Bowser’s Rebalancing Expectations for Neighbors, Tenants, and Landlords (RENTAL) Act.
This legislation, proposed in February, aims to strip longstanding protections from over 34,000 renters residing in market-rate buildings or those that have undergone substantial renovations.
Critics argue that the potential consequences of the RENTAL Act may extend far beyond its initial estimates, as buildings that qualify for exemption must be constructed or renovated within the last 25 years and contain more than 51 percent of units priced above 80 percent of the area median income.
For reference, this threshold translates to rents of approximately $1,900 for studio units and $2,030 for one-bedroom apartments under the Department of Housing and Community Development’s inclusionary zoning program.
Bowser’s administration insists that wealthier tenants in newer, larger developments seldom utilize their rights under the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA), which grants tenants the first right of refusal if a building is put up for sale.
By eliminating these rights, the mayor believes the District can spur new housing development, a sentiment echoed by Deputy Mayor for Planning and Economic Development Nina Albert who emphasizes the urgency of legislative action to prevent loss of affordability in the housing market.
Albert stated that without intervention, the city risks not only losing existing affordable housing but also jeopardizing its status as a national leader in housing production.
However, Councilmember Robert White has proposed a blanket 15-year exemption for newly constructed or significantly renovated properties, raising alarms about the potential widespread loss of TOPA rights across neighborhoods like Navy Yard, NoMa, and the Wharf.
The DC Policy Center’s analysis counters Bowser’s justifications, illustrating that newer buildings constitute a mere 5.4 percent of TOPA transactions and around 3.7 percent of tenant association formations.
These statistics suggest that the proposed RETNAL exemptions may obstruct affordability preservation rather than enhance it.
Tenant advocates assert that TOPA serves critical functions beyond merely maintaining affordability.
In interviews with residents from six large, market-rate buildings, they described how TOPA is central to enhancing their living conditions, ensuring security, expediting repairs, and securing a voice in the ownership and management of their homes.
Despite their ability to pay higher rents, these tenants face precarious situations due to rising rental costs and hidden fees, underscoring the importance of maintaining TOPA rights.
“TOPA is a fundamental right,” asserts Kathryn Howell, a University of Maryland professor and director of the National Center for Smart Growth. “It’s integral to tenant empowerment in a system where their voices should matter.”
Laura De Jaager, who leads the tenant association at the 266-unit Onyx in Navy Yard, emphasizes the profound impact TOPA has had on her community.
Since moving into her building in 2013, she has seen firsthand how tenants have mobilized under TOPA to advocate for their rights.
De Jaager remarks that developers often focus on adding extravagant amenities to attract affluent tenants rather than fostering a genuine community experience.
With new management now in place following the previous owner’s bankruptcy, De Jaager’s building faces challenges that threaten its stability, emphasizing the necessity of retaining TOPA rights.
The Gale Eckington represents another illustration of tenant empowerment through TOPA, where residents successfully negotiated critical terms with a new ownership group eager to uphold the desire for affordable housing.
Former tenant association president Jonathan Gold highlighted the effectiveness of residents engaging in the TOPA process to secure beneficial agreements, including a permanent cap on rent increases and assurances for maintenance of affordable units.
Despite some properties having publicly-funded affordable housing components, Bowser’s RENTAL Act aims to exempt these units under the assumption that they no longer need the same protections as market-rate housing.
Gold contends that such exemptions would leave tenants vulnerable, stripping them of essential protections and placing their futures in the hands of new owners.
Tara Kohli, president of the tenant association at the Loree Grand, shares her concerns about losing the community ethos that has been built over the years.
“The District has a lot of character in its neighborhoods, and people choose where they want to live based on the character of those neighborhoods,” she notes.
For Andrew Frenkel, a resident of AVA on H, the focus remains on securing affordability and safety rather than the identity of the building’s owner.
He emphasizes that the ongoing TOPA process within his building aims to ensure tenants’ demands for rent caps are heard and considered by potential buyers.
Even though the buyer has resisted imposing caps, tenant association president Brian Marshall continues to advocate for affordability, noting that voucher holders are actively involved in board discussions.
Interestingly, some prospective buyers resort to cash offers in exchange for tenants waiving their TOPA rights, raising ethical concerns about the negotiations.
Tenants report feeling pressured by developers who may insist on confidentiality agreements, allowing them to claim that tenants are demanding excessive payouts without allowing for public scrutiny.
According to the DC Policy Center’s findings, the cost of TOPA buyouts can escalate significantly, often amounting to over $100,000 per unit for investors, while tenants relayed experiences of receiving offers that barely scratch the surface of the total transaction costs.
At AVA on H, the offering of $1,000 per tenant to relinquish TOPA rights equates to less than half a percent of the total purchase price, effectively minimizing the financial burden on developers.
In addition to the challenges posed by the proposed RENTAL Act, TOPA comes with its own limitations and conditions, such as instances of bankruptcy that allow owners to sidestep tenants’ rights entirely.
De Jaager’s building recently faced disruption from new management, which she claims could complicate the living situation for low-income residents who depend on vouchers.
Despite these obstacles, she remains hopeful, celebrating the tenants’ growing awareness regarding their rights, as evidenced by their immediate recognition of unlawful management practices.
As the debate over the RENTAL Act unfolds, it becomes clear that the implications for tenant rights and housing affordability in D.C. remain significant and far-reaching.
image source from：washingtoncitypaper
