AOBA Testifies on Vending Legislation

The District has been operating under a series of emergency and temporary laws regulating vending operations. On June 9, the Committee on Public Services and Consumer Affairs held a hearing on Bill 18-257, the Vending Regulation Act of 2009,” which proposes to permanently grant the Mayor extensive authority to regulate vending in the public space. Read more

July 1 Hearing on Ex-Offenders Protection Bill

The Committee on Aging and Community Affairs, chaired by Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7), has set a July 1 hearing for B18-136, the “Human Rights for Ex-Offenders Amendment Act of 2009.” The legislation was introduced in February by Councilmember Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) and co-sponsored by Councilmembers Alexander and Harry Thomas (D-Ward 5). Councilmember Barry has introduced similar versions of the legislation during the two previous Council Periods without success. Read more

Council to Hold Hearing on Fire Alarm Legislation

On June 19, the Council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary will hear testimony on B18-178, the “Fire Alarm Notice and Tenant Fire Safety Amendment Act of 2009.” An emergency version of the legislation is currently in effect. Bill 18-178 mirrors the emergency law, with one notable exception. Both versions direct certain building owners to notify tenants about the operation of fire safety systems in their buildings; maintain a fire safety plan; and conduct an annual fire drill. Read more

AOBA Testifies Against Rental Housing Bills

On June 4, Peter Bonnell, of United Investment Partners, and Vincent Mark Policy, Esq., of Greenstein, DeLorme & Luchs, P.C., testified before the Committee on Public Services and Consumer Affairs about AOBA’s significant concerns with B18-92, the "Omnibus Rental Housing Amendment Act of 2009” and B18-42, the “Tenant Protection Act of 2009.” Bill 18-92 will create a tenant cause of action in the Landlord Tenant (L&T) Branch of DC Superior Court based on allegations of housing code violations, and also directs the Mayor to create a proactive housing inspection program. Bill 18-42 addresses the District’s authority and duty to close, placard, condemn, or otherwise order the removal of residents of a housing accommodation, due to the existence of housing or building code violations. Read more

AOBA Testifies on Vending Legislation

The District has been operating under a series of emergency and temporary laws regulating vending operations. On June 9, the Committee on Public Services and Consumer Affairs held a hearing on Bill 18-257, the Vending Regulation Act of 2009,” which proposes to permanently grant the Mayor extensive authority to regulate vending in the public space.  AOBA Executive Board member Carlton Diehl of the Cafritz Company presented AOBA’s primary concerns with the legislation: the fact that it would enshrine, in law, the right of all currently licensed vendors to do business in their present locations, even though scores of those locations presently violate the city’s own regulations governing vending locations; and the inadvisability of attempting to address by statute, rather than through a more flexible administrative process, the complex details and competing demands of safety and economic interests that must be balanced when regulating vending locations.

The first concern arises because Bill 18-257, unlike the law currently in effect, includes language permanently grandfathering in all vending locations previously assigned to a licensed vendor. If this provision were adopted, it would require a statutory amendment whenever there is a subsequent change in the use of public space that may require modification or relocation of a current vending space, e.g., adding/changing a bus zone, loading zone, construction zone or parking meter locations.  

Additionally, scores, perhaps hundreds,  of the vendors who have previously received permits are currently operating in locations that are not in compliance with the District’s own regulations—a messy situation, one obviously of the city’s own making, which neither the Executive or Council has wanted to step up and rationally, permanently sort out. By adopting Bill 18-257, both branches would be permanently taking a dive on doing so… and telling property owners and retailers adversely affected by the illegal vending locations to “just get over it.” 

Not, clearly, a result in which AOBA believes it, or the broader business community, should acquiesce. To address these concerns, AOBA presented the following basic recommendations to the Council:  revise the legislation to delete the grandfathering language, and maintain the current law’s requirement that all vending locations must ultimately be made compliant with the city’s  regulations; and amend the bill to authorize the Mayor to assign vending locations through the regulatory/administrative process, thereby providing him the flexibility necessary to efficiently manage the variety of demands that exist for use of the public space.

July 1 Hearing on Ex-Offenders Protection Bill

The Committee on Aging and Community Affairs, chaired by Yvette Alexander (D-Ward 7), has set a July 1 hearing for B18-136, the “Human Rights for Ex-Offenders Amendment Act of 2009.” The legislation was introduced in February by Councilmember Marion Barry (D-Ward 8) and co-sponsored by Councilmembers Alexander and Harry Thomas (D-Ward 5). Councilmember Barry has introduced similar versions of the legislation during the two previous Council Periods without success.

B18-136 would designate ex-offenders as a protected class under the District’s Human Rights Act.   It amends that Act to prohibit employment, housing, and educational discrimination based upon a person’s arrest or criminal record.   If passed, it would be an unlawful discriminatory practice to discriminate against a person with respect to hiring, terms and/or conditions of employment based on their ex-offender status.  As to housing, it would be discriminatory to, among other actions, refuse or restrict facilities, services, repairs or improvements for a tenant based on such status.  (See February At Issue for a more detailed summary of legislation).

In preparing for the hearing, AOBA has again teamed up with a broad-based coalition of business groups, each of which will communicate their collective concerns to the Council.  AOBA members will receive a separate Action Alert regarding the hearing in the next week.

Council to Hold Hearing on Fire Alarm Legislation

On June 19, the Council’s Committee on Public Safety and the Judiciary will hear testimony on B18-178, the “Fire Alarm Notice and Tenant Fire Safety Amendment Act of 2009.” An emergency version of the legislation is currently in effect. Bill 18-178 mirrors the emergency law, with one notable exception. Both versions direct certain building owners to notify tenants about the operation of fire safety systems in their buildings; maintain a fire safety plan; and conduct an annual fire drill. However, the emergency law only requires owners of buildings with 5 or more units to maintain a fire safety plan and conduct an annual fire drill, while Bill 18-178 would impose these requirements on buildings with 2 or more units.

Prior to the adoption of the emergency legislation, AOBA successfully argued that it should direct the Mayor to publish a sample tenant notice form. AOBA also successfully advocated for the longer (annual) fire drill interval. AOBA also recommended that the fire drill provision be limited to high rise buildings. While Councilmember Graham (D-Ward 1), the bill’s author, revised it to include AOBA’s first two recommendations, he would not do so in regard to which buildings will be subject to the fire drill requirements. Graham ultimately revised the bill to parallel the rent control standard, i.e. applying the fire drill requirement to buildings with five or more units.

AOBA continues to believe that the greatest need for fire drills exists in high-rise buildings, which can present more challenging safety concerns because of their greater number of tenants, multiple exits and entryways, and longer corridors. Members have also expressed concern with the notification provisions. Currently, the law requires that housing providers notify tenants by first-class mail; AOBA believes that hand-delivery should also be permitted. We will press both of these points at the June 19 hearing. AOBA members will shortly receive an Action Alert providing additional information about the hearing and opportunities to testify.

AOBA Testifies Against Rental Housing Bills

On June 4, Peter Bonnell, of United Investment Partners, and Vincent Mark Policy, Esq., of Greenstein, DeLorme & Luchs, P.C., testified before the Committee on Public Services and Consumer Affairs about AOBA’s significant concerns with B18-92, the "Omnibus Rental Housing Amendment Act of 2009” and B18-42, the “Tenant Protection Act of 2009.” Bill 18-92 will create a tenant cause of action in the Landlord Tenant (L&T) Branch of DC Superior Court based on allegations of housing code violations, and also directs the Mayor to create a proactive housing inspection program. Bill 18-42 addresses the District’s authority and duty to close, placard, condemn, or otherwise order the removal of residents of a housing accommodation, due to the existence of housing or building code violations. It also directs the owner of a property subjected to any such actions to locate, in the same or substantially similar area, and provide sufficient funds for, alternate and sanitary temporary housing for displaced tenants.

The AOBA panel testified that creating a new tenant cause of action is unnecessary, given judicial and regulatory remedies already available to tenants; these include filing a defense or counterclaim, negotiating with a housing provider to include repairs in a settlement agreement, and petitioning to pay rent into the Court registry. A variety of administrative means to allege substantial housing code violations exists, as well.  AOBA also testified that the L&T Branch is the wrong forum for the relief proposed, as it was created to provide a forum where parties can recover possession of property.

The AOBA panel further noted that the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) has recently launched an aggressive proactive inspection program-- using its existing statutory authority-- that will afford tenants greater protections because of its comprehensive and proactive, rather than complaint-driven, approach.

In regard to B18-42, AOBA does not believe that it affects our members, since it is aimed at properties subject to government sanction because of severe housing/building code violations. We did, however, recommend revisions to the relocation cost provisions that would better ensure that owners are properly notified of their obligations.