We asked Ward 2 council candidates about housing issues. Here’s what they said.

PoliticsBy Alex Baca (DC Policy Director) October 2, 2019

Willard Street in Dupont by Ted Eytan licensed under Creative Commons.

The GGWash elections committee is currently in the process of endorsing a candidate for the Ward 2 council seat in advance of the June 2020 election. As part of this process, we sent a questionnaire to each candidate who has filed to run. Our questionnaire contained three sections, covering the broad issues that we routinely cover on the blog and around which we regularly advocate: housing, transportation, and land use.

Those issues are germane to Ward 2 as well. Ward 2 contains some of the densest and wealthiest neighborhoods in DC, and the candidate elected to represent it will have a direct stake in matters that we’ve long covered on GGWash, like dedicated bus and bike lanes and affordable housing.

This week, we’ll be running posts with the candidates’ responses to our questionnaire, broken down by section. Today, you can read what the six declared candidates have to say about housing. You can read more of our Ward 2 election coverage here. We plan to endorse a candidate in November or December.

Here are our housing questions, followed by responses from candidates John Fanning, Jordan Grossman, Daniel Hernandez, Patrick Kennedy, Kishan Putta, and Yilin Zhang.

1. Mayor Muriel Bowser has said that she wants to build 36,000 units of new housing by 2025, which breaks down to about 4,500 homes per ward.

a. Do you agree with this calculation—yes or no? If no, please explain why not.
b. If you do agree that there should be about 4,500 new homes per ward, please explain how and where you would put them in Ward 2. If you do not agree, please explain why you think that other wards should build more housing than Ward 2 to meet the mayor’s 36,000-unit goal.

John Fanning

a. Yes, I agree with the Mayor’s commitment to creating 36,000 units of new housing by 2025, and the need for 12,000 of these new units to be affordable. The Mayor’s declaration of a specific goal for new housing is the first step in creating accountability towards meeting those goals. Often, we have heard specific numbers regarding the amount of housing that is needed to keep up with population growth in the District and the region, but we have seen very little commitment in terms of concrete targets until now.

b. I believe that each Ward should share equally the responsibility for creating 4,500 new housing units within their boundaries. I also believe that several Wards have the capacity to exceed these goals. Historic development, high density and the high cost of land provide challenges for large-scale housing projects in Ward 2. Despite these constraints, I believe housing goals for Ward 2 can be achieved by:

Jordan Grossman

The District faces a housing crisis. We need to produce much more housing that middle- and low-income residents can afford. As the State of the Capital Region 2019 report noted, “the region added almost twice as many people as housing units” from 2010 to 2017, “housing values have risen faster than income” across our area, and – as the report’s authors pointed out on Greater Greater Washington – “rising housing costs have regressive economic impacts.” Whether it’s the Mayor’s goal of 36,000 additional housing units in DC and 240,000 in the region by 2025, the Urban Institute’s recommendation of 374,000 additional housing units in the area by 2030 with nearly 80 percent in the middle or low cost ranges, or the Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments target of 320,000 additional housing units by 2030 with at least three-fourths affordable for middle and low-income households, I strongly support policies that will produce new housing units and preserve and protect existing affordable housing across the District and across the region. We need to dedicate particular attention to extremely low income households – those who make about $32,000 or less a year for a family of four. According to the National Low Income Housing Coalition, the District has a shortage of more than 30,000 rental units for this group alone, which comprises nearly a third of DC renter households.

Ward 2 can and should play a leading role in these efforts, including by producing at least 4,500 new units by 2025. As David Alpert noted earlier this year, “every neighborhood ought to be a part of meeting the need for homes at all income levels.” While I believe that councilmembers should generally take a systematic approach to housing policy rather than picking and choosing specific sites, Ward 2 has several areas that could be ideal locations for significantly more housing, such as the millions of square feet of vacant office space downtown.

Moreover, no one silver bullet will allow us to achieve our housing goals, and producing new units is only part of the solution. Preserving or rehabilitating existing housing is one of the quickest and least expensive ways to address housing affordability. This is an especially important priority for longtime residents who are at risk of displacement as housing and other costs continue to increase. We also must invest in remedying the deplorable state of public housing in the District that’s literally making children, the elderly, and other residents sick. We also can and should do better for Ward 2 residents experiencing homelessness – including treating them as our neighbors, not as a nuisance. I support a “housing first” approach with wraparound services to addressing homelessness and strengthening and expanding outreach teams and day services centers. Ultimately, we ought to recognize that the best solution to homelessness is affordable housing.

The Council should also substantially increase investments in the Housing Production Trust Fund, “DC’s primary tool to finance the production and preservation of affordable housing,” and enact more effective requirements for ensuring that units produced with Trust Fund dollars are affordable for low-income residents and families. Additionally, as the Council considers updates to the Comprehensive Plan, I agree with Greater Greater Washington that the Plan should explicitly “say that affordable housing is the top priority, not just one” of a range of important objectives. This will send a clear signal to courts and agencies like the Zoning Commission as they make decisions that will affect the supply of affordable housing in DC in the years to come.

Daniel Hernandez

a. I’d like to see this as a minimum target, but we should aspire to do more. Housing production has been depressed since the Great Recession, and I think we should aim to correct for this as much as we can.

b. I think it’s a good goal to have. I think practically it’s likely harder to reach for Wards 1 and 2, and some other areas, as there’s less available land. Ideally, it’s achievable in Ward 2 with some denser construction and office conversions.

Patrick Kennedy

a. I agree with this as well as other recent studies that illustrate the housing crisis we face. The number is feasible: DC permitted over 6,000 units in 2017 and if every year was 2017, we could easily meet the 36,000 unit goal by 2025.

b. We all know friends and neighbors who have rising housing costs that make it difficult to continue living in the ward. Having more housing available is only one part of a broader solution to this problem.

When I was Chair of the Advisory Neighborhood Commission, I joined with experts on DC’s housing situation to advocate for policies that increase affordable housing, support disadvantaged communities, and strengthen neighborhood commercial corridors and locally owned businesses as part of the District’s Comprehensive Plan.

In our specific neighborhoods, the built form looks quite different in Georgetown compared to Downtown, and compared to Logan Circle, and the capacity for more housing varies significantly. I would take a community-driven approach and would engage each community to produce a Small Area Plan (as part of the larger, updated Comprehensive Plan) to guide residential development towards meeting the community’s particular goals.

This is a contrast from what we do now at the neighborhood level, which is to essentially litigate development on a project-by-project basis and the only guideposts are the existing zoning code, historic preservation guidelines and review, and vague goals outlined in a Comprehensive Plan. What we should be striving for is more transparent development that adheres to more rational zoning regulations that the community had a hand in crafting.

Additionally, there is a significant opportunity to convert underutilized office space Downtown into housing with a high percentage of affordable units. I will lead on legislation for a rigorous program to promote office-to-housing conversions and the reclamation of highway land for housing purposes where feasible.

Kishan Putta

I believe what makes cities great are the people - specifically the diversity of the people - who live, work, and experience city life together. That’s why I’ve been glad that our city has been growing in recent years, but we need to plan better to support our residents as we continue to grow. As Ward 2 Councilmember, I would prioritize providing housing options that people of diverse income levels can afford.

A recent study by the Urban Institute recommends 374,000 new units of housing region-wide by 2030. By that measure, the Mayor’s 2025 goal is commendable, but I believe DC should aim to build even more by 2030. I’ve been working on affordability issues on both sides of Ward 2 for most of the last decade, whether housing, transportation, childcare, etc. I’m the only one running who has been elected on both sides of the Ward and I have experience reviewing new housing both east and west of Rock Creek Park in Ward 2.

I strongly believe that new housing should be increased in every ward and will welcome new neighbors to Ward 2. 4,500 new units in Ward 2 is a challenging goal because Ward 2 has less room or spare height to build under current law, but we must try.

A few options for more Ward 2 housing include:

As a Ward 2 Council Member, I would take a holistic approach to any major changes in housing and the related community impacts — considering access to fresh food, affordable childcare, public transportation, and social services, to encourage diverse and accessible communities throughout Ward 2 and greater DC.

Yilin Zhang

a. There are currently more affordable housing units at the higher percentage ranges of the AMI, or at or above 50 percent of the area median income (AMI). There is a need for more affordable housing units at or below 50 percent and especially 30 percent of the AMI.

Second, with ongoing market and environmental changes, we may want to consider thinking in proportions instead of exact numbers.

Finally, this is an ecosystem, and, in addition to affordable housing, the appropriate social resources are needed in order to make living in the community sustainable.

b. We need to address affordable housing as a district-wide issue. Equitable distribution across the wards will take time.

This is a multi-faceted issue, and we should also consider where and how feasible it is to have growth in each ward. Flexibility needs to be built into the process to allow additional or less growth in different areas.

Finally, in order to build a sustainable community of affordable housing tenants, we may first consider building them in areas – in each ward – where there is a high density of job opportunities and social resources.

2. Would you support larger, taller buildings if they had more affordable units in them—yes or no? If no, please explain why not.

John Fanning

Yes, I believe DC’s universal building height restrictions have contributed to our current housing shortage. I would support the creation of specific zones throughout the city whereby building height limits would be significantly increased.

Jordan Grossman

Yes.

Daniel Hernandez

Yes, absolutely.

Patrick Kennedy

Where appropriate, yes. Given that the vast majority of developable land is in the hands of the private sector, there is no way to achieve our housing goals without incentivizing the production of more units overall to make projects containing more affordable units feasible.

The District’s inclusionary zoning program already provides a density bonus for developments which are larger and taller based on providing affordable units, but right now we’re simply not delivering housing that is truly affordable for middle- and lower-income families. I would support changing inclusionary zoning to increase the affordable housing set-aside beyond the 8-10% required now and mandating that the units be more affordable, particularly at or below 50% of Median Family Income, changes which would require a higher density bonus than the current 30% included in the current regulations.

Kishan Putta

I’ve been working on affordability issues across Ward 2 for most of the last decade, whether housing, transportation, childcare, healthcare, etc. I’m the only candidate running who has been elected in multiple Ward 2 neighborhoods and I have experience reviewing new housing both east and west of Rock Creek Park in Ward 2.

I believe DC benefits from growth. As mentioned above, I believe everyone should have the opportunity to afford to live in DC and that keeping DC affordable will also keep DC diverse.

Creating and allowing larger buildings can help. But it is important that our government ensures developers live up to their promises. If developers promise to add affordable units in return for being allowed to build larger or taller, government must enforce these deals - and ensure there are enough affordable units - and that they are truly affordable enough. As councilmember I would push for tough and thorough oversight to ensure this. I’ve conducted oversight as a commissioner on both sides of Ward 2 and have testified at over 20 agency oversight hearings at the DC Council! I care about agency oversight and enforcement and would make this a top priority.

Yilin Zhang

We should ensure that there are no unintended consequences. Many residents may not be in favor of taller buildings, and this could potentially impact residents’ quality of life. This is something that we would need to discuss more deeply. Consequently, I would be supportive of considerations for larger, taller buildings if they are safe, engages the community in a discussion, and preserves our historic culture. Of note, only some parts of DC allow buildings up to the federal limit.


3. Only four projects using Housing Production Trust Fund dollars have been built in Ward 2. Please explain how you would ensure that housing, and affordable housing, is more equitably distributed throughout the city.

John Fanning

I would propose the creation, over the period of seven years, of a $400 million citywide amenities fund to be used to incentivize housing development in each of the City’s Wards. These funds would be tiered, contingent on meeting housing production goals; with the first tier (70%) for prioritizing deeply affordable, senior and workforce housing. The second tier (30%) would be for meeting overall housing goals. These funds could be used to build or modernize parks, recreation centers, libraries, or other amenities that would enhance the Ward.

I would also allow for Housing Production Trust funds to be used to provide low interest loans and/or grants for residents to create Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and tiny houses on their property. And where there is housing that already have ADUs that are not being rented, I would support providing property tax reductions to encourage homeowners to rent their ADUs, and additional incentives for accepting housing vouchers.

Jordan Grossman

I believe we need to shift from making decisions on housing development from a “micro policy scale” to more of a “macro” policy scale. In other words, rather than debating efforts to build housing on a building by building or street by street basis, we should enact transparent, predictable, and evidence-based policies and decision-making processes that govern in the vast majority of cases across the District. Every individual proposal will have its unique and particular elements and effects, but it will be very difficult to achieve our ambitious affordable housing goals if each project is litigated anew or is subject to different standards or procedures that can feel arbitrary, unfair, or unpredictable to neighbors, developers, and government officials alike. Having consistent and transparent processes that everyone knows from the outset will guide decision-making may also reduce mistrust and confusion among all stakeholders.

Moreover, as Mapping Segregation in Washington DC and The Color of Law: A Forgotten History of How Our Government Segregated America make clear, segregation and racism in housing policies persisted until more recently than many realize. As courts struck down explicit legal barriers to integration, they were frequently replaced by land use rules that could appear neutral but were intended to resist progress. This is vitally important context in our conversations about equitably distributing housing. As Ward 2’s councilmember, I would press for the Department of Housing and Community Development to prioritize compliance with the Fair Housing Act and the principles of the Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing rule—an Obama-era effort to address residential segregation and the inequitable distribution of housing that the Trump Administration has repeatedly attempted to undermine. The District should voluntarily adopt these efforts even if the federal government abandons or refuses to enforce them. I also strongly agree with Greater Greater Washington that we can and should set specific and enforceable targets for each ward for affordable housing efforts, including requiring minimum ward-based thresholds for Housing Production Trust Fund dollars, and that we should prioritize housing near transit and commercial areas.

Daniel Hernandez

Given that HPTF is an allocation of District funds, I’m not sure higher cost areas should be a priority for the available money. I would emphasize tools to increase affordable housing production by developers beyond inclusionary zoning, such as has happened via the PUD process.

Patrick Kennedy

When I was Chair, our ANC lobbied very hard to secure funding for one of those four projects: the residential units built above the new West End Fire Station. As a result, 100% of the units in that building are set aside as affordable for a term of 40 years. I’m very proud of the work we did to secure that, and I find that there is often a great deal of support for an affordable mix of units at the community level.

One of the challenges we face in Ward 2 is that many developers do not seek HPTF investment in the first place as it is generally difficult to make the numbers work out to provide affordable housing. Another challenge is equitably spending HPTF funds, as for the same amount of money, you can get many more units in a lower-cost part of the District than you could build in Ward 2 based on the higher land costs. There will continue to be tension between the equally valid goals of building the maximum number of units at the greatest degree of affordability and affirmatively ensuring that those units are distributed fairly across the District.

At the Council, I will champion policies that increase the amount of housing built with the HPTF in the ward. I also believe in stronger Council oversight of the HPTF, including setting benchmarks for spending in wards that are currently not seeing as much investment.

Kishan Putta

For most of the last decade, I’ve been working on affordability issues throughout Ward 2, whether housing, transportation, childcare, or healthcare, etc. I’m the only one running who has represented multiple neighborhoods.

What this really boils down to is opportunity — DC residents of all income levels should have the opportunity to find housing and keep our city accessible for diverse groups of people. This should be a citywide goal! Having represented and been a homeowner in two different parts of Ward 2 , I understand the challenges and am committed to more affordable housing in Ward 2.

I am concerned about the small number of new and existing HPTF projects in Ward 2. The fund has proven to be an effective tool to produce more affordable housing, but we need more transparency and accountability, and additional funding over DHCD’s administration. Although Mayor Bowser has dedicated significant funds, the lack of oversight has meant that building quality, affordable housing units has fallen through the cracks.

Recent audits show that less qualified projects are getting funded over more qualified projects and that the government (DCHD) is not enforcing the requirement that at least 80% of the funds are spent on affordable housing. The result is that far fewer units have been built than should have been built - especially for the lowest-income residents. As your councilmember, I would work hard to increase transparency through more regular audits to ensure developers are upholding their commitments. I would also advocate for DCHD to engage in proper monitoring of HPTF projects. This includes making sure that site visits are executed and that sites are submitting their required annual certifications. I’ve conducted oversight as a commissioner on both sides of Ward 2 and have testified at over 20 agency oversight hearings at the DC Council! I care about agency oversight and I will be tough about pushing for the vital HPTF dollars to be used properly. I would also support many of Councilmember Silverman’s housing reform proposals - including a change to allow the Council to appoint two members of the DC Housing Authority’s board.

Yilin Zhang

The Housing Production Trust Fund states that at least 40 percent of the funds need to be used to support households with incomes below 30 percent of the AMI. In each ward, we should assess areas where there could be the opportunity to build affordable and more affordable apartments, and is strengthened by social services that promotes long-term success.

4. Large parts of Ward 2, such as Georgetown and Dupont Circle, are within historic districts. Such districts preserve historic buildings but also make building new housing, and renovating existing housing, more difficult. DC as a whole has nearly three times as many historic buildings designated as Boston.

a. What do you think is the right balance between historic preservation and building more housing? Please explain why you think your response is the right balance.
b. Has Ward 2 achieved this—yes or no?

John Fanning

Nearly all of Ward 2 is covered by multiple historic districts; despite this fact, I do not view historic preservation and housing development as mutually exclusive. The focus needs to be on “How” we go about constructing new buildings and expand existing housing in century-old neighborhoods. Because of the challenges of building additional housing in densely populated, Historic neighborhoods, we cannot squander opportunities to build additional housing when they present themselves. I would consider not including housing as part of the MLK Library renovation to be a lost opportunity.

Jordan Grossman

My family and I have a deep appreciation for DC’s history, starting from when my great-great-grandfather immigrated to DC and worked as a kosher butcher in Georgetown and then downtown. Yet the District is a living and breathing city that has undergone many cycles of change since then, many of which are very positive developments (for example, “prominent parts of the National Mall” are no longer being used as surface parking lots!). While Ward 2 has some of the oldest neighborhoods in the country, we can do much better to balance historic preservation with our need for more affordable housing and promoting inclusive, dynamic, and growing communities.

Recognizing and preserving DC’s history does not require neighborhoods to remain static, but rather can and should complement efforts to confront urgent contemporary challenges like the affordable housing crisis and the existential threat of climate change. Greater Greater Washington has proposed some sensible reforms that would help strike the right balance, such as shifting away from the application-based historic review process and toward a system that would involve proactive and comprehensive surveys of potential historic sites by experts. It may also make sense to include retrospective reviews of prior historic designations as part of any new survey and prioritization process. I also support policies that would direct the Historic Preservation Review Board “to balance the needs of a growing city with their mission of protecting DC’s historic resources.” On a related note, not all historic buildings or districts warrant a maximal level of preservation. We should permit more flexibility to accommodate efforts to mitigate climate change, promote more sustainable transportation, and produce and preserve more affordable housing, among other important goals. For example, absent living in a truly significant historic home, people generally ought to be able to install solar panels without having to undergo extensive bureaucratic reviews or application processes.

More broadly, my campaign is focused on making it possible for everyone in DC – from fifth generation residents like me to recent immigrants and other new arrivals – to live and thrive in the neighborhoods that they love. An overly broad conception of historic preservation or an overly permissive historic designation process can be a significant barrier to that goal.

Daniel Hernandez

a. Historic preservation of truly historic places is important, but I believe we have too loose of a definition for a historically contributing building. We need to balance preservation interests with our housing crisis, and I think we need to shift to emphasize housing production more than we do today. As mentioned in the article, I’m not sure that we really have nearly 3 times more structures worthy of historic designation than Boston.

b. No.

Patrick Kennedy

a. I oversaw the process of gathering community input on, and ultimately led the ANC to be supportive of, the creation of a new Historic District when I was the Commission’s Chair. I feel very strongly about the need to preserve the history of the District and its neighborhoods, including in built form. I secured money for the creation of a Neighborhood Heritage Trail in Foggy Bottom to complement these efforts from a programmatic end.

It’s important to recognize that the historic preservation movement was a necessary response of the wanton demolition and alteration of buildings and neighborhoods that were defining elements of the District’s character. That said, it has been over 40 years since the passage of the Historic Landmark and Historic District Protection Act of 1978 and it’s time to evaluate changes to the regulatory regime we have in place. A lot has changed in 40 years. When that Act was passed, the District wasn’t dealing with housing supply challenges. It was overbuilt: a city with a surplus housing stock and a population that was then declining by the thousands every year.

What was helpful and appropriate then, to counterbalance the trend of turning brownstones into parking lots, increasingly runs the risk of being seen today as an overcorrection to a problem that is just not as salient relative to the other challenges that we face today, whether it’s building new homes for families or installing rooftop solar panels.

We no longer have midnight teardowns and wholesale destruction of landmarks taking place with great frequency, and I worry that the increasing reputation of historic preservation as being a tool to arbitrarily delay and increase the costs of construction will ultimately undermine popular support for historic preservation as a concept where it’s needed.

I continue to believe historic preservation has a role, and should continue to be balanced to allow the built environment to be adaptable to the challenges of an ever-evolving city. I support having regulatory processes that are more objective, transparent, and predictable for property owners and neighbors with clear and specific guidelines for changes that can be undertaken without a long and costly process.

b. No. We’re still too inflexible. The building stock in our historic districts is quite adaptable so I have no doubt that we can rebalance in a way that maintains the historic fabric of our communities.

Too often historic preservation is expressed as a function of “keeping things as they are” at the time a change is proposed, rather than taking the long view about how our city has evolved and what our building stock says about that evolution. The “period of significance” is important for defining architectural features and history, but the stories of the buildings themselves and how they relate to their surroundings is a story about the people who dwell or work in them.

We have buildings in our historic districts that have gone from mansions to rooming houses to offices or single-family homes and many are now – with rear additions – being subdivided again based on the demand for housing. We have buildings that were apartments go to office or hotel use, and some have switched back to apartments or condos. These are natural evolutions based on people’s needs, and we should encourage that.

Kishan Putta

I have been working on Ward 2 historic preservation issues the better part of this decade across Ward 2 on both sides of Rock Creek. I am the only candidate running who has been elected on both sides of the Ward. I have reviewed hundreds of projects in historic districts.

Last year, my constituents were asked to vote on whether Burleith should apply for Historical Designation. I opposed it and it failed by a 76% to 24% margin.

One of the reasons my family has stayed in Ward 2 for so many years is the concentration of beautiful historic buildings. Some of our favorites are Heurich House, Tutorski Mansion (our view for a decade), Old Korean Legation, Halcyon House, Fillmore School, and The Octagon.

But I have seen too many homeowners struggle with the regulations. One was recently complaining that he wants to install solar panels but may not be able to afford to do so because of HD rules.

Honoring the past is important, but so is protecting our future. As a new dad raising a child in DC, I worry about the impact of climate change on my son’s future on the future of low income neighborhoods of DC. A recent NPR study found that as temperatures rise, low-income city communities are disproportionately at risk.

I’ve spoken with some DC experts and am glad to hear that new HD guidelines are being considered to promote environmental sustainability for issues such as solar panels.

And if we can consider District priorities like sustainability, other DC priorities, like affordable housing, should be considered in the historical preservation review process. That will help DC and Ward 2 reach a better balance between preserving the past and planning for the future.

Yilin Zhang

a. Many people move and settle down in DC partly because of our historic culture. In order to strike the right balance, we need to assess the public land that we may consider building on and the concerns of community members. There may be an alternative solution when there is disagreement.

b. Recognizing that Ward 2 has a higher proportion of historic buildings, we should look for opportunities to transform old commercial/warehousing buildings or undeveloped land and to potentially build residential buildings. In this consideration, we should also strike a balance in preserving parks and consider when and where additional park space is needed. I believe we will get there, and this requires a cohesive vision for Ward 2 that is developed through community engagement and discussed on an ongoing basis.

5. Rent control will be up for reauthorization next year. Do you support further expanding this and other tenant protections, such as restoring the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act to apply to single-family homes, or restricting rent increases to CPI + 0%? Additionally, please describe other tenant protections you would pursue.

John Fanning

The Council just introduced the Rental Housing Act Extension Amendment Act of 2019 that extends DC’s rent control laws till 2030. While I support the extension of rent control till 2030, I believe the law should be expanded to include building built before 1995. I would support bringing single family homes back under TOPA, provided that the tenant(s) had rented the entire house. I would not restrict rent increases to CPI + 0%, however, I would use rental assistance funds to help seniors and those with incomes less than 30% AMI to keep net rent increases to CPI.

Jordan Grossman

I strongly support tenant protections, including reauthorizing rent control in conjunction with pressing for additional affordable housing, strengthening the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA), and implementing the District Opportunity to Purchase Act (DOPA) where tenants are unable to exercise their TOPA rights. At the same time, it’s critical to recognize that the District currently has some of the strongest housing protections in the country on the books, but these protections are not a reality for many tenants. The tragic deaths of two DC residents, including a child, in a fire last month make the urgency of stronger oversight and accountability regarding tenant protections heartbreakingly clear. According to a Washington Post investigation “of the city’s handling of the code violations at the property … virtually every relevant regulatory mechanism of the city government appears to have failed” these two victims, who lived in “life-threatening housing conditions.”

Similarly, despite the fact that DC law prohibits discrimination against tenants who rely on housing vouchers, enforcement has been so sporadic that some landlords literally advertise in writing that they do just that. While Attorney General Karl Racine has launched admirable efforts to address this issue, the Council should dramatically boost its oversight of local housing laws to ensure that the protections it has already enacted are actually making an impact in the day-to-day lives of residents. Specifically, the Council should invest in additional housing inspectors and demand stronger oversight (and conduct stronger oversight itself) to ensure that landlords are maintaining safe and livable units and do not exploit or unjustly evict tenants. These efforts could be implemented fairly quickly at relatively low cost, would help identify areas where misspent tax dollars could be recovered and/or redirected, and – most importantly – would put the day-to-day experiences and welfare of DC residents front and center.

Daniel Hernandez

I am certainly for reauthorizing rent control. I am for expanding enforcement and oversight to ensure habitable living standards, addressing predatory landlord practices, and closing loopholes around vacancies and price increases. Broadly, I believe rent control is a necessary band-aid to cover for failures in our housing planning and policies. I would rather we emphasize addressing root causes as I believe the research has shown rent control further distorts the housing market and exacerbates the conditions that led to its necessity.

Patrick Kennedy

I do support the reauthorization of rent control. What’s more, I think that we need to extend rent control on a rolling basis to buildings built after 1975. As more residential homes are built, a smaller share of the District’s rental housing stock is subject to rent control regulations, and that’s problematic for tenants who are subject to exorbitant rent increases. That’s a huge contributing factor in displacement.

The problem is compounded by the prospect that we will have larger numbers of long-term renters in the District as a result of how difficult it has become to buy property here. Historically, long-term tenants have benefitted from the accrued savings that add up over the years through rent control protections, savings which enable them to stay in their units which they could never afford to do if they had to pay market rate. We need to make sure that opportunity is there for new generations.

I believe in cracking down on the practice of management companies using “capital improvements” of dubious necessity or cost-effectiveness to justify large rent increases.

I am open to a conversation about restoring TOPA rights for tenants in single-family homes for legitimate purchasers, but I believe the law should in any event recognize a distinction between an individual homeowner and a multifamily landlord in terms of the burden placed on them in the sale process.

Kishan Putta

I have been working on Ward 2 housing issues for the better part of this decade across Ward 2. I am the only candidate running who has been elected in multiple Ward 2 neighborhoods. I support the reauthorization of rent control as it currently stands, specifically the continued implementation of just cause eviction and rent rate stabilization. I also support reforms that will add further protections for tenants.

Potential reforms to protect tenants could include expanding rent control to more units. Rent control only applies to buildings built prior to 1976. As new buildings are added, fewer units are protected under rent control. I would be interested in exploring how we could expand rent control to include more units in an incremental way.

Another needed reform is eliminating loopholes misused by landlords such as hardship petitions. Specifically, some landlords put off maintenance and capital investments until significant investments are needed, and then file for hardship petitions. This can result in tenants being caught off guard by a sudden increase in rent outside of their rent controlled increases.

Regarding restricting rent increases to CPI + 0%, I certainly want to maintain that limit for the diabled and elderly. I support all current rent control protections for these residents, including the rent control increase of CPI + 0%.

I’m interested in exploring the restriction of rent increases for all to CPI + 0%, but I want to be cognizant of the impact this would have landlords. Specifically, I want to make sure that landlords can continue to make the repairs and improvements necessary to maintain quality properties.

I support continuing to impose TOPA on multi-unit buildings. On the issue of bringing back TOPA for single family units, I would like to be data-driven and have good analysis on the impacts before suggesting such a change. We want to support homeowners adding units of housing but also protect tenants. Single family homeowners who want to sell their homes are not always financially able to wait very long periods to do so. So, if TOPA was restored for them, the timelines would need to be closely considered.

If we make it too hard for small families they may be discouraged from building those units to begin with. If we took this step, we would need safeguards that do not discourage single families from having rental units in the first place - regulations to ensure that both the property owner and the tenant are protected.

Yilin Zhang

Prior to restoring the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act, we need to assess the pros and cons of its implementation in the past. I would support restricting rent increases to CPI + 0% for individuals who would most need and benefit from this restriction. For example, there might be salary requirements to qualify for this (and would need oversight to manage compliance), and we would need to discuss what would be most appropriate and aligns with the vision for equity across communities. For seniors and disabled tenants in rent-controlled buildings, CPI + 0% is the status quo and we should keep this. Finally, for this to be successful and sustainable over the long-term, we need to make sure that sufficient income is generated to, for example, maintain the building.

Additionally, renters should be given, or at least know about/can easily access, a copy of tenant rights from the DC Office of the Tenant Advocate and informational support on how to start a tenants association if interested.