A gap in DC public safety laws makes it difficult for the Office of the Attorney General (OAG) to sue landlords who do not follow police recommendations to improve the safety and security of their apartment buildings. The DC Council is about to take up OAG-authored legislation aimed at closing that gap.
As Forest Hills Connection reported in May: An MPD Second District commander recommended in 2021 and 2022 that the OAG designate four Van Ness apartment buildings – Connecticut House, 3003 Van Ness, the Chesapeake and the Saratoga – as “nuisance buildings.” DC law makes it possible for the OAG and community groups to sue the owners of nuisance buildings if there’s evidence of drugs, gun or prostitution activity on the premises, but the OAG declined the police recommendation because the “lawsuits must also show that the properties are having an ‘adverse effect’ on the neighborhood as a result.”
The OAG’s Secure Apartments For Everyone (SAFE) Act, an expansion of the 1998 nuisance properties law, adds a focus on the adverse effects inside apartment complexes.
“Many tenants from across the District have expressed a need for immediate, comprehensive action to improve safety and security at their apartment buildings,” DC Attorney General Brian Schwalb said in a statement to Forest Hills Connection. “In response to these concerns, I introduced the SAFE Act, which, if adopted by the Council, will provide a coordinated approach in which relevant District agencies will work with landlords and tenants to address persistent patterns of criminal activity, helping to ensure that all Washingtonians are safe in their homes.”
“The SAFE Act offers a preventive, proactive suite of tools to address security concerns and enhance the District’s ability to work with tenants and landlords to develop tailored plans to address the needs of each building,” Schwalb said.
The legislation would give the DC Superior Court the ability to order the Department Buildings to conduct security assessments once arrests for violent crimes or seizures of guns and drugs meet certain thresholds. The resulting report would be shared with the OAG as well as the Office of the Tenant Advocate, the local advisory neighborhood commission, the ward’s council member office, and the president of the building’s tenants association.
The court could also “determine the most appropriate measures and course of action,” including financial penalties. Landlords with nuisance properties could be ordered to pay $1,000 each day that a nuisance remains unresolved. After 30 days, the fines would go up to $5,000 per day.
And, the bill assigns the landlord responsibilities for maintaining self-closing and self-locking exterior doors, and meeting at least the minimum standards for exterior lighting.
Still, the Council can, and likely will, put its own stamp on the legislation. For example, instead of OAG lawsuits, could mechanisms such as mediation be used to propel a landlord to act? Could security assessments be triggered by entities outside of the courts, such as ANCs, tenant associations, and DC agencies?
What could also be further defined are the roles of the police, who are often the first to be called upon when disturbances occur in apartment buildings, and the Departments of Behavioral Health and Human Services, two agencies responsible for providing intensive addiction and mental health services to those holding permanent supportive housing vouchers.
The OAG presented the SAFE Act on July 11th, shortly before the Council’s summer recess. The legislation is to be referred to the Judiciary and Public Safety Committee and the Committee of the Whole on September 17th. The Judiciary Committee is chaired by Council member Brooke Pinto; the Committee of the Whole, by Council Chair Phil Mendelson.
Tenant leaders will be able to weigh in during the legislative process through direct communication with Council members, and through their testimony.