Auditor: Housing Code Enforcement Needs Improvement

For immediate release

Contact: Diane Shinn

Auditor: Housing Code Enforcement Needs Improvement

Case study on Dahlgreen Courts shows problems with documentation and tracking of violations, and inconsistent enforcement that result in a failure to protect the health and safety of tenants

WASHINGTON, September 24, 2018 – The District’s current housing inspections process through the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs provides excessive leniency to landlords in D.C., allowing them to take months to resolve violations and get by with small or no fines for their transgressions, according to a new case study released today by the Office of the District of Columbia Auditor (ODCA).

“Failure to enforce the housing code effectively and consistently jeopardizes the health and well-being of the most vulnerable residents in the District,” said D.C. Auditor Kathy Patterson. “It also contributes to the loss of affordable housing when bad conditions persist and deteriorate. Tenants who have the resources can go elsewhere and those who don’t are forced to live in substandard conditions.”

ODCA did the audit at the request of D.C. Council Chairman Phil Mendelson to determine whether DCRA could better protect tenants through more rigorous and timely enforcement of the housing code, and whether recordkeeping, case tracking, and reporting were adequate for the Council to provide oversight on the health and safety of tenants in the District.

The report uses Dahlgreen Courts—a rental complex of nearly 100 units in the Brookland neighborhood of Ward 5—as a case study that illustrates how the enforcement process can stretch into months. Residents of Dalgreen Courts submitted numerous complaints to DCRA in December 2016 and DCRA responded with a whole-building inspection. Inspectors issued 24 notices of violation (NOVs) for 105 violations in 17 units and two common areas with potential fines of $36,300. When the issues were resolved nearly eight months later, the landlord paid a fine of $2,500 for violations in six units.

“The process for responding to housing code violation complaints allows landlords to put off remediation through extensions and delayed re-inspections,” Patterson said. “This can allow the property owner to work the process to delay cure and keep District residents in substandard housing conditions for extended periods of time,” Patterson said.

Minimal repercussions for code violators

Even when fines are levied, they may not be sufficient to deter landlords from allowing conditions in their units to deteriorate, the report found. Because DCRA does not publish data on housing code violations, landlords do not suffer a loss of reputation due to noncompliance with the housing code, nor are they prevented from doing other business within the District, including entering into new financial arrangements with tenants or the City, expanding operations, or seeking renewal of a business license.

DCRA leadership has discretion

Housing code enforcement is broadly and vaguely outlined in the D.C. Code and the District of Columbia Municipal Regulations (DCMR), which gives considerable latitude to the director of DCRA. Current language in the DCMR allows but does not require more rigorous enforcement of violations while the current leadership of DCRA has signaled a preference to continue the current enforcement regime.

The report found that to improve housing code violation outcomes for tenants and preserve a greater proportion of affordable housing stocks would require significant change. ODCA recommends that DCRA alter the process to shorten the time between an issuance of violation notifications, improve transparency and accountability, and deter violations by increasing financial penalties and other improvements that do not require statutory change. ODCA recommends that the D.C. Council require even more significant protections by mandating faster and more effective enforcement actions.

Problems at DCRA are not new

Problems at DCRA have long been a source of concern. A DCStat executive briefing from 2005 “identified the myriad of tactical and strategic issues that have not been systematically addressed.” Many of the concerns from that document appear to persist at DCRA.

D.C. officials identified high leadership turnover at DCRA—which has had six directors since 2001—

as a concern more than 13 years ago. Turnover can undermine performance improvement, continuity, and leads to accountability issues as each new director dismisses past problems as the fault of their predecessor and/or the policies of the previous Mayor.

Among the report’s other findings are:

• Recordkeeping is incomplete and does not provide a clear and durable record of enforcement activity.

• The Mayor and D.C. Council do not receive regular reporting from DCRA on trends and patterns of housing code compliance.

# # #