VACANT PROPERTY SPOTLIGHT
----The Committee of the Whole, which I chair, has oversight of the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs. DCRA is not a well performing agency in a number of areas, one of which is vacant property enforcement. It is the policy of the District government to put vacant property back to use. One of the tools is a vacant property tax. While homeowners pay 85 cents per $100 valuation, the owner of a vacant property pays $5. Not only does the higher rate help cover city costs associated with the nuisance property but this creates an economic incentive for the owner to put the property back into use. However, DCRA does a really poor job of enforcement. So it is not hard to find properties that are avoiding the vacant property tax. Here’s an example:
----600 Quackenbos Street, NW: This modest row house on a quiet tree-lined street in the heart of Ward 4 has a bright yellow sticker on the front window that screams “VACANT PROPERTY.” It’s dated April 29, 2015. Although DCRA determined the house to be vacant 8 years ago (two years before the sticker), and the yellow window sticker hasn’t moved in six years, somehow the property isn’t being taxed as vacant. It’s not like DCRA hasn’t known; this was one of the properties featured in a report by the DC Auditor in September, 2017 (“Significant Improvements Needed in DCRA Management of Vacant and Blighted Property Program”).
|
|
----The Auditor wrote: “DCRA’s mismanagement of the vacant and blighted program – including improper granting of exemptions, not following legal requirements, errors with communication with OTR [the real property tax office], and weaknesses in processes related to occupied status – resulted in almost $1 million in lost potential revenue from our sample of only 31 properties.”
----We calculate that for 600 Quackenbos the under-billing has been at least $20,000 per year back to 2015. And the result is little incentive for the owner to put the property back into use.
----As the Auditor wrote in her 2017 report: “The community impact has been no less grievous: deteriorating buildings; fewer neighbors and eyes on the street; magnets for illegal activity; and frustration from neighbors and elected officials when their repeated complaints do not produce results.”
----Even though this property has not been taxed as vacant for the better part of 6 years, last August the owner sought an exemption from the vacant property tax by obtaining a construction permit. And even though DCRA has told the Council that it inspects construction-exempt properties 90 days after permit issuance, DCRA’s public records give no evidence of such an inspection. No matter: our visit to the house earlier this month revealed absolutely no construction activity.
----Nothing but the yellow sticker.
|
|
----On May 27th Mayor Bowser will submit her proposal for next year’s budget. We delayed the submission date (originally March 31st) because we want the $2.3 billion federal stimulus/COVID relief money included.
----According to the February 28th revenue estimates, upon which the budget will be based:
- the current-year budget has a $30 million deficit;
- next year's budget starts with a $95.5 million deficit;
- the 4-year financial plan (2021-24) has a $235 million deficit;
- and revenue growth since 2019 is only $176 million (out of a total local revenue budget of $8.491 billion) – 2% total over three years.
----Then again, the federal payment will add $2.3 billion. Although this will be spread over three years, more than half will be available for the FY 2022 budget.
----We’ve already seen that the Mayor will use some of this for schools: her decision to increase the Uniform Per Student Funding Formula for next year by 3.6% and direct $14 million within DCPS to ensure that individual school budgets are no less than this year’s.
----I think public education should be our highest priority. The federal dollars give us the ability to address the learning loss that has occurred because schools have been closed. Virtual learning has been a poor substitute for most kids. I have asked the Mayor to propose additional relief monies for educational supports such as high dosage tutoring to recover learning loss, social/emotional counseling to address the stress (for both teachers and students) related to the pandemic as well as the trauma we see in so many at-risk kids, childcare, and teacher training, especially regarding addressing reading disorders among an estimated 20% of students.
----These funds can be budgeted in support agencies such as the Office of the State Superintendent for Education (OSSE) and the Department of Behavioral Health.
----Housing, in my view, is our other top priority. The Mayor deserves credit for upping to $100 million annually our expectation for the Housing Production Trust Fund budget. But to meet our goals I think a boost perhaps 3-times that is necessary for the next several years, and the federal dollars give us that opportunity. This is an investment: the boost will leverage significant housing production that, once built, will last a generation.
----For the short term there also needs to be significant application of federal relief dollars for short-term rental assistance, including utilities. The pandemic-induced recession has disproportionately affected low-wage workers – those least able to keep up with rent and utility bills. We can help, and ought to find ways to do so. Otherwise, when the eviction and utility disconnection moratoria end these folks will have debt they can't pay and we will have an eviction crisis.
----There isn’t space in this short article to list all my priorities, but I can’t close without adding this: it’s time to end the bureaucracy that has failed to protect tenants from slumlords, protect innocent homeowners from illegal construction by speculative developers, and improve our neighborhoods from blighted vacant buildings. Last fall the Council approved the Department of Buildings Establishment Act to break up DCRA and start over. Subsequently the Council unanimously overrode the Mayor’s veto of this law. It’s time to implement it, which will require a budgetary allocation of about $10.5 million.
|
|
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE |
|
----The Comprehensive Plan is a Council-adopted plan concerning a range of public policy including education, housing, human services, land use, and transportation. The most important component of the Plan is land use, because the Home Rule Act specifies that “zoning shall not be inconsistent with the comprehensive plan.”
----Bill 24-1, the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Act, is a substantive update to what the Council adopted in 2006. Introduced on April 23rd of last year, the Committee of the Whole held two days of hearings last November 12th & 13th with 159 witnesses. The Mayor’s Office of Planning spent perhaps four years developing the proposed amendments that were submitted.
----Bill 24-1 was marked up by the Committee of the Whole on April 20th, and was approved on first reading by the Council on May 4th. Final reading will be May 18th.
----One way to look at the extensive public comment is to divide it into two camps.
----Camp One believes that affordable housing is our greatest need, new housing comes from private developers (often with public subsidy), and, therefore, if we want more affordable housing we must give developers the greatest latitude.
-
---Camp Two believes that affordable housing is our greatest need, but because of developer-caused displacement over the last two decades (tens of thousands of African Americans have left the city), we need to control developers (as well as provide public subsidy) if we want more affordable housing.
-
---As it now stands, the bill strikes a balance. For instance, in many areas of the city such as Friendship Heights and New York Avenue NE, before upzonings with redevelopment may occur there must first be community-involved small area planning.
----The bill also requires that for the redevelopment of public housing there must be at least an equal number of replacement units, the replacement units have to be built first, and the tenants have a right of return. And this is an important policy, as well, for private sector development.
---- But an absolute ban on displacement (a term which for some advocates includes people moving from the larger residential neighborhoods where land values may increase) could likely have the effect of stymying new housing development by developers.
|
|
----Instead, the Plan calls on the city to try mitigating measures such as piloting a property tax deferral for low-income homeowners in fast-changing areas of the city where property taxes are rising due to development, or the city buying affordability covenants in currently affordable apartment buildings to keep rents from increasing above inflation.
----In recent years many developers have been afraid to pursue additional housing through zoning cases because of citizen lawsuits that can stall the projects for years. This was the primary reason the Mayor proposed amendments to make much of the Plan’s provisions more growth-focused and used vague language (using “should” rather than "ensure" or “must”). The Council has rejected those changes, opting instead for greater clarity about what flexibility is given to the Zoning Commission.
----Since releasing the Committee Print there has been some criticism that the bill “will exacerbate racial inequities in the District of Columbia.” I note this because that is a statement from the Racial Equity Impact Assessment (REIA) that describes the bill as introduced.
----In fact, the REIA finds that the Committee Print makes positive changes although because this is only a plan it does not, in itself, alter the status quo. The Council has continued to strengthen language in the Committee Print, including prioritizing resources towards deeply affordable housing. The REIA is available at here..
----Some have been disappointed that the plan does not do more, particularly to address racial equity. I see this differently. First, the Comprehensive Plan, like any plan, is merely a blueprint. It does not create jobs, close the income gap, create wealth, or make the substantive changes that will alter the legacy of systemic racism. Those changes come from legislation, not a Comprehensive Plan.
----Second, with Bill 24-1 we nevertheless will see meaningful change. The 2006 Plan which this bill is amending was all about encouraging economic development in our city. With these amendments, the Plan will be all about increasing the supply of housing, and affordable housing, in our city. Additionally, for the first time the Zoning Commission, Public Housing Authority, and other government agencies are being directed to use a racial equity lens when making decisions.
----In short, the emphasis on housing production, affordable housing, and the new priority of using a racial equity lens – that will make a difference.
|
|
Upcoming Hearings
of the Committee of the Whole
|
|
Public Oversight Roundtable
The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs’ Handling of Vacant and Blighted Properties
May 10, 2021
2 p.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
Public Roundtable (Reconvened)
Confirmation hearing on various appointments to the Board of Industrial Trades and the UMC Hospital Board of Directors
May 12, 2021
3 p.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
Committee of the Whole Meeting
May 18, 2021
12 p.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
Additional Legislative Meeting
May 18, 2021
1 p.m. of following Committee of the Whole
via Virtual Meeting Platform
Joint Public Roundtable (with Committee on Judiciary & Public Safety)
The Recommendations of the D.C. Police Reform Commission
May 20, 2021
9:30 a.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
School Reopening and Academic Recovery:
Hearing from Experts
May 24, 2021
12 p.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
Oversight Roundtable
The Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs’ Handling of Vacant and Blighted Properties (ANC Commissioners Only)
May 25, 2021
9 a.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
Joint Public Oversight Hearing
(with Special Committee on COVID-19 Pandemic Recovery)
The District’s Public Education System After the COVID-19 Pandemic
May 26, 2021
9 a.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
School Reopening and Academic Recovery:
Hearing from Ward 7 & 8 Families
May 26, 2021
6 p.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
School Reopening and Academic Recovery:
Government Witness Testimony
May 28, 2021
9 a.m. via Virtual Meeting Platform
For More Information on How to 'Attend' a Virtual Public Hearing & Meeting or to Testify for Public Hearings
|
|
CHAIRMAN MENDELSON'S STAFF |
|
The majority of the Chairman's Staff has shifted to telework during this public health emergency. Should you need to contact them, use the following information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
