| BELOW IS AN IMPORTANT MESSAGE OF CONCERN TO ALL TENANTS, POSTED ON THE COALITION TO REINSTATE GRAYCE WIGGINS WEBSITE, ABOUT ATTEMPTS BY THE DEPT. OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT (DCHD) TO RE-WRITE THE RENT CONTROL LAW REGULATIONS, including a letter from the Office of Tenant Advocate (OTA)'s Chief Tenant Advocate Johanna Sheve expressing concerns about this matter. We urge all tenants to read and distribute this e-mail as far and wide as possible. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- From: "Peter Schwartz" <pschwa@gmail.com> View contact details To: "reinstategraycewiggins" <ReinstateGrayceWiggins@yahoogroups.com> As you may know, DHCD is trying an end-run around the Council's effort to reform Voluntary Agreements by rewriting the regulations that govern these agreements. This afternoon, DHCD is holding a so-called "stakeholder meeting" suposedly to solicit input into their regulation rewriting effort. Not only is this effort to rewrite the regulation unusual and inappropriate, but based on what we have heard and seen, DHCD's actions seem extremely suspicious, and it is important that tenants oppose them. Below is the text of a letter from Chief Tenant Advocate Johanna Shreve to DHCD Director Leila Edmunds expressing her opposition to DHCD's gambit, and stating that the Office of Tenant Advocate will not participate in DHCD's effort. We are in the process of drafting a similar letter to Edmonds, to be signed by tenants and tenant organizers. Be on the lookout for it today, and if you are interested in signing onto it, please let me know by email. -Peter ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- ---- Ms. Leila Finucane Edmonds 801 N. Capitol Street, N.E., Suite 8000 Washington, DC 20002 Dear Ms. Edmonds: Thank you for the invitation to participate in the DHCD stakeholder working group meeting scheduled on Wednesday, October 29, 2008 to discuss DCMR Title 14 regulatory amendments relating to Voluntary Agreements. The Office of the Tenant Advocate will attend as an observer but will not actively participate in the meeting for the following reasons. First, as my testimony at the Council's October 14th hearing set forth, it is my belief that the original purpose of the Voluntary Agreement provision as reflected in the legislative history is clear. So too is the fact that changes to the statutory language over successive rent control laws have unintentionally obfuscated that original purpose. Rather than designing regulations that would of necessity further entrench that obfuscation, the Council appears poised to amend the statutory language in order to return to and strengthen the original purpose. The OTA supports this legislative effort. Second, as you are aware, one of the primary functions of the OTA is to identify and recommend legislative, regulatory, or administrative reforms as necessary to prevent the erosion of existing tenant rights and protections, whether the challenges are due to problems with the administration, enforcement or interpretation of the law. Section 215 of the Rental Housing Act, we believe, represents a striking and urgent example of a statutory provision that must be revised in order to ensure that the Voluntary Agreement is used as intended, and to protect the rights of both current and future tenants pursuant to the rent control law. Third, there is no question that the current regulations, contained in the DCMR Title 14, while flawed, reflect the original legislative intent better than some of the statutory language which, as I testified to at the hearing, has been stripped of its original context. We applaud recent decisions of the Rent Administrator that disapprove certain creative and unintended uses to which the Voluntary Agreement has been put. But we also believe that there have been numerous instances of misuse of the Voluntary Agreement over the past several years -- whether due to lax review or other administrative failures such as the lack of timely responses to filings -- which have resulted in either the active or passive approval of Voluntary Agreements that do not comport with the Rental Housing Act. The OTA does not believe in amending the regulations to further eviscerate the rights of District tenants. Finally, the OTA believes that it is manifestly up to the Council to clarify what the proper uses of the Voluntary Agreement are, and it is our expectation that the October 14th hearing on this matter which Councilmember Barry recessed will be reconvened shortly. For all these reasons, I believe that regulatory revision prior to statutory amendment would be untimely. Inasmuch as it takes into account numerous abuses and heavy-handed tactics with regard to the Voluntary Agreement, the pending legislation is somewhat lengthy, and as stated in my testimony certainly there is room for modification and compromise. But restoring the Voluntary Agreement to its original purposes necessarily entails prohibiting certain uses now prevalent that clearly undermine rent control. This is what the legislative hearing process is all about, and we believe that it is the proper venue for this dialogue. Respectfully submitted, Johanna Shreve cc: Anita Visser |
========================================================================
TENAC's web site: http://tenac.org
TENAC's Mobalization list archive: http://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/tenac
========================================================================
TENAC's web site: http://tenac.org
TENAC's Mobalization list archive: http://lists.riseup.net/www/arc/tenac
========================================================================
