WASHINGTON — The D.C. Council took a first‑reading vote on the Rental Act (Bill 26‑164) on Monday, July 28, approving the measure as amended after a contentious debate focused on shorter eviction timelines and changes to the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act, known as TOPA.

Council Chair Phil Mendelson opened the additional legislative meeting in Room 500 of the John A. Wilson Building and pushed the bill to first reading. “This vote on the rental act is not about scoring political points. It's about solving D.C.'s housing crisis for our residents,” Council member Robert White, chair of the Council’s Committee on Housing, said, describing the measure as “data driven” and intended to balance tenant and landlord needs.

Why it matters: The bill aims to speed eviction timelines, revise TOPA exemptions for new construction, and restructure the D.C. Housing Authority’s board — all changes that council members and advocates warned will alter tenants’ protections and affect housing investment in the District.

Most significant provisions and debate

• Eviction timelines: The committee substitute reduces the pre‑filing notice period for nonpayment from 30 days to 10 days and the summons hearing interval to 14 days in some cases; it also narrows how notice defects must be treated. White said the shorter timeline “gives tenants 10 days more than they had before COVID‑19” in some contexts and argued the change was necessary to reduce a court backlog that is discouraging investment in housing. Opponents said the change would accelerate evictions and risk more people losing housing without adequate time to respond. Council member Lewis George offered an amendment to retain stricter mandatory dismissal protections when plaintiffs fail to properly serve tenants; that amendment failed on a roll call (5 yes, 7 no).

• TOPA exemptions for new construction and covenants: The substitute creates a 15‑year TOPA exemption for certain newly constructed buildings and allows exemptions when a buyer signs a binding affordability covenant (20 years). Council member Matt Fruman proposed restricting the 15‑year exemption to prospective buildings only; Fruman said retroactive exemption would “take TOPA rights from a category of tenants who are in buildings that have been constructed in the last 15 years.” White opposed that amendment, defending the retroactive language as necessary to encourage reinvestment. The prospective‑only amendment failed (4 yeses, 8 nos). A separate Fruman amendment to remove the covenant exemption — that is, to require TOPA to apply even where buyers promise a 20‑year covenant — was approved by the council (6–6 tie failed; later votes produced legislative outcomes described below).

• D.C. Housing Authority (DCHA): The committee’s substitute restructures DCHA governance, creating a nine‑member board with resident representation and new qualification and oversight provisions. White said the changes aim to “empower public housing residents and strengthen oversight.” Council members debated whether elections for public housing resident commissioners should be included; White said resident elections are appropriate and would be implemented under the substitute.

How the council acted

• A motion by Council member Lewis George to postpone debate and first reading to Sept. 17 failed on a roll call (2 yeses, 10 nos). White urged members to proceed rather than delay, saying the issues would not become easier with time.

• Multiple amendments were offered and debated. Notably, Fruman’s amendment to make the 15‑year TOPA exemption prospective only failed, while other amendments seeking to narrow exemptions and strengthen tenant protections passed and failed at various stages. The council ultimately approved the substitute and proceeded to first reading. The measure was recorded as approved on first reading.

Voices from the dais

• Council member Robert White (chair, Committee on Housing): “Doing nothing is not an option… The A and S tackles this crisis head on and will drive investments in new homes, preserve affordability, and ensure fairness.”

• Council member Matt Fruman: “Going forward, [the exemption] would apply to new tenants who never had TOPA rights. Going backwards, it would take TOPA rights from a category of tenants who are in buildings that have been constructed in the last 15 years.”

• Council member Lewis George: “When tenants accept the one‑time payment, they are trading away not just their chance at affordability, but also the opportunity to secure affordability for other residents who rent the units after them.” (quoting the council’s Racial Equity Impact Analysis)

Discussion vs. decision

• Discussion: Members debated the tradeoffs between speeding eviction processes to support landlords and investments versus protecting tenants’ due process and long‑term affordability. Several members urged caution about retroactive changes to TOPA rights and emphasized the potential disproportionate effects on low‑income wards.

• Direction/assignment: Several council members said remaining concerns should be addressed between first and second reading; some amendments were withdrawn to be re‑circulated for second reading.

• Formal action: The council approved the bill on first reading as amended; specific amendments passed or failed by roll call as recorded at the meeting.

Clarifying details from the meeting

• Apartment permit decline cited by Committee Chair White: from about 7,200 permits in 2022 to about 1,200 in 2024 (a decline of roughly 80%).
• Court timing cited by White: “Superior Court handles on average 272 eviction cases a month with just 13 judges; the court reported a 16% judicial vacancy that could reach 22% by year’s end.”
• TOPA data cited by White: “Since 96% of TOPA transactions involve buildings over 50 years old… a 15‑year exemption impacts less than 4% of cases.”

Authorities referenced

• Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA) — referenced throughout the debate (local statute governing tenants’ right of first refusal).
• D.C. Superior Court eviction procedures — discussed in the context of timelines and backlog.

Proper names

D.C. Housing Authority (DCHA); Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act (TOPA); D.C. Superior Court; Robert White (Council member); Phil Mendelson (Chair); Matt Fruman (Council member); Lewis George (Council member); Council of the District of Columbia.

Who spoke (attributed quotes in article)

• Robert White — Council member; Chair, Committee on Housing; government
• Matt Fruman — Council member; government
• Lewis George — Council member; government
• Phil Mendelson — Chairman, Council of the District of Columbia; government
• Kenny McDuffie, Brianne Nadeau, Mary Cheh, Charles Allen and others also participated in debate; their remarks informed vote outcomes and are recorded in the council transcript.

Community relevance

• Geographies: District of Columbia (citywide), with specific concern called out for Ward 8 and public housing communities.
• Impact groups: renters (estimated 70% of D.C. residents are renters), landlords, developers, public housing residents.

Meeting context

• Engagement level: Extensive — the rental act consumed a substantial portion of the July 28 special legislative session, with more than a dozen council members taking part in sustained debate.
• Duration: Discussion on this item spanned roughly one hour of floor time during the additional legislative meeting.
• Implementation risk: Medium — many changes will require follow‑up at second reading, and executive branch implementation and court processes could affect outcomes.

Searchable tags

[rental act, TOPA, evictions, DCHA, housing, Robert White, Phil Mendelson, Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act]

Provenance (transcript evidence)

• topicintro: {"block_id":"block_5746.26","local_start":0,"local_end":435,"evidence_excerpt":"I just have it unanimously. We're on page 2 of the agenda, and the first item of business is bill 26 dash 1 6 4 known as the rental act, rebalancing expectations for neighbors, tenants, and landlords. Bill 26 dash 1 6 4. This is before us as a first reading. Council member Robert White." ,"reason_code":"topicintro"}

• topicfinish: {"block_id":"block_9594.641","local_start":0,"local_end":240,"evidence_excerpt":"Adam, secretary, you'll record the 2 council members as voting no. And the measure is approved. First reading." ,"reason_code":"topicfinish"}

Salience

• overall:0.88,"overall_justification":"Major local policy change on housing and evictions with immediate and long‑term impacts for tenants and developers." ,
"impact_scope":"local","impact_scope_justification":"Applies to District of Columbia housing law and affects D.C. renters and property owners." ,
"attention_level":"high","attention_level_justification":"Extensive floor debate, high public interest in eviction and housing policy." ,
"novelty":0.6,"timeliness_urgency":0.85,"legal_significance":0.7,"budgetary_significance":0.4,"public_safety_risk":0.5,"affected_population_estimate":200000,"affected_population_estimate_justification":"About 70% renters in D.C.; provisions affect eviction and housing purchase processes.","budget_total_usd":0.0}, {