Tenant advocate warns emergency housing fund shortfall as water shutoffs and condemnations rise

Chief Tenant Advocate Johanna Shreve told the Committee on Housing on June 4 that the Office of the Tenant Advocate (OTA) faces recurring midyear pressure on its emergency housing program and requested the Council consider a larger annual appropriation.

Shreve summarized FY25 spending and shortfalls: the OTA’s FY25 approved budget was $4,175,757; the executive branch later swept $163,247 from that total, leaving an adjusted FY25 appropriation of $4,012,510. Shreve said OTA had spent about 73% of that remaining FY25 budget and that $1,114,549 remained, of which roughly $1,017,118 was personnel and $97,430 non-personnel. On EHAP specifically, OTA had spent $621,512 against an FY25 appropriation of $570,000, a deficit of $51,512; the mayor approved a $250,000 transfer to the OTA to carry it through the remainder of FY25, leaving roughly $198,488 in the agency’s EHAP account, Shreve said.

Shreve urged a permanent funding increase for EHAP, saying a trend analysis by the agency identified roughly $760,000 as a safer annual appropriation to avoid repeated midyear transfers. She also reported one administrative recovery: the owner of a property at 1433 Columbia Road agreed to reimburse OTA $260,299 for emergency housing expenditures tied to a displacement in that building. With additional litigating attorneys planned for hire, Shreve asked the Council to shift $10,000 into a court-filing line to ensure the office can cover litigation costs when it pursues reimbursements and other enforcement actions.

Public testimony echoed concerns about the OTA’s responsiveness and about tenant needs. Karen Lundrigan told the committee she is currently homeless after a unit she considered home was condemned; the OTA provided two weeks of hotel placement but denied an extension she requested and she said repeated calls to the OTA had gone unanswered in the past. “I have called their number numerous times. I don't get callbacks. I'm 1 of many people who feel this way,” Lundrigan said. Shreve acknowledged staffing and funding limits and said OTA staff will follow up to clarify whether an extension should have been provided in that case.

Shreve told the committee the OTA is also seeing a new wave of requests tied to water-discontinuation notices from DC Water. She said the office maintains a confidential list of discontinuation notices and has begun receiving calls from tenants whose buildings were at risk of condemnation because the water had been shut off for unpaid bills or other utility issues. The committee said it will follow up with DC Water and the Mayor’s Office to better understand how the discontinuation notices are handled and whether changes are needed to prevent tenant displacement.

Shreve also described other FY26 budget changes in OTA’s request, including restored funding for two vacant attorney positions that were swept in FY25, modest increases for legal-research subscriptions and outreach printing, and a proposed increase in funds to support an in-person tenant summit scheduled for September. There were no formal committee actions during the hearing; councilmembers asked OTA to provide additional documentation and follow-up on specific constituent cases.