A DC neighborhood commission wants condo owners told when a warranty bond lands
A DC neighborhood commission wants condo owners told when a warranty bond lands
2026-09-09 · District of Columbia · Regulation · Proposed — not yet introduced
An Advisory Neighborhood Commission has formally asked the District to start telling condominium associations when a developer posts, changes or releases the warranty security that protects them. Nothing requires that notice today. ANC 1E adopted Resolution #1E-202605-05, “Calling for Improved Condominium Warranty Security Notification and Transparency,” by unanimous consent on May 27, 2026, on a motion introduced by Commissioner Brad Howard on May 20.1
This is a request, not a rule. No DHCD policy has been adopted, no rulemaking proposed, and no bill introduced.
The case behind it
The resolution's recitals set out a specific building. The Exchange Condominium at 3619 Georgia Avenue NW received its Certificate of Final Occupancy on October 21, 2021; the first unit sold on December 16, 2021. The unit owners' association reported that homeowners had incurred out-of-pocket costs in the mid-tens of thousands of dollars, with future repair exposure the resolution describes as reaching hundreds of thousands of dollars or more.
A public-records response showed DHCD had not received a warranty bond for the property. The association's president wrote to the Mayor and councilmembers in December 2023. DHCD subsequently told the Commission it had notified the developer in January 2024, issued a formal notice of noncompliance in February 2024, and received the hard-copy bond later that month — and that the bond on file is $660,000.
The sentence the resolution turns on is DHCD's own: it “did not notify the Unit Owners Association when the developer submitted the warranty bond.” As of April 2026, no individual warranty bond claims had been submitted.
What it asks for
Four things, all of which do not currently exist.
- That DHCD adopt an administrative policy requiring notice to associations “whenever DHCD receives, renews, increases, reduces, substitutes, releases, or otherwise materially modifies condominium warranty security.”
- That DHCD review past enforcement cases and notify affected associations that never received notice.
- That DHCD report within 30 days on the status of the public searchable warranty-security record the Commission says District law contemplates — its own review having found no readily accessible public-facing database.
- That the Council consider targeted statutory notice requirements.
It also asks DHCD to work with the Condominium Association Advisory Council and the Office of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions on plain-language guidance about warranty security and claim procedures.
Why the gap matters operationally
DC's structural-defect warranty regime runs on a two-year clock and on security the developer posts with DHCD. An association's ability to reach that security depends on three things it may not know: that security exists, how much it is, and whether it is still there.
The Exchange's experience shows all three failing at once. The bond was missing, then demanded, then posted — and the association, the intended beneficiary, was told none of it. It found out through a records request.
Three practical consequences for any DC board in a building under about five years old.
Do not assume security was posted. The statutory requirement binds the developer; compliance is a separate question. The Exchange's bond arrived more than two years after the first conveyance, and only after enforcement.
Ask, in writing, and keep the answer. Until a notification policy exists, the only reliable way to learn the status of warranty security is to ask DHCD's Rental Conversion and Sale Division directly, and to ask again periodically. A records request is the fallback and it works, as this resolution demonstrates.
Amount matters as much as existence. The security is keyed to a percentage of estimated construction or conversion cost. A $660,000 bond is meaningful against some defects and irrelevant against others. A board that knows the number can size its expectations, and its reserve planning, accordingly.
A note on the resolution itself
The adopted PDF is internally inconsistent: the cover block reads #1E-202605-05 while the page headers read #1E-202605-06. It is cited here by the cover number. It was certified by Chair Josh Jacobson and Secretary Brad Howard, and transmitted to the DHCD Director, the Council Chairman, Councilmember Brianne K. Nadeau, the Chair of the Committee on Housing, the Office of Advisory Neighborhood Commissions, and the Condominium Association Advisory Council.
That last recipient is worth noting. The Condominium Association Advisory Council is the statutory body created in 2017 to advise the Mayor, Council and agencies on condominium matters — and, as the District's own Office of Open Government found in August 2026, it has never met. A request for plain-language guidance was addressed, in part, to a body that does not convene.
What an ANC resolution actually does
Advisory Neighborhood Commissions are elected District bodies whose written recommendations agencies must give “great weight.” That is a real procedural obligation and not a power to compel. A resolution of this kind is best read as a documented, on-the-record request that an agency must engage with — and as the most likely origin point for a rulemaking or a bill, if either follows.
What to watch next
Three specific things: whether DHCD responds within the 30 days the resolution requested; whether a searchable warranty-security record appears; and whether any councilmember converts the fourth ask into introduced legislation before Council Period 26 ends at noon on January 2, 2027.
Related District of Columbia HOA Topics
Stay on top of District of Columbia HOA law
Every week: new District of Columbia legislation, court rulings, and regulatory developments affecting condos, planned communities, and property managers. Free.
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.