DC bill would ban smoking inside every condo unit in the city
DC bill would ban smoking inside every condo unit in the city
2026-09-09 · District of Columbia · Legislation · Pending — not yet law
A pending District of Columbia bill would make every condominium, cooperative and multifamily building in the city smoke-free indoors, including inside owner-occupied units. Bill 26-590, the Smoke-Free Residential Environments Amendment Act of 2026, is not law. It was introduced on December 30, 2025, and a Notice of Intent to Act was published in the DC Register on February 6, 2026.1
It has been referred to committee and, as of today, no hearing has been held.
What it would do
The bill amends the Smoking Restriction Act of 1979. As described in the published summaries, it would prohibit smoking tobacco or plant products in two places: anywhere inside multifamily housing, defined as housing with two or more dwelling units; and outside within 25 feet of an entrance or window of multifamily housing when another person is present.
It would also require landlords of multifamily housing to include notice of the restriction in lease agreements and to inform existing tenants of the new rules.
Opposition materials describe the coverage as reaching condominiums, townhomes, multifamily buildings and duplexes. The Premium Cigar Association is running a public campaign against it.
Why the two-unit threshold is the striking part
Most smoking legislation aimed at housing reaches common areas, or reaches rental units through the landlord-tenant relationship. A prohibition on smoking “anywhere inside” housing of two or more dwelling units reaches the interior of a unit its owner lives in — and reaches a two-unit rowhouse condominium as squarely as a 300-unit high-rise.
That is a materially different proposition from the smoking rules District associations adopt for themselves, which typically cover common elements, balconies and limited common elements, and which reach unit interiors only where an association has amended its declaration by the supermajority its own documents require.
A note on sourcing: the sponsorship of this bill is reported inconsistently. The Office of the Tenant Advocate's legislative tracker credits Councilmember Christina Henderson; a commercial bill tracker lists Councilmembers Matt Frumin, Christina Henderson and Brooke Pinto. Treat it as introduced by Councilmember Henderson and colleagues, and verify at the Council's own legislative record before relying on the attribution.
What it would change for a DC board
It would hand associations an enforcement duty they did not ask for. This is the practical heart of it. Today, a District condominium that wants a smoke-free building has to persuade its owners to amend the governing documents — a slow, contested, supermajority process that many boards have attempted and abandoned. A statutory prohibition delivers the outcome without the vote, and then leaves the board holding the enforcement problem.
What enforcement would actually mean is the question behind whether a board wants this. Smoking complaints inside units are among the hardest an association handles: the evidence is transient, the complainant and the respondent are neighbours, and the remedy escalates quickly from a letter to a fine to litigation. A statute that makes the conduct unlawful does not make the proof easier.
The interaction with existing rules would need working out. An association with a declaration provision permitting smoking in units, or a rule permitting it on balconies, would face a direct conflict. Associations that already prohibit it would find their rule reinforced but their enforcement mechanism unchanged — the fine would still run under the governing documents, not the statute, unless the bill said otherwise.
The 25-foot perimeter is an amenity problem. In a District of narrow lots and small setbacks, 25 feet from an entrance or window, when another person is present, will cover most of the outdoor space a typical condominium has. Courtyards, roof decks, pool surrounds and front stoops would in practice be inside the perimeter. Boards that have solved smoking complaints by designating an outdoor area should look at whether that area survives.
Reasonable-accommodation questions the bill does not obviously answer
Two, and both are the kind that arrive in a board's inbox rather than in a committee report.
The first is medical cannabis, which the District permits and which patients frequently consume by smoking. A prohibition on smoking “plant products” indoors, applied to a patient's own home, is a question that requires an answer before enactment rather than after.
The second is what a board does with a request to be excused. Associations are subject to reasonable-accommodation obligations under the federal Fair Housing Act and the DC Human Rights Act. Whether and how those interact with a statutory smoking prohibition is a question that otherwise gets improvised at a hearing.
What to watch next
A hearing date. This bill has sat in committee since a Notice of Intent to Act in February 2026 with no hearing recorded, and Council Period 26 ends at noon on January 2, 2027. A measure not finally adopted by then lapses, without prejudice to reintroduction.
If a hearing is noticed, it is worth a board's attention: the record made there is where the questions above get answered, and community associations are the entities that would carry the result.
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.