Living
Banning smoking in apartments, condos
What every association and owner should know
(Washington Blade photo by Phil Reese)
By DAVID A. RAHNIS
Many urban dwellers are waking up to the concerns surrounding secondhand smoke in their apartment cooperatives and condo buildings. To date, approximately half of all states (including D.C.) have passed comprehensive smoke-free laws. However, these laws typically exempt a person’s home. There is no effort on the horizon to ban smoking in all multiple family dwellings in D.C. This situation could create a dilemma for non-smokers trying to coexist with smokers in a residential environment. Nationwide, the number of residential buildings becoming voluntarily smoke-free appears to be growing.
The secondhand smoke issue is usually raised when a resident complains about the smell of smoke entering his or her apartment from other apartments or areas within the building. Attempting to address those complaints, building management will often undertake an investigation or some corrective action to address the smoke odors. Often, these initial efforts may fall short and residents will contend that only a full building-wide smoking ban can resolve the problem.
The first step for any coop or condo when facing this issue is to review the building’s governing documents for any provisions pertaining to smoking. If a board determines a smoking ban to be in the best interest of the building, the most effective way to do so is through an amendment to the governing documents. For example, in the cooperative setting, an amendment to the Proprietary Lease and/or By-Laws is the most effective means of enforcing a ban. Residents should examine the procedures and voting requirements necessary to amend the governing documents. In the cooperative setting, the most appropriate venue for obtaining shareholder consent would be a special meeting of the shareholders, held in accordance with the by-laws. A court is more likely to uphold a smoking restriction adopted by a supermajority of apartment owners rather than by simple board action.
At this point, there is only one local case involving smoking in the cooperative environment. In David Schuman v. Greenbelt Homes, Inc. (a 2011 Prince George’s County, Md. Circuit Court case now on appeal), a non-smoking cooperative townhouse owner sued building management and his neighbor on the grounds that secondhand smoke from his neighbor violated the nuisance clause of his mutual ownership contract. The non-smoking owner claimed that he suffered from coughing, sneezing, congestion and watery eyes for years due to the secondhand smoke. In an attempt to alleviate the problem, the management company caulked around baseboards, plumbing and electrical outlets in both homes. Such efforts did not satisfy the non-smoking owner.
However, the Circuit Court ruled in favor of the management company, noting that “not all nuisances are necessarily actionable” and that the matter was more appropriate for the state legislature. The court found that the level of smoke entering the non-smoker’s townhouse constituted merely an offensive odor and did not trigger an actionable nuisance. The court said that the plaintiff needed to demonstrate “real injury” such as an “unfavorable health condition”. In addition, the court found no bad faith in the management company’s handling of the non-smoker’s complaints.
While a significant body of legal analysis does not yet exist in the D.C. area, courts in other jurisdictions have already begun addressing and analyzing the issues surrounding community smoking bans. The underlying conclusion is that boards and managers need to be alert to secondhand smoke complaints because cooperatives and condos can be held legally accountable for failing to address smoking-related concerns.
A 2006 New York civil court case addressed the potential for landlord liability due to secondhand smoke. In Poyck v. Bryant, the court found that tenants who vacated a condominium apartment before the lease termination date due to secondhand smoke from an adjoining apartment could assert the “warranty of habitability” as a defense to their landlord’s nonpayment of rent proceeding, notwithstanding the fact that the landlord had no control over the adjoining apartment. The court held that a sufficiently egregious secondhand smoke condition presents health hazards so as to invoke the warranty of habitability, and that the landlord had the power to act against the smoking neighbor.
In Christiansen v. Heritage Hills 1 Condominium Owners Association, a Colorado district court in 2006 upheld an amendment to a condominium declaration that banned smoking inside apartments. The court noted that the board had already tried, unsuccessfully, to address secondhand smoke through various remediation measures.
The New York County Supreme Court in Reinhard v. Connaught Tower Corporation ruled in 2011 that coop boards are required to act reasonably when residents complain that secondhand smoke is infiltrating their apartments from other parts of the building. In this case, the plaintiff-owner of a coop apartment sued the corporation because she detected a strong smell of cigarette smoke in her apartment. She was told by the managing agent and the superintendent to re-caulk the floor, molding and faceplates in her bedroom, which did not eliminate the odor. The board, however, refused to take any action and disclaimed any responsibility for the problem. Plaintiff then sued the corporation for breach of the warranty of habitability, breach of fiduciary duty and constructive eviction among other causes of action. The court held that the secondhand smoke in plaintiff’s apartment breached the warranty of habitability and as a result constituted a constructive eviction. Furthermore, the court determined that the co-op breached plaintiff’s proprietary lease by failing and refusing to take any “reasonable steps” to alleviate the secondhand smoke problem.
If a cooperative apartment or condo community is experiencing an increasing number of secondhand smoke complaints and if remediation efforts have been unsuccessful, the Board should consider a building wide smoking ban. In addition to a “town hall” style meeting, the Board’s next step might be to conduct a formal survey of apartment owners in order to determine the most feasible course of action for the community. If the survey results reveal that a full and immediate smoking ban is not appropriate, the building can implement a modified form of smoking ban. For example, the ban could be delayed for a certain period of time (e.g., two or three years) in order to allow owners/residents time to comply with the new rules. Alternatively, current smokers could be “grandfathered” out of an immediate smoking ban. At the same time, the building could begin to reject any prospective purchasers who smoke. In this manner, through gradual attrition, the building would eventually become entirely smoke free. Owners and boards would be wise to consult management and legal advice when facing these issues to avoid expensive litigation or claims of discrimination down the road.
This is a part of a series of monthly articles by Jackson & Campbell, P.C. on legal issues of interest to the LGBT community. Jackson & Campbell, P.C. is a full service law firm based in Washington with offices in Maryland and Virginia. Those with questions regarding this article, please contact David Rahnis at 202-457-1673 or [email protected]. Those with questions regarding the firm should contact Don Uttrich, who chairs its Diversity Committee, at 202-457-4266 or [email protected].
Real Estate
D.C.’s canvases of artistic expression
Murals offer a unique way to experience the city through art
If you are looking for art for your home or to just explore your creative side, Art All Night is a wonderful event to explore. It is one of D.C.’s most vibrant and inclusive cultural celebrations of the city’s rich artistic community. Held annually in multiple neighborhoods, this free, overnight festival transforms the city into a massive gallery of visual art, live performances, and interactive experiences.
From photography to dance and music to murals, Art All Night highlights the diverse talents of D.C.’s artists, offering residents and visitors a unique opportunity to engage with art in unconventional spaces. This year, it takes place from dusk until dawn on Sept. 27-28, allowing participants to explore the city’s creative energy in a festive atmosphere.
Art All Night plays a significant role in fostering community connections and revitalizing public spaces. The festival often takes place in unexpected locations, such as vacant lots, alleyways, and storefronts, transforming these areas into lively cultural hubs. It is well worth driving into the city for this event.
Among the many forms of artistic expression found in the nation’s capital, wall murals on buildings stand out as a dynamic and powerful medium. While you can’t hang them on the wall in your living room, these large-scale artworks transform public spaces into open-air galleries, each mural telling a story that reflects the city’s diverse population and its history.
The city’s mural scene gained prominence in the late 20th century. Murals became a way for artists to express political messages, celebrate cultural identities, and address social issues. This tradition continues today, with murals serving as both a reflection of the city’s past and a commentary on its present.
One of the most famous murals in the city is the “Duke Ellington” mural, located in the U Street Corridor. Painted by G. Byron Peck in 1997, this mural pays homage to the legendary jazz musician Duke Ellington, who was born and raised in D.C. The mural is not just a tribute to Ellington’s musical genius; it also serves as a reminder of the U Street Corridor’s history as a cultural hub for African Americans during the early 20th century, often referred to as “Black Broadway.”
Within different neighborhoods, you can see murals that celebrate the city’s African American, Latino, and immigrant communities. For example, in Columbia Heights, the “Un Pueblo Sin Murales Es Un Pueblo Desmuralizado” (A People Without Murals is a Demuralized People), a play on words between demoralized and demuralized, stands as a vibrant celebration of Latino culture. Created by a group of artists led by Carlos Salazar and Alfredo Ratinoff, this mural is a colorful depiction of Latin American history, culture, and struggles. It is not just a piece of art, but a statement of identity for the Latino community in D.C.
Similarly, the “Ben’s Chili Bowl” mural on U Street celebrates African-American culture and history. This iconic mural features portraits of notable African-American figures, including Barack and Michelle Obama, Prince, and Harriet Tubman.
You may enjoy a 2.5-hour walking tour of 25 local murals. Book online and check times at www.dcmuraltour.com. Your guide will meet you in front of the CitizenM NoMa Hotel Thursdays through Saturdays. You can also schedule a private tour with a five-person minimum.
The “Black Lives Matter” mural on 16th Street, N.W., near the White House, became a symbol of the global movement for racial justice. Painted in bold yellow letters, this mural was commissioned by D.C.’s mayor in 2020 amid protests against police brutality and systemic racism. The creation of this mural is both a declaration and a demand for justice, making a powerful statement in a city that is at the center of national politics.
The “LOVE” mural in the H Street Corridor is a collaborative effort involving local artists and residents. The mural, which spells out the word “LOVE” in large, colorful letters, is a symbol of unity and inclusivity. It serves as a reminder of the power of love and community in a rapidly changing city.
Murals on buildings in D.C. are more than just decorative art; they are powerful expressions of culture, history, and social consciousness. Each mural tells a story that is deeply connected to the community it represents, making the city’s streets vibrant canvases of expression.
So, as you walk through D.C., let these murals invite you to explore the city’s diverse neighborhoods, learn about its history, and engage in conversations about its future. Whether you are a resident or a visitor, the murals of D.C. offer a unique, creative, and enriching way to experience the nation’s capital through art.
Valerie M. Blake is a licensed Associate Broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH Real Estate / @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her via DCHomeQuest.com, or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.
In the rapidly evolving world of real estate, two major trends are converging to shape the homes of the future: sustainability and smart home technology. As more people become aware of the environmental impact of their choices, and as technology continues to advance at a breakneck pace, these two trends are increasingly influencing buying decisions in the residential real estate market. For those looking to buy or sell a home, particularly within the LGBTQ community, understanding these trends is essential. At GayRealEstate.com, we recognize the importance of these developments and how they contribute to a better, more sustainable future for all.
Demand for Sustainable Living
Sustainability is no longer just a buzzword — it’s a key factor in the decision-making process for many homebuyers. The modern consumer is increasingly conscious of their carbon footprint and is seeking homes that align with their values. Sustainable homes, also known as green homes, are designed to be energy-efficient and environmentally friendly. They often feature solar panels, energy-efficient windows, and advanced insulation systems, all of which contribute to reducing the home’s overall energy consumption.
One of the primary benefits of sustainable homes is the long-term cost savings they offer. By utilizing renewable energy sources like solar power, homeowners can significantly reduce their utility bills. Additionally, many governments and municipalities offer tax incentives and rebates for homes that incorporate green technology, making the initial investment in sustainability more financially viable.
The Rise of Smart Home Technology
Simultaneously, smart home technology is becoming a must-have feature in modern homes. What was once considered a luxury is now becoming a standard expectation for many buyers. Smart homes are equipped with devices and systems that can be controlled remotely via smartphones, tablets, or voice-activated assistants like Amazon Alexa or Google Home. These technologies include smart thermostats, security systems, lighting, and even kitchen appliances, all designed to make life more convenient, efficient, and secure.
Smart home technology is particularly appealing for its ability to optimize energy use. For example, a smart thermostat can learn a homeowner’s schedule and automatically adjust the temperature to reduce energy consumption when the house is empty. Similarly, smart lighting systems can be programmed to turn off when not in use or to dim based on the time of day or natural light levels, further contributing to energy savings.
Intersection of Sustainability, Smart Technology
The most forward-thinking homes are those that successfully integrate sustainability with smart home technology. This intersection is where the real innovation in real estate is happening. Homes that combine these elements offer not only reduced environmental impact but also enhanced living experiences.
Imagine a home where solar panels are not just installed but are also connected to a smart grid that optimizes energy use based on real-time data. Or consider a home with a rainwater collection system that works in tandem with smart irrigation to water the garden efficiently and sustainably. These are not just futuristic ideas — they are already being implemented in new developments across the country.
In fact, this integration is becoming a key selling point in competitive real estate markets. Buyers are increasingly looking for homes that offer both energy efficiency and the convenience of modern technology. For sellers, this means that investing in these features can significantly increase the value of their property and make it more attractive to potential buyers.
Impact on Property Values
As sustainability and smart technology become more ingrained in the real estate market, their impact on property values is becoming increasingly evident. Homes equipped with these features are often valued higher than comparable properties without them. Buyers are willing to pay a premium for homes that offer lower energy bills, reduced environmental impact, and the latest in home technology.
For LGBTQ real estate buyers and sellers, particularly those who value innovation and environmental responsibility, these trends represent an exciting opportunity. By focusing on sustainability and smart home technology, you can find or create a home that not only meets your needs but also contributes to a better, greener future.
(At GayRealEstate.com, we are committed to helping our clients navigate these emerging trends. Whether you are looking to buy, sell, or simply explore the possibilities, our network of knowledgeable and LGBTQ-friendly real estate professionals is here to guide you every step of the way. Together, we can make sustainable, smart living a reality for everyone.)
Jeff Hammerberg is founding CEO of Hammerberg & Associates, Inc. Reach him at 303-378-5526 or [email protected].
Advice
My boyfriend has gained 50 pounds and won’t change
Should I stay with someone who refuses to get off of the couch?
Dear Michael,
My boyfriend of five years has been steadily putting on weight and now I would say he is about 50 pounds heavier than when we met, which was the summer of 2019.
First he blamed the weight gain on COVID. Like most people we were stuck at home, anxious, and overindulging in comfort food; and the gym wasn’t an option. So I didn’t say anything and figured things would return to “normal” once we got through the pandemic.
I will say, though, that I managed to not gain much weight during that time because I found ways to exercise. He didn’t want to join me and I didn’t push.
Although we’re long past COVID, Tim hasn’t changed his ways. He never went back to the gym and continues to eat whatever he wants. I’d say his main hobby is sitting on the couch watching TV and eating junk food.
To make matters worse, his sister recently told me that historically Tim has been a heavy guy. He’d never bothered to share this with me, so I had no idea.
Evidently I met him on the tail-end of an intense push to get in shape. So he looked really good at the time, but that was temporary.
When I confronted him about this, he was mad at his sister for telling me and said I had no right to talk about him behind his back. Well, I didn’t ask her—she just brought it up, and was surprised that I was surprised.
Tim is annoyed that I keep voicing my unhappiness about his being out of shape. He says he is the same sweet and loving person I fell in love with and I’m shallow to be so upset by surface appearances.
I told him he was trying to gaslight me: If he feels that love should have nothing to do with how you look, then why did he go to all the trouble to lose weight and get in shape before we met? I feel like he did it to get a boyfriend and then thought he could just go back to being fat once he was in a relationship.
So now he’s mad at me for saying he’s basically a devious schemer. I didn’t use those words but it’s true I don’t trust him and feel taken advantage of.
Besides the weight, it’s not attractive to see him just basically lie around all the time and not take care of his body.
I asked if he’d consider some drug like Ozempic and he got really angry and said I’m awful to suggest something that might have all sorts of side effects just so that I will be happier with his looks.
The upshot is, I feel stuck with a guy who turns me off and doesn’t want to do anything about it and tells me I’m shallow for not being in love with him no matter what he looks like.
My friends tell me to dump him, but does he have a point?
Michael replies:
You get to decide whom you want to date. You are very far from alone in wanting an energetic and physically attractive partner.
It’s true that no one stays gorgeous, and has an amazing body, forever. We all have to accept the changes that time brings to our partners and to ourselves. But that is different from accepting a partner who isn’t making any effort to take care of himself.
Aside from the lack of self-care, Tim’s refusal to share significant details about his life, or his thoughts and motives around big issues, is both a trust-destroyer and a huge roadblock to your having a close or intimate relationship. And the way that Tim blows off your questions, and attacks you for being curious or confused, is a recipe for distance and resentment. It is also unkind.
Now let’s look at your part in this. I’m curious about what has been keeping you in this relationship. You haven’t said anything about what you like (or love) about Tim. All I know is that he describes himself as sweet and loving.
Maybe he has some wonderful qualities you haven’t mentioned. Or maybe it’s hard for you to stand up for yourself? To let someone down? To have a boundary when it’s important?
My biggest questions: Do you have a history of picking partners who underperform in some major ways? Or is the first time you’ve found yourself constantly disappointed by your partner, and constantly pushing him to do better?
Somehow you’ve created a life where you are hitting your head against a brick wall, getting nowhere, continuing to do it, and complaining about the pain. Tim’s made clear that he doesn’t want to do anything different, and yet you continue to push him to change. Your behavior might be leading him to dig in. In any case, it’s leaving you miserable.
In any relationship, you can certainly ask for what you would like from your partner. But you have to let go of the result. And if the answer is “no,” you can either accept it, or drive the two of you crazy.
If you do care about this relationship, and Tim, and yourself, you could propose to Tim that the two of you meet with a couples therapist. Perhaps this would help Tim to open up and to get a grip on his behaviors. It might also help you to understand why you might be keeping yourself stuck in a miserable position, so that you can raise your level of functioning in this relationship.
One more important thought: Tim’s lack of self-care and energy make me think that he is depressed. I wonder if Tim—before you met him, at least—was one of the many gay men who feel intense pressure to have a certain kind of body. It isn’t always easy, or even possible, to sustain this kind of appearance. And I wonder if he may be ashamed of where he is, which might be one big reason for his defensiveness.
Again, couples therapy—or individual therapy—might help him address whatever is keeping him down. But Tim would have to be willing to go. You can make the suggestion, but you cannot force him to change.
Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C. He can be found online at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].
Biden-Harris administration sets record for number of confirmed LGBTQ judges
Another gay man murdered in South Africa
What is an ‘independent’ voter?
Man who had sex with cucumber in driveway wanted by D.C. police
Federal commission acknowledges violence against transgender women of color
The Washington Blade interviews President Joe Biden
Lana Del Rey, Katy Perry plan fall releases
Queers clean up at 76th annual Emmy Awards
Bye-bye Brat summer, hello fall nightlife
