Connect with us

Living

Banning smoking in apartments, condos

What every association and owner should know

Published

on

cigarette, gay news, Washington Blade
cigarette, gay news, Washington Blade

(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].

Advertisement
FUND LGBTQ JOURNALISM
SIGN UP FOR E-BLAST

Advice

I keep getting rejected on the apps

Ready to give up on the gay dating scene

Published

on

Getting rejected on the apps? Try some old school, offline experiences to shake things up. (Photo by BAZA Production/Bigstock)

Dear Michael,

I keep getting rejected on the apps. I don’t want to put myself out there anymore.

I don’t understand gay men. I think they behave really badly.

Guys stop replying in the middle of a text conversation and then un-match me. Guys don’t show up when we make a plan to meet. After a date or even a hookup that it seems clear we both enjoyed, I never hear from the guy again.

I am a pretty good looking and successful guy. I’m not a model or a billionaire but I’m sincerely wanting to date and eventually share a life with someone.

Unfortunately, everyone I am meeting, even if they say they have similar aspirations for a partner, acts like they’re looking over my shoulder for something better, and drops me for I-don’t-know-what reason.

I don’t have a lot of trust in the sincerity of gay men.

I know I sound bitter but I’ve been at this for a while and it keeps happening.

I know there’s a saying that if it keeps happening to you, you must be the problem. Logically that makes sense.

Except, I think this keeps happening so often and so predictably that it’s not me. These people hardly know me. It’s more along the lines of, if everything about me isn’t exactly what they want, or some little thing that I say, think, or do offends them, they vanish.

I’m lonely, but what’s out there is awful. Maybe it’s best to not keep trying. 

If you have a different way of seeing it that’s honest, not just some fluff to make me feel better and be hopeful, please enlighten me.

Michael replies:

I agree with you, there is a lot of this kind of behavior out there. I hear stories similar to yours all the time. Though people do find great relationships online, relying on apps to meet a partner can be tricky.

Hookup apps have little to do with any kind of real connection. Often, they don’t even have much to do with sex. For a lot of people, they’re more about trying to fill up some kind of emptiness and seeking validation. They also, obviously, objectify men, which is the opposite experience of what you’re seeking.

And dating apps lend themselves to a sort of takeout menu concept of dating. You get to specify exactly what you’re looking for—a little of this, a lot of that, please omit something else—and then believe you should get what you ordered. As if that really exists. And when something isn’t just what you wanted, forget it. 

But life doesn’t work that way. Nor do people: You can enter the exact criteria for the man of your dreams, but he will surprise you or let you down at times in some major ways. That’s how it goes. Part of being in a relationship is accepting that we all have to deal with imperfection.

All that said, hordes of people are going to keep using all sorts of apps and keep looking for “perfect” partners and keep ditching perfectly fine guys for the most minuscule of reasons. 

But that doesn’t mean that you have to stay on the apps if it’s demoralizing you and leaving you hopeless.

Before you sign off, perhaps you would like to have some fun and be creative. Just for example, you could write in your profile that you’re interested in meeting a guy who isn’t looking for perfection and is looking for a decent soul rather than a set of stats. You still might encounter a lot of guys who ghost you for no apparent reason, but you also might have some luck finding a sincere someone with relationship goals that are similar to yours.

Another, complimentary strategy: Toughen up your attitude to stop letting let these rejections get under your skin. They have little to do with who you are (unless you are oblivious to some major issue about yourself), so you needn’t take them personally. In other words, expect this to keep happening; and when it does, laugh and keep moving forward.  

I understand you are feeling like giving up on gay men in general. Keep in mind that while there are a lot of reasons why many gay men focus more on sex and less on commitment, that isn’t true across the board. In my work over the years, I have met many gay men who are looking for what you’re seeking. You could strive to be hopeful that if you keep looking, you are likely to cross paths with some of them. 

And where you look may play a role.

Whether or not you stay on the apps, I suggest you seek additional ways to meet a potential boyfriend. Before apps existed, people did find other ways to meet romantic partners, and these ways do still exist. I know that this path is not an easy one. The whole dating endeavor isn’t easy. But difficult is not impossible.  

There are social and activity groups for gay men that are organized around some sort of shared interest. They aren’t overtly sexual, so often attract people who are interested in and looking for a deeper connection. Even if you don’t meet a boyfriend there, you might make some like-minded friends, and one thing may lead to another in all sorts of ways. 

There’s also plenty you can do as a human being (not simply as a gay man) in the offline world that might interest and even uplift you, where you just might meet a man you like. Again, you might also simply make some friends, and through having a bigger social life, might ultimately meet your guy.

Simply put: Don’t let yourself feel like or be a victim. Don’t keep putting yourself in miserable situations. And figure out what it means for you to do your best to make what you’d like to happen, happen. 

Michael Radkowsky, Psy.D. is a licensed psychologist who works with couples and individuals in D.C., Maryland, Virginia, and New York. He can be found at michaelradkowsky.com. All identifying information has been changed for reasons of confidentiality. Have a question? Send it to [email protected].

Continue Reading

Real Estate

New year, new housing landscape for D.C. landlords

Several developments expected to influence how rental housing operates

Published

on

Muriel Bowser has advocated for more affordable housing during her time as mayor. (Washington Blade file photo by Michael Key)

As 2026 begins, Washington, D.C.’s rental housing landscape continues to evolve in ways that matter to small landlords, tenants, and the communities they serve. At the center of many of these conversations is the Small Multifamily & Rental Owners Association (SMOA), a D.C.–based organization that advocates for small property owners and the preservation of the city’s naturally occurring affordable housing.

At their December “DC Housing Policy Summit,” city officials, housing researchers, lenders, attorneys, and housing providers gathered to discuss the policies and proposals shaping the future of rental housing in the District. The topics ranged from recent legislative changes to emerging ballot initiatives and understanding how today’s policy decisions will affect housing stability tomorrow.

Why Housing Policy Matters in 2026

If you are a landlord or a tenant, several developments now underway in D.C., are expected to influence how rental housing operates in the years ahead.

One of the most significant developments is the Rebalancing Expectations for Neighbors, Tenants and Landlords (RENTAL) Act of 2025, a sweeping piece of legislation passed last fall and effective December 31, 2025, which updates a range of housing laws. This broad housing reform law will modernize housing regulations and address long-standing court backlogs, and in a practical manner, assist landlords with shortened notice and filing requirements for lawsuits.  The Act introduces changes to eviction procedures, adjusts pre-filing notice timelines, and modifies certain tenant protections under previous legislation, the Tenant Opportunity to Purchase Act. 

At the same time, the District has expanded its Rent Registry, to have a better overview of licensed rental units in the city with updated technology that tracks rental units subject to and exempt from rent control and other related housing information. Designed to improve transparency and enforcement, Rent Registry makes it easier for all parties to verify rent control status and compliance.

Looking ahead to the 2026 election cycle, a proposed ballot initiative for a two-year rent freeze is generating significant conversation. If it qualifies for the ballot and is approved by voters, the measure would pause rent increases across the District for two years. While still in the proposal phase, it reflects the broader focus on tenant affordability that continues to shape housing policy debates.

What This Means for Rental Owners

Taken together, these changes underscore how closely policy and day-to-day operations are connected for small landlords. Staying informed about notice requirements, registration obligations, and evolving regulations isn’t just a legal necessity. It’s a key part of maintaining stable, compliant rental properties.

With discussions underway about rent stabilization, voucher policies, and potential rent freezes, long-term revenue projections will be influenced by regulatory shifts just as much as market conditions alone. Financial and strategic planning becomes even more important to protect your interests.

Preparing for the Changes

As the owner of a property management company here in the District, I’ve spent much of the past year thinking about how these changes translate from legislation into real-world operations.

The first priority has been updating our eviction and compliance workflows to align with the RENTAL Act of 2025. That means revising how delinquent rent cases are handled, adjusting notice procedures, and helping owners understand how revised timelines and court processes may affect the cost, timing, and strategy behind enforcement decisions.

Just as important, we’re shifting toward earlier, more proactive communication around compliance and regulatory risk. Rather than reacting after policies take effect, we’re working to flag potential exposure in advance, so owners can make informed decisions before small issues become costly problems.

A Bigger Picture for 2026

Housing policy in Washington, D.C., has always reflected the city’s values from protecting tenants to preserving affordability in rapidly changing neighborhoods. As those policies continue to evolve, the challenge will be finding the right balance between stability for renters and sustainability for the small property owners who provide much of the city’s housing.

The conversations happening now at policy summits, in Council chambers, and across neighborhood communities will shape how rental housing is regulated. For landlords, tenants, and legislators alike, 2026 represents an opportunity to engage thoughtfully, to ask hard questions, and to create a future where compliance, fairness, and long-term stability go hand-in-hand.

Continue Reading

Real Estate

Unconventional homes becoming more popular

HGTV show shines spotlight on alternatives to cookie cutter

Published

on

Shipping container homes have gained popularity in recent years. (Photo by Suchat Siriboot/Bigstock)

While stuck in the house surrounded by snow and ice, I developed a new guilty pleasure: watching “Ugliest House in America” on HGTV. For several hours a day, I looked at other people’s unfortunate houses. Some were victims of multiple additions, some took on the worst décor of the ‘70s, and one was even built in the shape of a boat.

In today’s world, the idea of what a house should look like has shifted dramatically. Gone are the days of cookie-cutter suburban homes with white picket fences. Instead, a new wave of architects, designers, and homeowners are pushing the boundaries of traditional housing to create unconventional and innovative spaces that challenge our perceptions of what a home can be.

One of the most popular forms of alternative housing is the tiny house. These pint-sized dwellings are typically fewer than 500 square feet and often are set on trailers to allow for mobility. Vans and buses can also be reconfigured as tiny homes for the vagabonds among us.

These small wonders offer an affordable and sustainable living option for those wishing to downsize and minimize their environmental footprint. With clever storage solutions, multipurpose furniture, and innovative design features, tiny homes have become a creative and functional housing solution for many, although my dogs draw the line at climbing Jacob’s Ladder-type steps.

Another unusual type of housing gaining popularity is the shipping container home. Made from repurposed shipping containers, these homes offer a cost-effective and environmentally friendly way to create modern and sleek living spaces. With their industrial aesthetic and modular design, shipping container homes are a versatile option for those contemplating building a unique and often multi-level home.

For those looking to connect with nature, treehouses are a whimsical and eccentric housing option. Nestled high up in the trees, these homes offer a sense of seclusion and tranquility that is hard to find in traditional housing. With their distinctive architecture and stunning views, treehouses can be a magical retreat for those seeking a closer connection to the natural world.

For a truly off-the-grid living experience, consider an Earthship home. These self-sustaining homes use recycled construction materials and rely on renewable energy sources like solar power and rainwater harvesting. With their passive solar design and natural ventilation systems, Earthship homes are a model of environmentally friendly living.

For those with a taste for the bizarre, consider a converted silo home. These cylindrical structures provide an atypical canvas for architects and designers to create modern and minimalist living spaces. With curved walls and soaring ceilings, silo homes offer a one-of-a-kind living experience that is sure to leave an impression.

Barn homes have gained popularity in recent years. These dwellings take the rustic charm of a traditional barn and transform it into a modern and stylish living space. With their open, flexible floor plans, lofty ceilings, and exposed wooden beams, barn homes offer a blend of traditional and contemporary design elements that create a warm and inviting atmosphere, while being tailored to the needs and preferences of the homeowner.

In addition to their unique character, barn homes also offer a sense of history and charm that is hard to find in traditional housing. Many of them have a rich and storied past, with some dating back decades or even centuries.

If you relish life on the high seas (or at a marina on the bay), consider a floating home. These aquatic abodes differ from houseboats in that they remain on the dock rather than traverse the waterways. While most popular on the West Coast (remember “Sleepless in Seattle”?), you sometimes see them in Florida, with a few rentals available in Baltimore’s Inner Harbor and infrequent sales at our own D.C. Wharf. Along with the sense of community found in marinas, floating homes offer a peaceful retreat from the hustle and bustle of city life.

From tiny homes on wheels to treehouses in the sky or homes that float, these distinctive dwellings offer a fresh perspective on how we live and modify traditional thoughts on what a house should be. Sadly, most of these homes rely on appropriate zoning for building and placement, which can limit their use in urban or suburban areas. 

Nonetheless, whether you’re looking for a sustainable and eco-friendly living option or a whimsical retreat, there is sure to be an unconventional housing option that speaks to your sense of adventure and creativity. So, why settle for a run-of-the-mill ranch or a typical townhouse when you can live in a unique and intriguing space that reflects your personality and lifestyle?


Valerie M. Blake is a licensed Associate Broker in D.C., Maryland, and Virginia with RLAH @properties. Call or text her at 202-246-8602, email her at [email protected] or follow her on Facebook at TheRealst8ofAffairs.

Continue Reading

Popular