DC's Condo EV Charging Right Is Enacted but Unfunded

The Comprehensive Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Access, Readiness, and Sustainability Amendment Act of 2024 became D.C. Law 25-262 on March 7, 2025, published at 71 DCR 14111. Section 4(c) of that law added two new sections to the Green Building Act of 2006, which is why the District's right-to-charge language lives in Title 6, Chapter 14A of the Code and not in the Condominium Act at Title 42, Chapter 19. Section 4(c) created § 6-1451.03c for owners in condominium associations, community associations and other common interest developments, and § 6-1451.03d for tenants of a housing provider.

Neither section is operative. Section 7 of D.C. Law 25-262 conditioned those additions on the inclusion of the law's fiscal effect in an approved budget and financial plan, a drafting device the Council uses routinely. The Code page for § 6-1451.03c carries the note that the amendment "has not been implemented," and the body of the section is the single phrase "Not Funded." There is no statutory duty an association can be held to and no District agency has jurisdiction to enforce one, because the section that would have assigned that jurisdiction is itself dormant.

What would change on funding is worth knowing, because the text is already written and would take effect as drafted. Section 4(c) would require an association to allow installation and repair of a charging port, at the owner's expense and for the owner's own use, in a deeded parking space or a space specifically designated for a particular unit owner. The association could still impose bona fide safety requirements consistent with the construction codes, require the port to be registered with the association within 30 days after installation, apply reasonable architectural standards governing dimensions, placement and external appearance, and prohibit the owner from licensing, renting or subletting the space with the port in it. The owner would have to supply plans stamped by a licensed architect, professional engineer or electrical engineer, use a licensed journeyman electrician, master electrician or electrical engineer for installation, and carry the cost of the electricity and of any damage to common elements.

For a port in a common element or an exclusive-use common element, the drafted text would require prior written approval, reasonable reimbursement for electricity, and a certificate of insurance naming the association as an additional insured, or reimbursement of the increased premium attributable to the port. An owner would have to remove the port and restore the premises before transferring the unit unless the buyer accepts it in writing, and would have to disclose the port and whether it is removable to prospective buyers. Any covenant or governing-document provision that effectively prohibits or unreasonably restricts an owner's port, or that conflicts with the section, would be void and unenforceable.

The procedure would also be timed. An association would have to process a port application the way it processes an architectural modification, answer in writing, and would be deemed to have approved an application not answered within 60 days of receipt unless the delay came from a reasonable request for more information or from exigent circumstances. A rejected owner would get a chance to cure defects and resubmit. The association could charge only a reasonable application-processing fee consistent with what it charges for architectural modifications, and could not otherwise charge for placement of the port.

None of that binds any DC association today. A DC owner negotiating with a board in 2026 is negotiating under the declaration and bylaws, not under § 6-1451.03c, and the practical leverage is the § 4(c) text sitting in the statute books waiting on a budget line.

There is nothing to violate while the section is unfunded, and no penalty applies to a DC association that refuses a charging port today. The enforcement machinery is written but dormant: subsection (i) of § 4(c) would have the Department of Buildings fine an association that willfully violates the section up to $1,000 for each 60-day period the reported violation is not brought into compliance, with an appeal from that enforcement action to the Office of Administrative Hearings. The parallel tenant provision, § 6-1451.03d(j), would set the housing-provider fine at up to $1,000 for each 30-day period, with an appeal to the Office of Administrative Hearings and from there to the Rental Housing Commission under D.C. Official Code § 42-3502.02(a)(2). Until the fiscal effect is funded, an owner denied a port has no District enforcement route and is left with whatever the declaration, bylaws and architectural-review process in their own community provide.