Bowser Proposes New Short-Term Rental Legislation

The Mayor’s 2026 bill returns the opportunity to operate STRs to some DC homeowners. And a new Special Event STR license is included for rentals during cherry blossom season and other notable happenings.

Mayor Muriel Bowser and the Department of Licensing and Consumer Protection (DLCP) introduced the Short-Term Rental Regulation Amendment Act of 2026 Friday.

The bill is designed to make the District’s short-term rental laws clearer and provide greater economic opportunity for DC homeowners and renters wanting to lease residential space by the day, week or month.

As you may recall, these same folks brought the hammer down on STRs in 2018.

In late 2018, strict regulations on short-term rentals (such as Airbnb) were passed unanimously by the D.C. Council in an effort to address housing affordability. The Short-Term Rental Regulation Act of 2018 mandated that STRs be limited to a primary residence, with a 90-day cap for unhosted stays. All short-term rentals are required to obtain a license and the bill required the Department of Consumer and Regulatory Affairs (DCRA) to monitor, investigate, and license them.

Thriving short-term rental businesses were devastated, homeowners who purchased properties that facilitated this type of house hack were angry, and companies like Airbnb suffered a gradual decline as similar restrictions spread outside the Beltway and across the country.

Now, as the District is suffering reversals in both the real estate market and population due to federal government policies, officials are backtracking.

Here’s what the Mayor is proposing:

We’ll call it the You Occupy, You Operate (YOYO) legislation. It allows owners of second homes (rental properties or pied-a-terres) to obtain an STR license and the second property does not need to be owner-occupied–but–the property still can’t be rented for more than 90 cumulative nights per year.

A special event license can also be obtained for the second property, offering additional short-term rental opportunities for those who want rent out their spaces withouot being present, during periods designated by the Mayor.

The confusing ‘Vacation Rental’ license would be eliminated.

The bill also expands STR eligibility to DC non-owner occupants the ability to rent out their primary residences as short-term rentals and/or for special events. This is an idea that brings to mind many potential abuse scenarios and seems like it would be nearly impossible to track. Considering the risk and liability this would add for the property owners, security concerns, and the fact that most condos and co-ops have instituted strict ‘no STR’ rules, I’m wondering why the Mayor thought this would be beneficial? The bill does state that renters do not qualify for the licenses if the property is part of the District’s Rent Stabilization Program, or if short-term rentals are restricted by their lease agreement.

Other provisions in the bill refine key definitions, consolidate existing license categories, and update operational requirements ‘to make it easier for District residents to operate short-term rentals in their homes.

That “Primary Residence” Definition

The bill also simplifies guidance on primary residence requirements, eliminating a reference to the District’s Homestead Deduction and clarifying that a short-term rental host must reside at the primary residence being rented out.

My ‘Special Dissent License’

I’m going to go out on a limb here and do something I rarely do–voice an opinion. And it’s not favorable.

I was excited to read the headlines trumpeting the return of STRs to the District… until I scanned the bill. Disappointment set in.

IMO, the YoYo Legislation would have little positive impact and, as drafted, holds the potential for a good deal of negative impact.

Instead of expanding the 90 day restriction for non-owner occupied properties to 180 days to bridge the gap to the minimum 6 month lease requirements so common in the city, homeowners are offered a “we’ll tell you when you can” shackle in the form of a Special Event License, which I will call the “Additional Fees and Red Tape” license. Homeowners want consistent–not random–rental income. The few nights they may pick up for a cherry blossom or election visit are unlikely to outperform a regularly opertaing STR, especially considering that tourism in DC has dropped off due to a projected 5.1% to 6.5% decrease in international visitation, inflation, travel and safety perceptions, and closed attractions, especially when a second license is required and more residents will be competing for those bookings.

And, as previously noted, the idea of renters being granted STR licenses is perplexing. I struggle to think of many scenarios to which this would legitimately apply. Think of the added precautions needed, and risks involved for landlords. Who would take that on? It would almost certainly violate terms of residential insurance policies, leaving homeowners liable for all kinds of losses.

Abuse is certain. This scheme depends largely on the ‘honor system.’ Ask a landlord how they feel about that. Of course there are great tenants who would try to be responsible. But even they can not fully control the actions of their STR tenants. And there are always bad actors. We only have to look at the backlog of landlord/tenant court cases to know that. Once a license is obtained, what’s to stop tenants from leasing a property, then leaving and running a full-time STR? Who’s in violation of the 90 day rule then? Or landlords jacking up rent for these scenarios, then looking away, essentially profit-sharing in an illegal STR. What if an STR guest refuses to vacate when their rental term is up? They are not party to the primary lease, so how would eviction be enforced when the STR agreement is hosted by a secondary party?

It’s also an administrative nightmare. Who would be tracking violations, the long distance landlord? Not likely. It would be extremely difficult to track license failures without property tax records and would require a new level of agency documentation and approvals to include property owner permissions and restrictions. How could the license conform to unique lease terms? More than likely, any restriction provisions at all would nix the license. So prospective tenants would start pressuring landlords to allow STR. I foresee the burden being foisted almost entirely upon landlords, pages of STR addendums being added to lease agreements, and everyone ending up in a courtroom where only the lawyers win.

What’s your take?

Read the Short-Term Rental Regulation Amendment Act of 2026.