Testimony of Daniel O’Brien
Sierra Club DC Chapter
Before the DC Council Committee of the Whole
May 6, 2026
Sierra Club DC appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony to the DC Committee of the Whole, Budget Oversight Hearing on the Department of Buildings (DOB). We are appreciative and grateful that we have had a strong relationship with the DOB, having worked with them on net-zero building standards, building code updates, outreach to the community, materials recycling, and other key programs. In particular, the Office of Construction and Building Standards' Green Building division, responsible for regulating construction in the District that falls under the regulations of the Green Building Act, Green Construction Code, and Energy Conservation Code, has been a valuable partner in the implementation of DC climate commitments related to buildings.
Zero Waste
Tracking, verifying, reporting, and outreach
Last year, the Sierra Club raised concerns that effective enforcement of the District’s construction and demolition (C&D) reuse and recycling mandates depends on DOB having the ability to systematically collect, track, and analyze hauling receipt data. We emphasized that C&D waste represents roughly one quarter of the District’s waste stream and that compliance with the 50 percent reuse/recycling requirement in the Green and Residential Construction Codes is essential to achieving the District’s 80 percent diversion goal and reducing climate and environmental justice harms.
Per the 2027 capital project , the IT Systems Modernization Initiative was completed within the capital budget. Within that initiative, we respectfully request an update on progress made in several areas we previously identified:
Tracking and data systems
Within the initiative, has DOB taken steps to develop or procure a searchable database or other system capable of collecting and analyzing hauling receipt data tied to specific projects and code provisions? If DOB applied for grant funding to support such a system, what is the status of that application? If no external funding was secured, has DOB identified alternative funding sources or internal budget allocations? Additionally, has DOB conducted—or determined it still needs—a feasibility assessment regarding enhanced tracking within Accela or another platform? If so, does the proposed FY27 budget include the necessary funding for this assessment? We are particularly interested in whether DOB can now document compliance with Section 503 of the Green Construction Code and Section 327.1 of the Residential Building Code at a level more granular than a general inspection pass/fail.
Verification and compliance practices
Overall, there was a $1.56 million increase in funds for Permitting Services from FY 2026 to FY 2027, which we were pleased to see. Have there been any changes to inspection protocols or documentation requirements to strengthen DOB’s ability to confirm that contractors are meeting reuse and recycling targets? Further, with this increase in funding, is DOB now requiring the submission of hauling receipts rather than leaving them optional upon inspector request? Within the Permitting Services, were the reports further refined so that current data can be shared more easily, demonstrating compliance rates or trends?
Public reporting and interagency coordination
Is DOB now collecting C&D diversion data in a format that allows for periodic public reporting? Has DOB begun sharing relevant compliance or diversion information with the Office of Waste Diversion within DPW to support broader waste reduction planning?
Outreach, education, and enforcement capacity
In the FY 2027 proposed budget, under the Green Buildings Programs, it appears that it has increased from $1.96 million to $3.57 million, an increase of $1.6 million. This translates to an increase of 8 FTE’s. We request clarification on what program(s) this increase is allocated to:
In 2024, DOB acknowledged the need for improved outreach and awareness — especially among small contractors — regarding reuse and recycling requirements. What outreach, guidance materials, training, or enforcement initiatives have been implemented since then? Does the proposed FY2027 budget include funding for designated staff time or roles specifically focused on C&D compliance education and enforcement?
Strengthening enforcement and transparency in this area remains a high-impact, cost-effective opportunity to advance the District’s climate, waste diversion, and environmental justice goals. We appreciate any progress DOB has made and encourage continued investment in systems, staffing, and reporting that allow the District to verify compliance and continuously improve outcomes.
Moving beyond C&D recycling to embrace reuse through deconstruction
Deconstruction is the careful dismantling of a building to recover reusable materials. The zero waste hierarchy recognizes that reuse is a more effective zero waste practice than recycling. Deconstruction is a well-established practice for the reuse of building materials. Action 5 of the DC Zero Waste Plan calls for DOB (and the Department of Energy and the Environment) to update the DC Green Construction Code to require deconstruction plans for all new construction, demolition, and retrofit projects beginning in 2029, and redirect materials toward affordable housing. Do the proposed 2027 capital budget funds allocated to IT Systems Modernization put into place the proper information systems to help a building track and recover reusable materials?
As more jurisdictions adopt deconstruction policies and material reuse programs to prevent waste generation upstream, we would also like to take the opportunity of this hearing to ask if DOB evaluated opportunities to support or pilot similar approaches in the District, whether through incentives, guidance, or coordination with other agencies? Indeed, a growing number of jurisdictions are embracing deconstruction not only for its zero-waste and climate benefits but also because it generates workforce development, including for disfavored communities, and fosters affordable housing and other community projects (e.g., bus shelters). These jurisdictions include Chicago, Hennepin County, MN, Kings County, WA, Palo Alto, Portland, San Antonio, and Savannah. Policies include deconstruction requirements for older buildings, lowering permit fees for deconstruction, increasing demolition permit fees, banning landfill disposal of readily recyclable C&D materials, implementing tax incentives, providing municipal materials sorting stations, and adopting reuse resale platforms (e.g., Michigan). Are the deconstruction policies that are being considered aligned with the other jurisdictions located in Maryland and Virginia? We are specifically curious about neighboring states due to the shared municipal waste stream system.
Meeting DC Code composting requirements
Composting requirements for District government agencies and facilities are spelled out in Section 8-1031.04a of the District Code. This measure requires the District government to source-separate and collect composting in line with DC code 8-1301.03 once the Department of Public Works (DPW) establishes a compost collection program, subject to funding. Based on our reading of the law and the publicly available information on the DPW and Zero Waste DC websites, this trigger was met in 2024, when the Curbside Compost: Foodwaste Collection Program was established, following a one-year curbside collection pilot. Does DOB currently have a composting program? If not, does DOB plan to implement one? In either case, does the proposed FY2027 budget include funding to start up or maintain a composting program?
Lastly for DOB, we want to bring a recent issue to your attention. The Mayor dissolved the Construction Codes Coordination Board (CCCB) and killed the pending building code update. The update process had involved approximately 6,000 hours of time devoted by members of the CCCB and their technical advisory group members. We consider this a brazen disregard for the work of the code experts, design professionals, and industry stakeholders who contributed to updating the code. Six years have now passed since the last code update. (The District is required by law to update its green building code every 3 years and to adopt a net zero energy code by the end of 2026). On paper, the Mayor plans to start from scratch and pass a new code by the end of 2027. We do not believe that is a realistic timeline if the Mayor intends to start from scratch.
Food Policy Council
Turning briefly to the Food Policy Council under the Office of Planning, we call on the Council to restore funding for the Food Policy Council, which does so much to promote equitable access to food and prevent food waste. The Mayor proposes to eliminate the Food Policy Council and staff at the Office of Planning via the Food Policy Functions Amendment Act. This is another misguided cut by the mayor of a low-budget, high-impact, effective program. Instead, we urge Council to pass and fund the Food Policy Council Procurement Amendment Act of 2025, budgeting at least $100,000 for FY27.
Thank you for your attention to these questions and for the opportunity to testify.