From the January 2010 Newsletter:

Chipping away at our property rights, one new law at a time
By Peter Reitz, SPOSFI Executive Director

 If you’re getting the distinct impression that tenant activists never stop working to erode our property rights, it’s not just your imagination. Here’s an update on four new laws in the legislative pipeline that require our full attention.

Avalos:
New law to extend all Rent Ordinance eviction protections for tenants in post-’79 units

Citing an undocumented “eviction crisis” supposedly brought on by “thousands” of foreclosures, D-3 Supervisor John Avalos recently introduced a measure to the Land Use and Economic Development Committee that extends Rent Ordinance eviction protections for the first time to tenants in most residential rental units built after June 1979. Units included are condos, TICs, apartments, and single family homes. The measure passed unanimously and was forwarded on to the full Board, which on Tuesday, December 8, passed it by a vote of 7 to 4, one short of making it veto-proof. If the Mayor vetoes the measure, it might then appear on either the June or November 2010 ballots. Four supervisors are needed to make that happen.

Responding to Avalos’s rationale for introducing the measure, the Mayor announced his intent to veto it and introduce his own legislation that specifically addresses the foreclosure issue, stating that the bill, while “well intended, goes too far.”

SPOSFI’s position is clear: This measure goes way too far, and is anything but “well-intended.” Clearly, the measure, which was effectively authored by the Tenants Union, is a foot-in-the-door tactic to extend Rent Ordinance eviction controls to post-’79 buildings, since price controls on such properties are specifically prohibited by the state Costa-Hawkins law.

What are the measure’s practical implications?
Since most condos in the city were built after 1979, this ordinancewould prohibit newbuyers frommoving into their condos if they are currently rented and the tenant refuses to vacate. As a “concession” to S.F. developers, an amendment was added allowing developers to rent the condo during a limited period of time after construction has been completed and to evict the tenant when the unit is sold. However, the same would not be true for those who purchase the condo. Once title had transferred to a new owner, an OMI would no longer be a “just cause” for eviction and would be prohibited. Such a new law would have a depressing effect on new condo development. Aside from extending Rent Control to post-’79 buildings, could it be that stifling new condo construction in San Francisco is, in fact, one of the motivations driving this legislation?

And how would this law affect rented single-family homes, TICs, andmultiunit rental buildings built after 1979? The Avalos Ordinance would extend all Rent Control restrictions except price controls to these properties. If you purchased amulti-unit rental buildingwith the intent of moving in, you could do so just one time and evict only one tenant. Under the new law, singlefamily homes and TICs would be subject to a blanket prohibition on OMI evictions. Single-family home owners who thought that S.F.’s onerous Rent Ordinance did not apply to them—think again!

Mar:
New law to prohibit OMI evictions of families with children

Sup. Mar’s measure would amend the Rent Control Ordinance to prohibit ownermovein evictions where any tenant is under 18 and is a member of a household that has resided in the unit for at least 12 months. As first discussed in our September 2009 issue, this continues a process we too often observe at City Hall, particularly where rental property owners are concerned: creation of legislation to fix a problem, whether or not it actually exists. The legislation proposes to create a new protected class of tenants while presenting no credible evidence that families with children are victims of discrimination.

On December 14, the Land Use Committee and Economic Development Committee held another hearing on the measure and passed it with a 2 to 1 vote (Maxwell voted “No”). It is scheduled to be heard before the full Board on January 5, 2010.

If it garners fewer than 8 votes, we trust the Mayor will veto it. In that case, as with the Avalos legislation, the measuremay end up on either the June or November 2010 ballot.

Chiu:
New law to change zoning, parking requirements and right to install garage in rental buildings with eviction history

As discussed in our November 2009 issue, Supervisor Chiu’s legislation proposes to bar owners of residential rental properties from adding a garage if a tenant has been evicted without cause, such as through the Ellis Act, over the past 10 years. Chiu points to a recent survey of new garage permit applications showing that almost half have been in buildings with previous mass evictions involving the Ellis Act. The state Ellis Act grants a rental property owner who wishes to permanently exit the business the right to evict tenants.

In buildings with no history of such evictions, the owners would need to obtain a special permit from the Planning Department and, in some cases, the Board of Supervisors as well, before securing the right to build a parking garage. Owners who had evicted tenants using the Ellis Act would have to obtain a special permit with a much higher threshold, requiring public hearings and appealable to the Board of Supervisors.

In addition to regulating new garage construction, the law would “modernize parking controls in the city’s northeast neighborhoods” by implementing the parking rules developed in the Market-Octavia plan —i.e., promoting the city’s “Transit-First” mandate by reducing the allowable parking-space-to-living-unit ratio in new construction.

Chiu’ s legislatio n would limit the construction of garages in existing rental properties by adding bureaucratic hoops that would cost property owners time and money and limit opportunities to create garages out of what was once living space. The proposal caters to two powerful and vocal political forces: tenant activists and anti-car advocates.

The measure is being reviewed by the Planning Department. Once completed, it will return the legislation to the Board of Supervisors for action, assigned initially to its Land Use and Economic Development Committee. The full Board will probably not act on the proposal before late January or early February.

S.F. Animal Control and Welfare Commission:
New law to prohibit exclusion of pets from rental units

As discussed in our November issue, the Animal Control and Welfare Commission, in its October 8, 2009 public meeting, proposed a new law that would prohibit S.F. property owners from excluding pets in rental units. The Commission rationalizes the proposal as a way to reduce the number of animals surrendered to shelters (“rental housing that allows pets cannot be found”), and to reduce the number of animals euthanized in shelters (“people who would otherwise foster or adopt animals are prevented from doing so because the owner doesn’t allow pets”).

As we pointed out in our November 2009 issue, since San Francisco’s SPCA actually imports up to 1,000 adoptable animals per month from other cities, it is patently unfair to require property owners to bear the cost and legal liability of this “enlightened public policy” alone. The Commission has failed to foresee the serious repercussions for both property owners and tenants: 1) property owners being held responsible for maintaining their tenants’ comfort as non-pet owning tenants pass through common areas, 2) irresponsible pet owners putting a strain on tenant relations as allergysuffering tenants are forced to endure daily exposure, 3) tenants who fear certain animals are forced to interact with them, 4) tenants are disturbed by odors and barking, and 5) the impossibility of defining just what is a “non-dangerous” pet.

The Commission will hold its next meeting on Thursday, January 14, including a discussion and possible action to recommend to the Board of Supervisors that San Francisco tenants be afforded this legal right. As always, SPOSFI will be there to testify.

Like what you're reading?

Join SPOSFI now to receive our complete newsletter each month, as well as access to our on-line newsletter archive located in our Member Area.