1. Tenant Jose Morales prayed that we "come
to our senses, and not try to maximize profits at the expense of the poor,
especially seniors." Mr. Morales believes that the proposed "regulation"
will "obliterate rent control and allow landlords to evict to jack
up the rent."
2. Tenant Vince Pietro Matera pointed out that landlords
are supposed to be going out of the rental business in good faith. Mr. Matera
believes that, if the prior tenant cannot be found, the unit should be re-rented
at the prior rental amount. Otherwise, the landlord could collude with a
tenant paying market rent and allow only that tenant to remain in the building.
3. Tenant John Daniels told the Board he was "devastated"
when he received an eviction notice. Mr. Daniels believes that title to
the building should be clouded immediately and anything less is similar
to "declaring bankruptcy and leaving creditors in the lurch."
4. Janan New of the S.F. Apartment Association expressed
her organization’s support for Option 4, and asked that the Board schedule
a Public Hearing on the Rules changes proposed by Commissioner Lightner.
5. Kerrie Evans said that the belief that rent control
causes homelessness has been disproved by the Tucker Study, which proved
a link between homelessness and good weather.
6. Tenant Charles Brerwirth supported the statements
of John Daniels, saying he is also an artist in a storefront, and thought
that there was "some security for folks like him."
7. Landlord Jon Bumgarner said that he has a tenant
who gave notice and is voluntarily vacating. Mr. Bumgarner said that, economically,
he would be better off leaving 2 units empty if he is thinking about selling
the building within 4 years.
8. Tenant Larry Roberts lives in a 6-unit building
that is for sale. Mr. Roberts told the Board that they should take the needs
of the tenant majority in San Francisco into consideration, especially since
"this would fail to pass on the ballot."
9. Tenant Yan Qi Guang said that he is facing an
Ellis Act eviction and that his attorney is working on a settlement with
the landlord. Mr. Guang asked that the Board not pass something that would
interfere with his settlement.
10. Tan Chau of the Chinatown Community Development
Center said that his organization bought the building at 665 Clay Street
in order to preserve affordable housing after Ellis notices had been given
by the prior owner. Mr. Chau told the Board that, if Option 1 passed, they
would not have been able to buy the building, and suggested Option 3 with
75% of the tenants remaining in place.
11. Gen Fujioka of the Asian Law Caucus told the
Board that he represents tenants and "sees lots of Ellis." Mr.
Fujioka said that, in some situations, an owner can be convinced to rescind
the Ellis filing and keep tenants in place. Option 1 is therefore a problem
because of its "inflexibility."
12. Tommi Avicolli Mecca of the Housing Rights Committee
sees problems with all of the proposals, and suggested that the Board "come
up with a way to make #1 work for tenants." Mr. Avicolli Mecca said
that 27% of Ellis evictions impact seniors, and 23% are tenants in the Castro
District.
13. Kim Stryker of the Small Property Owners of
San Francisco supported Option #4. Ms. Stryker maintained that, since the
passage of Proposition I, Ellis numbers have gone up. She pointed out that
many small owners are seniors, are possibly disabled themselves, and it
is her belief that excessive regulations are forcing them to sell their
homes. Ms. Stryker suggested that these decisions should be based on the
findings of the Housing Study.
14. Tenant Ernestine Weiss said that San Franciscans
are supposed to be compassionate, but pointed out that seniors with 10 years
of tenancy cannot be evicted in New York. She said that seniors should not
be dispossessed.
15. Tenant Philip Brady said that all of the proposals
would work against preservation of the housing stock, and that Ellis is
a drastic measure which encourages sale of the property rather than keeping
units at ridiculously low rents. Mr. Brady suggested that perhaps rent control
restrictions are too strict if landlords are taking units off the market.
16. Landlord Patricia Carter said that she should
have the right to do what she wants with her property, including no longer
being a landlord. Ms. Carter said that new tenants are paying too much because
long-standing tenants are paying too little, and said that we should "do
away with inflexible laws."
17. Landlord Peter Holden said that landlords are
getting away from the original intent of the Ellis Act, and it is now "part
of a money-making scheme." Mr. Holden believes that Option #4 provides
the most flexibility and said that he supports "affordable", not
"cheap", rent.
18. Landlord Kia Eldemir asked what happens if a
landlord is on a fixed income. Ms. Eldemir needs to spend $12,000 on repairs
to her building’s drainage system, money which she doesn’t have, and she
says that if she just uses the unit as a sewing room she won’t have to deal
with it.
19. Steven Shubert is a counselor at the Tenants’
Union who says he’s "never counseled a landlord who’s being evicted."
He has, however, counseled "tons" of tenants, especially elderly
tenants. Mr. Shubert told the Board that the main purpose of Just Cause
grounds for eviction was to prevent evictions in order to increase the rent,
but that these proposals would "do just that."
20. Landlord Andrew Long endorsed Option 4. Mr.
Long said that the Ellis Act is "not good public policy", but
that people resort to it for many reasons. He suggested that, in order to
keep units on the market, make it easy to withdraw Ellis notices.
21. Landlord Marina Franco, who is on the Board
of the S.F. Apartment Association, supported Option 4. Ms. Franco pointed
out that many tenants get "huge payoffs", whereas in other counties
they just get a 30-day notice and no compensation.
22. Tenant Chris Slingsby expressed his support
for the statements of Mr. Shubert of the Tenants’ Union.
23. Tom Ram of the Small Property Owners of San
Francisco spoke of a small landlord who is dying of AIDS but can’t move
downstairs in their building; and another landlord just making expenses
by cleaning houses. Mr. Ram suggested that funding for the Housing Study
be increased to find out the extent of the problem.
24. Heidi Smith, Tenants’ Union counselor, said
that losing one’s home is one of life’s most traumatic events, and that
she doesn’t know what to tell tenants who ask her if two months’ free rent
is a "good deal."
25. Cynthia Arnold of Tenants for Home Ownership
supported Option #4. Ms. Arnold believes that she should be able to negotiate
with her landlord, and that landlords have a right to make a profit. Ms.
Arnold contended that the majority of buildings being Ellised have long-term
low rent paying tenants, and that tenants should be responsible for their
own financial security.
26. Norman Rolfe said that he originally had supported
Option 1 to "deal with chicanery." He also thinks that Option
4 could have some benefits if a "super-majority" is left. Mr.
Rolfe feels that if a landlord no longer wants to be a landlord, they should
sell the building and provide life-time leases for seniors as a condition
of sale. Mr. Rolfe said that "you can’t run over people in the name
of property rights."
27. Tenant Robert Sites said that his building was
Ellised two years ago, but that he is "still fighting." Mr. Sites
told the Board they would not be enforcing State law if they allowed landlords
to evict and re-rent the property: "if a person stays, the property’s
not Ellised."
28. Tenant Roy Levy told the Board not to adopt
any policy that would allow a landlord to profit after an Ellis filing.
This would constitute a fraudulent practice under the Civil Code, and they
would be an "accessory before the fact."
29. Tenant Todd Curtis thanked the Board for "trying
to close the loopholes", but asked that they not adopt Option #4, or
he’ll be "out of a home." Mr. Curtis has been threatened with
an Ellis eviction by the new owner of his building, and said that he "can’t
work out a deal with landlords who lie."
30. Robert Pender of the Tenants’ Network said that
he doesn’t know much about Ellis, but that tenants have the power of the
Referendum, which is the best defense.
31. Tenant Diane Perez-Portello said that she is
a single mother with two children. She asked that the Board not allow landlords
to raise rents, or she will be out of her home.
32. Tenant Anastasia Yovanopolous said that the
Ellis Act is "onerous" and should be final; the landlord "should
think twice." Since "many folks have had to leave the City",
a landlord should not be able to change their mind when they’ve "changed
peoples’ lives."
33. Ted Gullickson of the Tenants’ Union said that
"this is all about landlords renting at a higher rent", which
is prohibited by Ordinance Section 37.9A. Mr. Gullickson told the Board
that, legally, they could only adopt Option 1.
34. Tenant Jean Marsh told the Board that she has
received "wonderful help" from the Rent Board over the years.
After her landlord filed a Writ in her case, Ms. Marsh feels financially
and emotionally beaten down. She told the Board that this affects working
people as well as the elderly and disabled, and that her landlord was given
the building as a gift, for no consideration.
35. Tenant Ted Sevringhouse told the Board not to
do anything to "dilute tenants’ rights" under Ellis. Mr. Sevringhouse
said that many tenants have a "hard time dealing with the stress",
and the burden should not be put on tenants to sue for wrongful eviction.
36. Sarah Menio said that "the City belongs
to everyone, not just the affluent."
37. Landlord Ida Rachael said that landlords have
problems as well, and that tenants should have the government supplement
their rent. She said that the Board should try and find a balance, since
it "works both ways."