To view graphic version of this page, refresh this page (F5)

Skip to page body

June 06, 2000

June 06, 2000

 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF

THE SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTIAL RENT

STABILIZATION & ARBITRATION BOARD,

 

Tuesday, June 6, 2000 at 6:00 p.m. at

25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 70, Lower Level

 
 
 

I. Call to Order

 

President Wasserman called the meeting to order at 6:09 p.m.

 

II. Roll Call

 

Commissioners Present: Becker; Bierly; Hobson; Justman; Marshall; Mosser; Murphy; Wasserman.

Staff Present: Grubb; Wolf.

 

Commissioner Lightner appeared on the record at 6:12 p.m.; Commissioner Gruber arrived at 6:14 p.m.

 

III. Approval of the Minutes

 

MSC: To approve the Minutes of May 16, 2000.

(Marshall/Becker: 5-0)

 

IV. Remarks from the Public

 

A. Christian Lackner, tenant-appellant in the case at 2526 Van Ness (AT2K0066), addressed the Board concerning his appeal. He stated his opinion that there was no basis for upholding the Decision of the Administrative Law Judge; that the result of the Decision would be that he would have to pay for storage space that is illegal; and that inconsistent, fraudulent testimony on the part of the landlord was given greater credence than his credible and consistent testimony.

 

V. Consideration of Appeals

 

A. 2526 Van Ness #11 AT2K0066

(cont. from 5/16/00)

 

The tenant filed a petition alleging an unlawful rent increase because the tenant claimed that the landlord had failed to refund amounts found owing to him in a prior Decision; the tenant contended that he had not been properly served with the notice of rent increase; the tenant maintained that the notice was technically defective in that it did not itemize banked increases by year; and the tenant contended that the landlord was not entitled to restore a rent reduction for loss of storage space because improvements to the space had not been effectuated. On appeal, the tenant asserted that the amount of overpayments determined to be owing from the landlord are still incorrect; that he was not served with the notice of rent increase until several months later than the date determined in the Decision; and the full use of the storage space has not been restored.

 

Since a response by the tenant to a Memorandum from the Administrative Law Judge had not been served on the landlord, consideration of this case was continued to this evening’s meeting.

 

MSC: To deny the appeal except to remand the case to the Administrative Law Judge on the record to correct the amounts owing from the landlord to the tenant. (Lightner/Gruber: 5-0)

 

B. 41 San Jose Ave. AT2K0072

 

The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs to 11 of 18 units was granted, in part. One tenant appeals the decision on the grounds of financial hardship.

 

MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case for a hearing on the tenant’s claim of financial hardship. (Becker/Marshall: 4-1; Gruber dissenting)

 

C. 5116 - 3rd St. AL2K0074

 

The tenant’s petition alleging unlawful increases in rent was granted and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in the amount of $7,100.00. On appeal, the landlord claims that information he furnished to the Administrative Law Judge was ignored, and that his position was not seriously considered.

 

MSC: To deny the appeal. (Becker/Marshall: 5-0)

 

D. 656 O’Farrell St. #202 AT2K0073

 

The tenants’ appeal of the decision certifying capital improvement costs was granted and the case was remanded for a hearing on the tenants’ claim of financial hardship. In the Decision on Remand, the Administrative Law Judge found sufficient hardship to warrant a temporary deferral of the capital improvement passthrough, until October 1, 2000. On further appeal, the tenants claim that, due to age and limited English speaking ability, the prospects for employment are extremely poor.

 

MSC: To deny the appeal. (Lightner/Gruber: 4-1; Marshall dissenting)

 

E. 798 Geneva #2 AL2K0075

 

The tenant’s petition alleging an unlawful increase in rent from $600 to $1,500 per month was granted. The Administrative Law Judge found that the landlord did not have the right to increase the rent based on Costa-Hawkins because the landlord had accepted rent from the tenant over a protracted period of time and had waived a prohibition against subletting through his conduct. The Board accepted the appeal of the landlord and remanded the case for a hearing on the issues of waiver and estoppel. In the Decision on Remand, the Administrative Law Judge affirmed the original Decision, and concluded that the landlord was estopped from claiming that the tenant is not a tenant because the landlord imposed banked rent increases from 1984 and otherwise treated the tenant like a tenant, including threatening to terminate the tenancy based on alleged habitual late payment of rent. The landlord appeals the remand decision, arguing that: the rent increase is authorized by Costa-Hawkins because the tenant is an assignee of the prior tenant; the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act was intended to occupy the field, and Rules Section 6.14 is inapplicable; the landlord acted based on the tenant’s misrepresentations and has suffered economic loss as a result; and the Administrative Law Judge is incorrect in her analysis of the elements of estoppel as applied to this case.

 

MSC: To deny the appeal. (Becker/Marshall: 3-2; Gruber, Lightner dissenting)

 

F. 2821 - 25th St. AT2K0079

 

The tenant’s petition alleging an unlawful rent increase was dismissed due to his failure to appear at the properly noticed hearing. On appeal, the tenant asserts that, at the time of the hearing, he was in Guatemala because his mother was gravely ill. Since the tenant’s statement was not executed under penalty of perjury, it was the consensus of the Board to continue consideration of this case in order to obtain a sworn statement from the tenant and documentation regarding his having been out of the country at the time of the hearing.

 

G. 2810 Folsom St. AL2K0080

 

The landlord’s appeal was filed one day late because it took several days for the appeal form to arrive in the mail.

 

MSC: To find good cause for the late filing of the appeal.

(Becker/Gruber: 5-0)

 

The tenant’s petition alleging substantial decreases in housing services was granted only as to a 5% monthly rent reduction due to loss of access to the garage. On appeal, the landlord claims that the base rent amount in the decision is inaccurate because the tenant has refused to pay noticed rent increases; and that the rent was reduced because the tenant had provided maintenance services, which he is no longer providing.

 

MSC: To deny the appeal. (Becker/Marshall: 4-1; Gruber dissenting)

 

H. 4410 - 17th St. AL2K0081

 

The tenants’ petition alleging decreased housing services was granted and the landlord was found liable to the tenants in the amount of $2,231.25. The landlord’s appeal was accepted and remanded to the Administrative Law Judge to consider evidence submitted in conjunction with the appeal concerning the quality of the drinking water in the unit. In the Decision on Remand, the amount owing from the landlord to the tenants due to water quality was reduced from $1,452.50 to $1,068.75. The landlord again appeals, on the grounds that: receipts for plumbing work done several years ago are no longer available; the problems within the unit were created by the tenants; and rent reductions granted to the tenants have considerably reduced the income she receives from the building.

 

MSC: To deny the appeal. (Marshall/Becker: 5-0)

 

I. 250 Kearny St. #517 AT2K0082

 

The tenant’s petition alleging a substantial decrease in housing services was dismissed due to her failure to appear at the properly noticed hearing. On appeal, the tenant claims that management in the residential hotel failed to give her the mail containing the notice of hearing. She asks for a new hearing, not to be scheduled prior to December, 2000.

 

MSC: To change the Dismissal with Prejudice to Re-filing to a Dismissal Without Prejudice to Re-filing. (Becker/Marshall: 3-2; Gruber, Lightner dissenting)

 

VI. Director’s Report

 

Executive Director Grubb informed the Board that a Public Hearing regarding the scope of the San Francisco Housing Study to be performed pursuant to legislation introduced by Supervisor Amos Brown was held on May 24, 2000. 49 individuals spoke to what they believed should comprise the scope and nature of the study; these comments shall be included with the Study Protocol, a compilation of recommendations previously submitted by various housing advocates. Minutes of the Public Hearing will be prepared by the Deputy Director.

 

VII. Old Business

 

Revenue Offset for Operating & Maintenance Expense Increases

 

This issue was temporarily taken off calendar by Commissioner Becker.

 

IV. Remarks from the Public (cont.)

 

B. Joe Hall inquired as to why there are only 5 voting members on the Board; and asked where hearings are held.

 

C. Robert Pender of the S.F. Tenants’ Network informed the Board that a memorial was held for Carmen Ramirez of the Oakwood Tenants’ Association at City Hall on June 5th. He also told the Board that, in response to a petition for rent increases based on increased operating expenses by the management at Parkmerced, the tenants at that complex are re-organizing. A meeting will be held on Sunday, June 11th at 2:00 p.m. in the Creative Arts Building at S.F. State.

 

VIII. Calendar Items

 

June 13, 2000 - NO MEETING

 

June 20, 2000

6 appeal considerations

 

IX. Adjournment

 

President Wasserman adjourned the meeting at 6:49 p.m.

Last updated: 12/24/2013 1:50:09 PM