Tuesday, December 21, 1999 at 6:00 p.m. at
A Public Hearing on proposed amendments to Rules and Regulations
Section 6.15 was convened at 6:20 p.m. and concluded at 6:52 p.m. The proposed
amendments conform the procedures for obtaining a replacement roommate in
the event of an absolute prohibition against subletting with those outlined
in Section 6.15 for situations where the rental agreement contains a consent
clause, in accordance with legislation sponsored by Supervisor Leno. In response
to many communications received by the Board from small landlords, and prior
to taking testimony, President Wasserman provided an explanation as to the
scope of the proposed amendments.
Many individuals had expressed the fear that the 14 days allowed in the
Ordinance for a landlord to respond to a tenants request to sublet was
being shortened to 5 days. President Wasserman explained that the 14 day period
to obtain consent in the event of an absolute prohibition was new, and codified
in the Ordinance pursuant to the Leno legislation. However, for consent clauses,
Section 6.15 had always provided the landlord with 5 days to process a proposed
new subtenants rental application; for absolute prohibitions, the amendments
add the 5 days for processing the application to the 14 days the landlord
has to respond to a request to sublet.
The Board then heard from the following landlords:
1. Marian Halley: the Regulations should differentiate between Prop
I landlords, whose property ownership is attached to home ownership; she no
longer has control over who lives with her in her two-unit building; the tenant
"starts the clock running"; and, since it is too onerous to keep
up with the complicated regulations, she will sell her building.
2. Tess Wellborn: the Board should cut the number of regulations
in half; 5 days may be adequate for individuals with secretaries and offices,
but not for small property owners, 14 days is unreasonable; there are no "teeth"
in 6.15 to force tenants to comply with the procedural requirements; and what
happens when there is more than one roommate change per year?
3. Andrew Long: a tenant could wait until the landlord is on vacation
to slip in a deadbeat friend, so tenants should have to serve notice on the
owner.
4. Gary Briggs: the written request to sublet should be served by
the tenant on the landlord in the same way as an eviction notice.
5. Peter Chin: the law is confusing to a non-attorney, but tenants
can obtain free counsel.
6. W. E. Winn, Jr.: agrees with all thats been said; "draconian
rules implemented by sincere but misguided people" have led to renting
out fewer units in his building.
7. Janan New, on behalf of the S.F. Apartment Association: there
is no enforcement mechanism for non-compliance by tenants; what happens when
an owners out of town?; and it should be clarified that an owner does
not have to allow the number of occupants in a unit to expand.
8. Linda Dunn: she is subsidizing a high-income tenant in her building;
rent controls not serving the population for which it was intended.
9. Bill Quan: it can take 8-9 days to process a rental application;
and the language in subsection 6.15(d)(1)(vi), "without good cause",
is too vague.
10. Paulette Burrows, representing a large property owner: apartments
will be sitting vacant while the owner is waiting for information from the
tenant.
11. Nancy Tucker: the Commissioners should ask the Supervisors to
think about small owners, who are not lawyers, and have real jobs; "treat
us like professionals and well get out of the business"; "were
not greedy, just fed up."
12. Michelle OLeary: trying to help her mother with property
management, but cannot understand the regulations; only large owners will
be left.
13. Tess Wellborn: the regulations make landlords not want to allow
roommates and restrict occupancy to one person only.
14. Michelle Horneff, landlord representative: if a landlord rejects
an applicant, is the clock still ticking?
15. Jennifer Finley of S.F.A.A.: the Board should clarify the timelines
after a landlord has rejected an applicant.
After discussing the public testimony, some of the Commissioners voiced
concerns regarding the possibility that a tenant could purposely request the
landlords consent to a sublet at a time when they knew that the owner
would be out of town, and therefore an unqualified applicant could be "deemed"
approved by the landlords unintentional failure to respond. Therefore,
it was moved that subsection 6.15A(c) be amended to read as follows (new language
underlined):
(c) If the tenant makes an initial written request to the landlord
for permission to sublease in accordance with Section 37.9(a)(2), and the
landlord fails to respond in writing within fourteen (14) days of actual
receipt of written notice, the subtenancy is deemed approved pursuant
to Ordinance Section 37.9(a)(2).
MSC: To amend the proposed language to provide that, where
the rental agreement includes an absolute prohibition against subletting
and assignment, a landlords failure to respond within 14 days
of actual receipt of written notice from the tenant shall result
in the proposed subtenancy being deemed approved. (Lightner/Gruber:
3-2; Becker, Marshall dissenting)
MSC: To approve the rest of the proposed amendments to Rules
and Regulations Section 6.15, as put out for Public Hearing. (Becker/Lightner:
4-1; Marshall dissenting)
3. Landlord Nancy Tucker informed the Board that there are 5 pending
pieces of legislation that will affect her property, and that it is because
of this that she is "overwhelmed."
4. Landlord Orion Culver said that elderly and non-English speaking
landlords are even less capable of protecting themselves.
5. Landlord Marian Halley informed the Board that it cost a landlord
she knows $46,000 to evict a tenant who was running an illegal business and
driving other tenants out of the unit. She said that she would rather lose
half a months rent than the right to screen her tenants.
6. Gary Briggs said that it is unfair when a new tenant moving into
a unit gets charged more than their proportional share of the rent.
7. Landlord Peter Chen expressed his belief that San Francisco landlords
"want out", out-of-town landlords wont come in, and there
will be fewer landlords and less housing.
8. Landlord Michelle OLeary remarked on the high cost of eviction,
and said that tenant-to-tenant conflicts fall on landlords.
9. Landlord Tess Wellborn recommended that the Board adopt a principal
place of residency requirement for tenants.