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

Skip to page body

December 21, 1999

December 21, 1999p> 

 

 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF

THE SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTIAL RENT

STABILIZATION & ARBITRATION BOARD,

Tuesday, December 21, 1999 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 6:05 p.m.

II. Roll Call

Commissioners Present: Becker; Bierly; Gruber; Hobson; Lightner; Marshall; Mosser; Wasserman.

Commissioners not Present: Murphy.

Staff Present: Grubb; Wolf.

Commissioner Justman appeared on the record at 6:11 p.m.

III. Approval of the Minutes

MSC: To approve the Minutes of November 23, and December 7, 1999. (Gruber/Becker: 5-0)

IV. Remarks from the Public

1. Landlord Marian Halley stated that Rules and Regulations Section 6.15 is "the straw that breaks the camel’s back." She asked the Commissioners when she should speak, and was advised to do so during the Public Hearing portion of the Agenda.

2. Landlord Peter Chen asked what happens if a tenant sublets without the owner’s consent and the sublessee turns out to be a criminal, or creates a nuisance.

V. Public Hearing

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 tenant’s 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 subtenant’s 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 that’s 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 owner’s 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 control’s 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 we’ll get out of the business"; "we’re not greedy, just fed up."

12. Michelle O’Leary: 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 landlord’s 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 landlord’s 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 landlord’s 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)

VI. Communications

The Commissioners received the office workload statistics for the month of October, 1999.

VII. Director’s Report

Executive Director Grubb informed the Board that Supervisor Ammiano’s legislation increasing payments pursuant to Ellis evictions to $4,500 to low-income tenants and to $3,000 to elderly and disabled tenants was passed at First Reading before the Board of Supervisors on Monday. Similar legislation introduced by Supervisor Becerril was introduced and will be referred to Committee. The Rent Board’s proposed amendments to the Rent Ordinance to conform it to Costa-Hawkins was heard at the Housing and Social Policy Committee today. Upon a request by Ted Gullickson of the Tenants’ Union that the Supervisors include eviction controls on newly constructed units, this matter was continued to January in order for the City Attorney to draft such an amendment.

IV. Remarks from the Public (cont.)

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 month’s 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 won’t come in, and there will be fewer landlords and less housing.

8. Landlord Michelle O’Leary 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.

VIII. Calendar Items

December 28, 1999 - NO MEETING

January 4, 2000

9 appeal considerations (1 cont. from 11/9/99)

The Commissioners also decided to schedule a Special Legislative Session on January 25, 2000 to discuss Rules Section 6.14 and Costa-Hawkins.

IX. Adjournment

President Wasserman adjourned the meeting at 8:05 p.m.

Last updated: 10/9/2009 11:26:14 AM