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

Skip to page body

November 25, 1997

November 25, 1997B>

 

 

 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTIAL RENT
STABILIZATION & ARBITRATION BOARD,

Tuesday, November 25, 1997 at 5:30 p.m. at
25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 70, Lower Level

  1. Call to Order

    President Lightner called the meeting to order at 5:43 p.m.

  2. Roll Call

    Commissioners Present: Becker; Bierly; Gruber; Justman; Lightner; Marshall; Moore; Mosser.

    Commissioners not Present: Wasserman.

    Staff Present: Grubb; Wolf.

    Commissioner Murphy appeared on the record at 6:00 p.m.

  3. Approval of the Minutes

    MSC: To approve the Minutes of October 28, 1997.

    (Marshall/Becker: 5-0)

  4. Remarks from the Public

    Robert Pender of the Tenants’ Network informed the Board that there was a well-attended demonstration in support of the Tenants’ Bill of Rights in front of City Hall on November 24th. Tenant Monique Moro-Jang informed the Commissioners that the eviction notice she had received for having two birds in her apartment had been rescinded.

  5. Consideration of Appeals

    1. 2410 - 27th Ave. #1 S001-22A

      The tenant’s petition alleging unlawful increases in rent was granted, and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in the amount of $9,216.36. On appeal, the landlord maintains that the hearing officer erred in not including banked amounts from rent increases that were declared null and void in the decision when determining the legality of increases imposed at a later date, even though the excessive amounts were still being paid; that the tenant consented to the unlawful amounts, even though she was aware of the rent increase limitations in the Ordinance; and that the tenant sat on her rights for over ten years, to the detriment of the landlord.

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

    2. 1049 So. Van Ness Ave. S001-36R

      The tenant’s petition alleging substantial decreases in housing services was granted, in part, and the landlords were found liable to the tenant in the amount of $5,445.00 due to defective conditions on the premises. The tenant’s claim of unlawful rent increases was only granted in the amount of $55.54, because the hearing officer found that the tenant had been a co-owner of the property during a portion of the time period in question. On appeal, the tenant provides documentary evidence showing that he paid rent to the new owners of the property during a period of time when the hearing officer determined that he was not a tenant.

      MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case for a hearing on the issue of the rent history only, including terms of the sale of the property and representations made by the parties. (Marshall/Becker: 5-0)

    3. 700 - 29th Ave. #8 S001-37R

      The tenant’s petition alleging an unlawful increase in rent was denied. Although the tenant’s rent was increased nine days prematurely in 1985, the tenant had filed two previous petitions challenging rent increases and had failed to raise the instant claim on either of those occasions. Therefore, since the tenant’s base rent amount had been held to be valid in two prior decisions, the hearing officer found the issue to be res judicata. On appeal, the tenant asserts several factual inaccuracies and bias against him on the part of the hearing officer; and that the timelines for scheduling a hearing and issuing a decision in this case exceeded those mandated in the Ordinance.

      MSC: To deny the appeal. (Lightner/Gruber: 5-0)

    4. 1217 Kearny St., Apt. D S001-38R

      The tenant’s petition alleging a substantial decrease in housing services was dismissed due to his failure to appear at the properly noticed hearing. On appeal, the tenant claims that he mistakenly entered the hearing date on his calendar as October 9th instead of October 7th, and asks the Board’s indulgence in granting him another hearing.

      MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case for a new hearing. In scheduling the remand hearing, every effort will be made to accommodate the landlord. (Becker/Marshall: 5-0)

    5. 707 - 711A San Jose Ave. S001-23A

      The landlords’ petition for rent increases based on increased operating expenses and certification of capital improvement costs was granted, in part. The landlords had performed much of the capital improvement work themselves, and were compensated at either the prevailing labor or licensed contractor rate. Interest on their uncompensated labor costs was denied as not being an actual cost. The landlords appeal the decision only on the issue of imputed interest on uncompensated labor costs, alleging that: this policy unfairly penalizes small property owners, who do not necessarily have the financial means to hire an outside contractor; the costs to the tenants would have been greater if an outside contractor had been used, but the landlords would have received interest on those costs; and the Board’s policy on this issue is depriving them of a fair return on their investment.

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

    6. 259 Peralta Ave. S001-39R

      The landlords’ petition for certification of capital improvement costs to the tenants in one unit of a two-unit building was granted, in part. The tenants appeal the decision on the grounds that: the capital improvement work was the result of deferred maintenance; the newly constructed carport does not have a roof and is of no real benefit to the tenants; and the tenants should not have to pay for the demolition of the garage because it was in a dilapidated condition and they had been unable to use it prior to its having been torn down.

      MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case for a new hearing on the issue of the benefit of the newly constructed carport to these tenants, considering their individual circumstances and the unique facts of this case. (Marshall/Justman: 5-0)

  6. Communications

    In addition to correspondence concerning cases on the calendar, the Commissioners received the following communications:

    1. The Mediation and Office Workload Statistics for the month of October.

    2. A copy of a 3-Day Notice to Perform Covenant or Quit given to tenants George Jang and Monique Moro-Jang because of the presence of two birds in their unit.

    3. An article on the front page of the November 13th S.F. Examiner regarding the Board’s enactment of Rules and Regulations Section 12.20(a) pertaining to evictions for breaches of unilaterally imposed covenants, and a letter from tenant James Delaney supporting the Board’s action.

  7. Director’s Report

    Executive Director Grubb informed the Commissioners that four new hearing officers have been hired to fill three full-time positions and will commence employment as of January 1st. It is anticipated that the new staff members will be conducting hearings as of February 1st, which should aid in reduction of the hearing backlog. He and Deputy Director Wolf received the Commissioners’ assent to their proposal that the monthly Mediation Summaries provided to the Board include only agreements that include a provision that the tenant(s) will vacate the unit.

  8. Old Business

    The Board’s discussion of proposed additions to the Rules and Regulations pertaining to evictions for breach of unilaterally imposed covenants, changes in roommates and "Master Tenants" was continued to the December 9th Board meeting.

  9. Remarks from the Public (cont.)

    The tenant involved in the case at 259 Peralta Ave. (S001-39R) addressed the Board regarding the deferred maintenance defense that he raised to the landlord’s capital improvement passthrough.

  10. New Business

    The Board briefly discussed Wilson v. Partridge (Municipal Court Case No. 147769), an unlawful detainer action currently before Judge Quidachay. In a pre-trial ruling, the Judge had issued an order precluding evidence of comparable vacancies available at any time other than during the 30-day notice period. Defendant’s attorney Ivan Rothman had written to the Board requesting that the Commissioners consider filing an amicus brief if he should have to file an appeal. Since Mr. Rothman could not appear at this evening’s meeting, the Board continued discussion of this matter to the December 9th meeting and asked that Deputy Director Wolf invite both Mr. Rothman and counsel for the plaintiff to address them at that time.

  11. Calendar Items

    December 2, 1997 - NO MEETING

    December 9, 1997

    1 appeal consideration

    Old Business:

    1. Continued Discussion of Proposed Additions to the Rules and Regulations Pertaining to Changes in Roommates and "Master Tenants"

    2. Report on Wilson v. Partridge (Municipal Court Case No. 147769)

    December 16, 23 & 30, 1997 - NO MEETINGS (Happy Holidays!)

  12. Adjournment

    President Lightner adjourned the meeting at 7:30 p.m.

Last updated: 10/9/2009 11:26:15 AM