April 16, 2002
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF
THE SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTIAL RENT
STABILIZATION & ARBITRATION BOARD,
Tuesday, April 16, 2002 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 6:16 p.m.
II. Roll Call
Commissioners Present: Aung; Becker; Gruber; Marshall; Mosser;
Murphy; Wasserman.
Commissioners not Present: Hobson; Lightner.
Staff Present: Grubb; Wolf.
Commissioner Justman appeared on the record at 6:19 p.m.
III. Approval of the Minutes
IV. Remarks from the Public
A. Tenant Ross Wilkinson informed the Commissioners that he has filed a
Report of Alleged Wrongful Eviction with the Board, and that the landlord
has been unresponsive. He asked the Commissioners to investigate his case,
and grant him an eviction hearing.
B. Landlord Anthony Schultz of 2782 Union St. (AL020088) explained that,
just because he gave the tenant a 60-day notice of restoration of the housing
service, he was not conceding that the service had been taken away. Mr.
Shultz is disputing the amount of the rent reduction granted by the Administrative
Law Judge.
V. Consideration of Appeals
A. 2782 Union St. AL020088
The tenant’s petition alleging substantial decreases in housing services
was granted, and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in the amount
of $1,205.00 due to loss of exclusive use of the deck and garden area and
loss of laundry privileges. On appeal, the landlord asserts that: the tenant
has not actually suffered the loss of exclusive use of the deck and garden,
and failed to meet her burden of proving such a loss; no quantifiable evidence
was presented to justify the $100 per month valuation for loss of exclusive
use; and the base rent amount in the decision is incorrect because an allowable
annual rent increase has since been issued.
B. 2242 Polk St. #302, 303, 310 & 501 AT020090 thru -94
The tenants in unit numbers 302, 303, 310 and 501 filed their appeals more
than five weeks late because they were confused by the landlord’s petition,
which did not show their rents being increased due to the capital improvement
passthrough.
The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs to
33 of 49 units was granted, resulting in a monthly passthrough in the amount
of $26.46. The tenants in four units, who failed to appear at the hearing,
appeal the decision. The tenants were confused by the landlord’s petition,
which did not show their rents going up as a result of the passthrough, because
the tenants are currently paying the 10% maximum annual cap due to a prior
capital improvement passthrough.
C. 1204 Alemany Blvd. AL020089
The tenant’s petition alleging a substantial decrease in housing services
was granted and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in the amount
of $861.00 due to the replacement of a no-fee washer and dryer with coin-operated
appliances. The landlord appeals, claiming that: the Administrative Law Judge
was biased against him; the lease he entered into with the tenant let him
know that a "pay Wash and Dri" was going to be installed shortly;
the subtenant has vacated the premises, so the rent reduction amount granted
to her constitutes a windfall to the master tenant; and the tenant perjured
himself at the hearing.
D. 1207 & 1209 Guerrero St.` AL020097
The landlord’s Petition for Extension of Time to do Capital Improvement Work
was granted, and the Administrative Law Judge found that it was reasonable
for completion of the work to extend through October 31, 2001. The tenants
filed petitions alleging decreased housing services due to the landlord’s
failure to allow them to reoccupy the subject units within the time period
granted in the decision. The petition of the tenant in unit #1207 was denied,
because the tenant was paying the same amount of rent in the replacement unit
as she had been paying in the subject unit. The petition of the tenant in
unit #1209 was granted, and the landlord was found liable to the tenant in
the amount of $900 per month. The landlord appeals, claiming that: the tenant
in unit #1209 did not support her allegations with receipts or other documentation;
the delays in the work were reasonable and necessary; the premises were ready
for reoccupancy by the middle of February, and the rent reduction should have
terminated at that time; and the Rent Board does not have the authority to
award damages for a period of time when there was no tenancy in existence.
This appeal was withdrawn immediately prior to the meeting.
E. 1959 Oak St. #4 AL020096
The landlord’s appeal was filed four days late because the property management
company did not receive a copy of the decision, and the owner of the property
is frequently away on business.
The landlord’s petition seeking certification of capital improvement costs
was granted. The tenant’s appeal on the grounds of financial hardship was
accepted and remanded for hearing. The Administrative Law Judge found sufficient
financial hardship to warrant a deferral of the passthrough through February
28, 2003. The landlord appeals the remand decision, claiming that if the tenant
obtained a roommate and gave up her parking space, she would no longer fall
within the Board’s hardship guidelines.
F. 961 Pine St., Apt. E AT020099
The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs and
rent increases based on increased operating expenses was granted, in part.
One tenant appeals the imposition of the operating expense increase to all
units in the building equally, since he resides in a smaller unit.
G. 1916 Taraval St. AT020098
The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs for
two units was granted pursuant to a Minute Order. One tenant appeals the decision
on the grounds of financial hardship.
H. 839 Jones St. #17 AT020095
The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs to
seven of seventeen units was granted, in part. Two tenants in one unit appeal
the decision on the grounds of financial hardship.
I. 32 Cervantes Blvd. AL020101
The landlord’s petition for certification of the costs of exterior painting
and staircase repair to one unit was granted. However, a previous passthrough
for painting the front of the building was discontinued, because the current
paint job also included painting the front of the building. On appeal, the
landlord claims that she should have received more, since the current paint
job also included painting the side of the building.
J. 845 California St. #405 AT020100
The tenant’s appeal was filed one month late because the tenant waited for
the notice of rent increase and was not aware of having to file within 15
days of issuance of the Minute Order.
The landlord’s petition for certification of capital improvement costs to
43 of 58 units was granted pursuant to a Minute Order. One tenant appeals
on the grounds of financial hardship.
VI. Public Hearing
A Public Hearing to consider an amendment to Rules Section 6.15C(3) was convened
and concluded at 6:29 p.m., since no member of the public appeared. The amendment
makes it clear that a violation of this Section, which requires that master
tenants pay a proportionate share of the rent for the unit, will not serve as
a basis for eviction. The language is as follows below (new language underlined):
(3) Partial Sublets. In the event a master tenant does not sublease
the entire rental unit, as anticipated in Section 37.3 (c), then the master
tenant may charge the subtenant(s) no more than the subtenant(s) proportional
share of the total current rent paid to the landlord by the master tenant
for the housing and housing services to which the subtenant is entitled under
the sub-lease. A master tenant’s violation of this section shall not constitute
a basis for eviction under Section 37.9.
VII. Communications
In addition to correspondence concerning cases on the calendar, the Commissioners
received a copy of the Appellate Decision in the case of Cobb v. Rent Board
(Superior Court Case No. 314966), in which the Court of Appeal upheld the
lower court’s denial of the landlord’s Writ challenging the denial of a rent
increase based on Costa-Hawkins.
VIII. Director’s Report
Executive Director Grubb reported as follows:
A. Legislation proposed by Supervisor Daly providing additional eviction
protections to tenants passed First Reading at the Board of Supervisors. The
legislation will require that oral warnings to tenants must be put in writing
within five days, except for non-payment of rent. The warnings will have to
be filed with the Rent Board only if the landlord proceeds with an eviction.
Settlements involving the waiver of a tenant’s rights may go through a mediation/arbitration
process, and must be filed with the Board, although the settlement amounts
can be redacted. Notices for owner move-in evictions will also have to be
filed with the Board, and will expire after three years. Enabling legislation
allowing the Rent Board to arbitrate disputes regarding guest and visitor
policies in residential hotels also passed first reading.
B. Mr. Grubb reminded the Commissioners that the Open Enrollment period for
health benefits is up until May 1st.
C. Mr. Grubb provided an update on the department’s current petition backlog,
which was 315 petitions in January, but has now grown to around 600. This
has resulted from the Temporary Moratorium on processing of capital improvement
petitions, the extended adjudication of several large cases, and the Board’s
adoption of Rules Section 1.21, among other factors. A fee increase to $23
is still going forward as the Department’s submission. This will allow the
Department to hire two Administrative Law Judges and one recording clerk,
and fill the vacant Counselor position. It will not, however, allow for the
Department to get rid of the petition backlog within the coming year.
IX. Calendar Items
April 23rd & 30th & May 7th & 14th
- NO MEETINGS
May 21, 2002
8 appeal considerations (2 rescheduled from 5/7/02)
X. Adjournment
President Wasserman adjourned the meeting at 8:19 p.m.