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

Skip to page body

June 19, 2001

July 07, 1998

 

 

MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF

THE SAN FRANCISCO RESIDENTIAL RENT

STABILIZATION & ARBITRATION BOARD,

 

Tuesday, June 19, 2001 at 6:00 p.m. at

25 Van Ness Avenue, Suite 70, Lower Level

 

 

 

            I.            Call to Order

 

            Vice-President Marshall called the meeting to order at 6:16 p.m.

 

            II.            Roll Call

 

                                                                        Commissioners Present:            Aung; Gruber; Hobson; Justman; Lightner; Marshall; Murphy.

                                                                        Commissioners not Present:            Becker; Mosser; Wasserman.

                                                                        Staff Present:            Grubb; Lee; Wolf.

 

            III.            Approval of the Minutes

 

                                    MSC:            To approve the Minutes of June 5, 2001 with the following addition:  to add to Commissioner Hobson’s remarks upon the conclusion of the Public Hearing that he recommended exempting reasonable absences caused by education, an ill family member, or employment.

                                                (Gruber/Justman:  5-0)

 

            IV.            Vote on Whether to Go Into Closed Session Regarding the Case of Larsen v.
                        Rent Board (Superior Court Case No. 319390) Pursuant to S.F.
                        Administrative Code Section 67.11{a}

 

                                    MSC:  To go into Closed Session.  (Hobson/Justman:  5-0)

 

            V.            Closed Session re Larsen, supra, Pursuant to Government Code Section
                        54956.9{a}

 

      The Board went into Closed Session from 6:20 to 6:55 p.m. with Deputy City Attorney Marty Greenman to discuss the case of Larsen v. Rent Board (Superior Court Case No. 319390).

 

            VI.            Vote on Whether or Not to Disclose and Possible Disclosure of Any/All
                        Conversations Held in Closed Session Regarding Larsen, supra.

     

                                    MSC: To disclose that the Board has entered into a settlement of the Larsen litigation, and to inform the public as to amended administrative procedures that will be followed pursuant to Ellis filings.  (Lightner/Gruber:  5-0)

 

            VII.            Report on Any Actions Taken in Closed Session Regarding Larsen, supra,
                         Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.1{a}{2} and S.F. Administrative
                        Code Section 67.14{b}{2}

 

      Vice-President Marshall reported that the Board held a Closed Session to discuss the Larsen case with its attorney, and approved a settlement of that litigation.  Additionally, the Board’s administrative procedures pertaining to Ellis filings were amended so that Step 7 now reads as follows:  “Prior to the effective date of withdrawal, owner records the Memorandum summarizing Notice of Intent with County Recorder.  A tenant may assert the owner’s failure to record a memorandum as a defense to an eviction action.  The Rent Board will record a Notice of Constraints (Step 10) notwithstanding the owner’s failure to record the Memorandum.”

 

            VIII.            Consideration of Appeals

 

            A.            110 Portola Dr. #2                                    AL010103

 

      The tenant’s petition alleging decreased housing services due to removal of the right to have an extra front door key was granted, and the landlord was found liable in the amount of $315.00, or $70.00 per month.  On appeal, the landlord claims that:  there was no decrease in housing services, since security is not defined as a housing service; increased security constitutes an increase in housing services, rather than a decrease; the tenant failed to prove the need for an extra key; there is no authority for granting a rent reduction larger than the amount requested by the tenant; the amount granted was arbitrary and capricious; the Administrative Law Judge exhibited bias against the landlord; and the landlord has a right to establish security criteria for the building, which is of more importance than one tenant’s convenience.

 

                                    MSC: To recuse Commissioner Gruber from consideration of this appeal.  (Lightner/Justman:  5-0)

 

                                    MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case to the Administrative Law Judge on the record to adjust the amount of the rent reduction granted to an amount no greater than that requested in the tenant’s petition; the appeal is denied as to all other issues.  (Hobson/Marshall:  3-1; Lightner dissenting)

 

            B.  145 Central Ave.                                    AL010104

 

      The tenants’ petition alleging decreased housing services was granted and the landlord was found liable to the tenants in the amount of $725.00 due to the condition of a closet ceiling and leaking refrigerator.  On appeal, the landlord claims that the tenants failed to provide him access in order to inspect the unit and effectuate any necessary repairs; and that the tenants have exhibited racial bias against him.

 

                                    MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case to the Administrative Law Judge on the record to: disallow the rent reduction for the refrigerator because it was not reported by the tenants to the Department of Building Inspection and therefore was not substantial; disallow any other rent reductions during the period the landlord’s access to the unit was only allowed with a police escort; and re-visit the issue of the closet and determine if the condition constituted a substantial decrease in housing services.  (Gruber/Lightner:  5-0)

 

            C.            3340 – 18th St.                                    AT010106

 

      The landlords’ petition for a rent increase based on comparable rents was granted, and a rent increase from $650.00 to $1,023.44 was approved.  On appeal, the tenants assert that:  the rent for the unit was not as high in 1996 as the appraiser estimated it to be at the hearing; the apartment is not a two-bedroom unit, rather, the dining room is being used as a bedroom; the tenants’ evidence was not given sufficient weight; and the subject unit is not in good condition.

 

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

 

            D.            2440 Bayshore Blvd. #2                                    AL010107

 

      The tenants’ petition alleging decreased housing services due to the loss of use of a parking space was granted and the landlords were found liable in the amount of $562.50, or $75.00 per month.  On appeal, the landlords claim that the tenants had not parked their car at the building but, rather, in a space belonging to a neighboring building.

 

                                    MSC: To recuse Commissioner Aung from consideration of this appeal.  (Marshall/Lightner:  5-0)

 

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

 

            E.            478 Warren Dr. #720                                    AT010108

 

      The tenant’s petition alleging decreased housing services due to noise from a downstairs neighbor’s dog was denied because the Administrative Law Judge found that the landlord made numerous, reasonable, timely and ultimately successful efforts to resolve the tenant’s complaint.  The tenant appeals, claiming that:  the Administrative Law Judge exhibited bias against the tenant; the conclusion that the landlord made reasonable attempts to resolve the problem contradicts sworn, taped testimony at the hearing; the tenant was ill on the day of the hearing, and not functioning at a high level; there are numerous dangerous dogs on the premises; and there are many factual errors in the decision.

 

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

 

            F.  278A Golden Gate                                    AL010109

 

      The landlords’ appeal was filed one day late because the landlords’ attorney alleges that instructions he gave to his staff were not carried out.

 

                                    MSC: To find good cause for the late filing of the appeal.  (Gruber/Hobson:  5-0)

 

      The tenant’s petition alleging decreased housing services and unlawful rent increase was granted, in part, and the landlords were found liable to the tenant in the amount of $5,330.79 due to unlawful rent increases and $50.00 per month due to a non-working fireplace.  The landlords appeal, asserting that:  the unlawful rent increases were only minimally excessive; the tenant was advised to seek advice from the Rent Board concerning the increases and this claim should therefore be barred by the doctrines of laches and estoppel; the alleged increase in February, 1999 actually took effect in March, 1999 and was lawful; the tenant’s initial base rent did not include a working fireplace; and the amount granted for the fireplace is excessive, especially considering the fact that the tenant did not even attempt to use the fireplace for six months after moving in to the unit.

 

                                    MSC: To accept the appeal and remand the case for a hearing on the rent history and to make findings as to whether the fireplace was offered as a housing service at the commencement of the tenancy. 

                                                (Justman/Marshall:  5-0)

 

            IX.            Communications

 

      The Commissioners received communications concerning cases on the calendar.

 

            X.            Old Business

 

Proposed New Section 6.15C(3), Requiring that a Master Tenant Pay a Pro-Rata Share of the Rent

 

      This proposal will be discussed at the meeting on July 10th.  The Executive Director will explore the possibility of obtaining a room in City Hall for a Public Hearing on August 21st.

 

            XI.            Remarks from the Public

 

      Karen Crommie expressed her disappointment that proposed Rules Section 6.15C(3) was not going to be discussed at the meeting, and asked that the Board “take the profit motive out of subletting.”  Len Pink said that he also came to hear the discussion of 6.15C(3) and supports passage.

 

            XII.            New Business

 

            A.  Commissioner Lightner brought up a request by Supervisor Gonzales that the Office of the City Attorney draft legislation that would restrict the Board’s rule-making powers, and asked that the Commissioners unanimously oppose such a proposal.  This issue will be put on the calendar for discussion at the next meeting.

 

            B.  Commissioner Hobson distributed letters to Supervisor Chris Daly objecting to a proposal that would take away the permitting of late night clubs from the Police Department, and asked for the Board’s support.

 

            XIII.            Calendar Items

 

            June 26 & July 3, 2001 - NO MEETINGS

 

            July 10, 2001

            3 appeal considerations

            Old Business:

                  Proposed New Section 6.15C(3), Requiring that a Master Tenant Pay

                  a Pro-Rata Share of the Rent

            New Business:

                  A.  Litigation Update

                  B.  Rule-Making Authority of the Rent Board Commissioners

 

            XIV.            Adjournment

 

      Vice-President Marshall adjourned the meeting at 8:06 p.m.

Last updated: 6/5/2012 11:32:44 AM