Evictions

Proposed Legislation Requires Landlords to Subsidize Rents of Evicted Tenants for 2 Years

— By Kevin Montgomery (@kevinmonty) |

San Francisco Supervisors have been railing against the Ellis Act for some time now, without much success in cutting down the eviction rate. But Supervisor David Campos' latest piece of legislation aims better compensate victims of the often-abused state law that allows landlords to evict tenants by getting out of the rental business entirely.

Via a press release sent out this morning:

The ordinance will require landlords who evict using the Ellis Act to pay the difference between the tenant’s rental rate prior to eviction and what would have been the market rate for that unit for two years. This ensures that relocation payments adequately represent true market costs and allow displaced tenants who would face dramatically higher rent costs the opportunity to stay in San Francisco.

Currently, landlords are required to pay relocation assistance amounts of approximately $5,261 per tenant capped at $15,783 per unit. Landlords must also pay an additional amount of approximately $3,508 for each displaced elderly or disabled tenant. The Campos law would keep the current law as a minimum, but in most cases, would make relocation reflect market increases.

“Almost every renter in San Francisco is just one eviction notice away from being displaced from our city,” said Supervisor Campos. “It is time that we recognize that tenants must receive assistance that is commensurate with market increases in rent if we are to truly address our affordability crisis and check the rampant growth of Ellis Act evictions.”

Campos added that he's working with Sacramento on “placing an outright moratorium on Ellis Act evictions in San Francisco”—a goal we imagine won't gain much traction up-river—and he sees this as an interim solution.

Of course, the San Francisco Apartment Association has already come out against the plan, with Association director Janan New suggesting that the proposal is “just clear theft.”

“It is very creative - and he is acknowledging the ultimate policy goal of transferring wealth from building owners to tenants, so at least they are clear,” she told the Chronicle. “The issue we have is how do you establish a definition of what these criteria are? How do you define what a comparable unit is, what a comparable neighborhood is? How do you define current market rate?”

[SFGate]

The Return of the Eviction Party

— By Kevin Montgomery (@kevinmonty) |

I've heard a lot about these mythical eviction parties, where tenants tossed to the curb by their money-grabby landlords celebrate their former homes with beer and destructive mayhem. Fortunately, I had never once come across one for myself until yesterday evening.

Sadly all-to-common throughout the turbulent late-90s, when social justice activists were booted to make room for open source activists, they seem to have died off in recent years (one notable exception from two years ago notwithstanding).  However, the eviction of the Capp Street Commune at Capp and 20th seems like a particularly eery omen of what's to come, given the Commune was right next door to the SF Tenants Union.  If their neighbors, arguably one of the most adept organization at protecting tenants in the city, couldn't help them, what does that say for the rest of us?

I invited myself into the party, hoping to catch someone light the first match, or at least take a swing of the sledgehammer of “fuck yous.”  But there was no retributive property destruction, just melancholy and boxed belongings.  Not much of an eviction party, at least in the eyes of a kid who spent his youth burning matchbooks for fun.

On my way out, I asked a guy clearly suffering from a case of the bummers if he lived in the house, hoping to get the story behind the eviction.

“Naw man, no one lives here.”

This is What Evicting a Business Looks Like

— By Kevin Montgomery (@kevinmonty) |

Earlier this morning, two Sheriff's Department squad cars rolled up to 24th and Folsom, a bunch of officers piled onto the street, stared longingly at the vegan blueberry donuts at Philz, and proceeded to supervise the eviction of the Purple Haze Smoke Shop.  Admittedly, I didn't stop to ask what was going on because there was a circular saw in play, but it's worth noting that this is the third business evicted from this corner in the last few months (the other two being Gunz & Bunz/Mike's Deli and the liquor store on the corner, which were both evicted back in November).

Anyone know what's up?

Previously on Uptown Almanac: