Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Evictions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board advances ordinance to prioritize Ellis Act evictees for some affordable housing slots
Summary
An ordinance proposed by Supervisor Chu would give limited priority in city‑funded affordable housing programs to tenants facing Ellis Act evictions, seniors and disabled tenants; the measure passed its first reading.
The Board of Supervisors advanced an ordinance on first reading on Tuesday that would create a limited priority for tenants displaced by Ellis Act evictions and for long‑term residents with serious disabilities in city‑funded affordable housing programs.
The ordinance, introduced by Supervisor Chu and recommended by the Land Use and Economic Development Committee, would give priority to tenants who have occupied apartments for more than 10 years and have received an Ellis Act notice, and to tenants who have lived in their units for more than five years and who have a disability or life‑threatening illness. The priority would be for applicants who also meet project eligibility requirements (income, age, etc.).
How it would work: The proposal would permit programs funded or administered by the city, including successor redevelopment programs, to establish a priority for qualifying households; the priority could apply to a capped share of units (up to 20% in some new developments under the language discussed) and could be used only once per beneficiary. The bill also includes expiration provisions for the priority if unused (three years for existing projects, six years for new projects) and preserves individual project eligibility rules.
Why it matters: Supervisors framed the measure as a practical, local response to displacement caused by Ellis Act evictions even as many said broader state action would also be needed. The stated intent is to reduce the risk that long‑term tenants who are forced from their homes become homeless by giving them standing in the queue for affordable units produced with city resources.
Questions raised in committee: Supervisors and staff discussed how the preference would interact with existing programs and eligibility rules, whether the Rent Board or other agencies would make disability determinations, and how the priority would be limited so as not to interfere with project underwriting and state funding requirements. Supervisor Cohen asked about interaction with Section 8 voucher holders; staff said the preference would move an eligible household ahead in project waiting lists but would not override project eligibility rules.
Vote: The ordinance passed on first reading by the board under the same‑house/same‑call procedure used for committee reports.
