Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rent Control topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Rent Board explains tenant protections, relocation rules and data on unit legalizations
Summary
Deputy Director Robert Collins told the Board of Appeals that San Francisco’s Rent Board enforces rent‑control for units built before June 13, 1979, offers counseling and mediation, reviews petitions for unlawful increases and relocation claims, and is preparing to publish partial Ellis Act datasets via DataSF.
Robert Collins, deputy director of the San Francisco Rent Board, briefed the Board of Appeals on June 24 on the agency’s services for landlords, tenants and the public, with a focus on how the rent ordinance treats demolition and the removal of residential units.
Collins said the rent ordinance applies to buildings built before June 13, 1979, with limited exemptions for some single‑family homes and condominiums. The Rent Board does not set a unit’s base rent but limits annual increases during a tenancy, tying allowable raises to the consumer‑price index and providing additional pass‑throughs for capital improvements, water‑revenue bonds, and certain utility costs.
On eviction and relocation when units are removed from housing use, Collins said landlords must have a just‑cause reason — one of 16 listed in the ordinance — including a demolition or removal‑from‑housing finding. The ordinance requires landlords who recover possession under a demolition‑type provision to pay relocation expenses as provided in section 37.9(c), though Collins said the code does not clearly define every type of permit that qualifies as a lawful removal and that the ambiguity has practical consequences for enforcement.
Collins described the Rent Board’s counseling and mediation units, which provide outreach, an intake call center (about 30,000 calls per year), and an administrative hearings and appeals unit that receives about 2,000 petitions annually. He said the board emphasizes mediation and alternative dispute resolution in resolving many matters rather than formal adjudication.
During questioning, Planning Department zoning administrator Scott Sanchez confirmed that Department of Building Inspection (DBI) data show active public interest in the legalization program: as of the prior week DBI had recorded 776 phone calls about the program, 1,589 counter visits, 251 screening forms, 199 applications and 32 permits issued to legalize previously unpermitted units. Collins said portions of Ellis Act filings remain confidential, but that the Rent Board is working with the city’s DataSF initiative to publish partial data for public review.
Collins and Sanchez both told the board that the Rent Board’s role is limited when a unit’s removal is linked to complex permitting questions — for example, whether the unit is being demolished or merely taken offline — and that enforcement or judicial processes (including unlawful detainer in Superior Court) may control an outcome. Collins urged tenants and landlords to use the Rent Board’s counseling services and noted that tenants may file petitions for substantial decreases in housing services or for unlawful rent increases.
The Board of Appeals did not take action on the presentation; Collins answered commissioners’ questions and provided contact pathways for additional follow‑up.
