In 2008, San Francisco voters passed Proposition M, a proposition that prohibits landlords from harassing tenants through certain actions, such as abusing the right of entry to a unit, threatening or attempting to coerce a tenant to move, or denying housing services or utilities. In response, the City began funding and partnering with nonprofit organizations to tackle evictions at all stages, from preventative steps such as tenant and landlord education to more intensive interventions when tenants are facing eviction.
Background
What are Tenant Protection Services?
The Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development’s (MOHCD) Community Development Division funds a variety of tenant protection services, including legal services, tenants’ rights counseling and education, mediation, housing stability case management, and direct financial assistance (rental assistance) for one-time back rent or ongoing need-based rent subsidies.
Multilingual and multimedia community-driven public information campaigns disseminate information through ads in transit shelters and other public spaces in neighborhoods, broadcasted in radio, print, and digital format with a focus on neighborhoods experiencing highest displacement rates. Know-Your-Rights Education addresses both tenants and landlord rights and responsibilities. Tenants in the early stages of eviction, experiencing landlord harassment, or seeking to address habitability issues can receive one-on-one counseling. Alternative dispute resolution (ADR) services are provided to tenants, landlords, property managers, and other rental housing stakeholders, with a focus on quickly deescalating tensions that can lead to an eviction or other forms of residential instability.
Rental assistance, either on an ongoing or one-time basis, is offered to tenants who are either severely rent burdened and struggle to make ends meet or who are facing an unexpected crisis and cannot make rent, respectively. Ongoing rental assistance can also deepen the affordability of City Affordable Rental Opportunities when provided to applicants who would not otherwise income-qualify due to their low incomes.
Why is Tenant Protection Services Important?
These services equip tenants with the resources to understand and assert their rights.
Key Trends
Partnering organizations that receive funding for tenant protections services are, but not limited to,
Eviction Defense Collaborative, Bay Area Legal Aid, Q Foundation, Tenderloin Housing Clinic, Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco, and Causa Justa: Just Cause.
Eviction Defense Collaborative largely provides services to residents of the Tenderloin, SoMa, Inner Mission, and Bayview.
Tenderloin Housing Clinic’s clients mainly come from the Haight, Western Addition, Sunset, and Richmond neighborhoods.
Eviction Defense Collaborative estimates that 90 percent of households who respond to unlawful detainers receive EDC assistance.
What’s Happening Now to Enhance Tenant Protection Services?
San Francisco voters passed Proposition F on June 5, 2018, which established a policy that all residential tenants facing eviction have a right to full-scope legal defense. This ordinance went into effect on July 11, 2019 and MOHCD is overseeing its implementation.
Supervisor Sandra Fewer introduced legislation in 2018 to disallow passthroughs and prevent real estate companies from passing on cost of loan and property taxes the building to the tenants. One of the legislation’s intentions is to stop speculators from buying buildings at high-priced loans, passing through these costs to tenants in the hopes of eventual eviction, and bringing affordable rent-stabilized units to high market rate rents.
Issues Regarding Tenant Protection Services
The City relies on eviction notice data to understand eviction trends in the city. However, this data is not complete – certain eviction notices are not always reported, some eviction notices are resolved in court, whether the eviction notice results in an eviction is unknown, and the extent of unlawful evictions is unknown.
Tenants are often at a disadvantage in buyout situations - they do not always know their rights to stay in the home or that they can negotiate the amount. There is no minimum buyout amount unless the household includes seniors or people with disabilities. Buyouts are not always recorded and an enforcement mechanism to ensure that landlords report buyouts does not exist, despite the requirement by the Rent Board.
Evictions generally increase when the market is in its upswing and decrease when the economy is in recession. However, there is a marked increase in “low-fault” evictions (breach of lease, illegal use, failure to renew lease, unapproved subtenant, etc.) when the economy is booming.
Wrongful evictions still occur, especially where enforcement is not easy in situations such as wrongful owner move-in (OMI), capital improvement, and soft story retrofit evictions. Every OMI eviction is not closely monitored to ensure that the owner is living in the unit as intended. Capital improvements and retrofits and related rent increases may lead to eviction. Tenants living in illegal units may be displaced if the units cannot be brought up to code, though they have tenancy rights. Undocumented immigrants, elderly, disabled, and tenants living in boarding homes, in hazardous housing, or in units with a master tenant are especially at risk of eviction; these households tend to be unaware of assistance opportunities.
For Future Consideration
The ideas for future consideration that have the potential to increase community stability in San Francisco are described below. They provide a starting point for agencies, decision-makers, and community members to explore stabilization efforts and identify critical pathways forward. Based on preliminary information, staff is qualifying these ideas according to the type of task, scale of resources and level of complexity to underscore that any of these ideas would require time and additional resources not currently identified. These are not City commitments or recommendations, rather informed ideas that will require careful vetting and analysis as to their reach, resource needs, feasibility, unintended consequences, legal implications, and racial and social equity considerations.
Eviction-Related Data Collection and Sharing
Eviction data collection and sharing
The City and partnering organizations currently have a system in place to collect data on eviction notices, but not the actual evictions. Data collection from the court system could be enhanced by including comprehensive data on case type and eviction notice outcomes.
| Type of Response | Mitigation, Early Intervention |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Data
 |
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | More information required |
| Timing | Short Term (1 year or under)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), Rent Board, Planning, community partners |
| Benefit | Without this data, it is difficult to determine what portion of eviction notices lead to the eviction of tenants. The Rent Board could also have access to DBI and Planning Department data to understand relationships between permits and evictions. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, and collaboration with courts to establish reporting on proceedings. Court data on case management could be used as a screening tool by landlords, thus impacting prospective tenants from obtaining housing. Data should be confidential to assist in improving eviction preventions services without compromising tenants housing prospects. May require State law revisions to enact. Data may still not provide insights into full picture of eviction outcomes. |
Eviction-Related Data Collection and Sharing
Prior evictions data on Property Information Map (PIM)
Service providers suggested that including property evictions data on the City’s Property Information Map would be useful for the public, prospective tenants, and City staff. This entails several key considerations, including the lack of certain types of evictions data and the capacity for the Rent Board or other evictions data collectors to provide the Planning Department with this information.
| Type of Response | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Data
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | Complex (generally major legislation, and/or new program required, and more than three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Planning Department, Rent Board, community partners |
| Benefit | Would create more accessibility to evictions data. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, might be difficult to maintain. Evictions data shown at such a granular geographic level may be used as a screening tool by landlords, thus impacting prospective tenants. Therefore, data should be at the property level not tenant specific. |
Eviction-Related Data Collection and Sharing
Repeat evictor data collection and analysis
Data from eviction notices filed contains property owner information, thus allowing the Rent Board to collect information from repeat evictors.
| Type of Response | Mitigation and Prevention |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Data
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | Complex (generally major legislation, and/or new program required, and more than three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Rent Board, Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), community partners |
| Benefit | Enhancing a system to flag repeat evictors could help tenant organizations or agencies monitor bad actors who are abusing the eviction notice process to evict tenants. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, and an inspection or housing service that follows up on eviction notices. Large property management companies who file eviction notices on the behalf of property owners would not get flagged by this system since they are technically not the property owners. |
Eviction-Related Data Collection and Sharing
Monitor buyout data over time
Analyze whether buyout data is increasing when all tenants begin to receive the right to legal counsel.
| Type of Response | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Data
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time would be required
|
| Complexity | Less Complex (generally no or limited legislation and/or an existing program, and one agency involved)
|
| Timing | Short Term (1 year or under)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Rent Board, Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), Planning, Assessor-Recorder’s Office |
| Key Priority | Yes - Enhancements to Existing City Programs and Policies |
| Benefit | Since buyout amounts vary significantly and some tenants may be pressured or harassed into accepting a buyout amount when faced with eviction, analyzing whether buyout amounts increase when tenants receive right to counsel could be helpful in creating further buyout guidelines. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, and buyout information may not always be fully accurate since it is self-reported. Buyouts may be discussed between a tenant and a landlord without counsel present, thus creating more pressure on a tenant to accept a buyout without considering all options. |
Improve Enforcement of Existing Tenant Protections
Enhancements to notification requirements to tenants affected by maintenance, repairs, or other work
Requiring tenant notification for all impactful residential projects could help inform the tenant of the unit earlier in the development process.
| Type of Response | Early intervention and Prevention |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Regulation
 |
| Resource | Generally only staff time would be required
|
| Complexity | Medium (generally some legislation and/or some change of and existing program, and two to three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Planning Department, Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), community partners |
| Benefit | If a housing inventory is in effect or if there are adjustments made to the Block Book Notification service, the City could confirm the existing tenant have been notified and given the chance to discuss the development application with the project sponsor. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, and an accurate and up-to-date rental registry. Permit process will be extended and requires more staff time and collaboration. |
Improve Enforcement of Existing Tenant Protections
Primary eviction enforcement agency and process clarification
Identifying a primary enforcement agency and process can help address wrongful evictions that occur through Owner Move-In, Relative Move-In, or Ellis Act evictions. While the Rent Board regulates rents and evictions for rent-stabilized units in the city, it is not an enforcement agency. Though there are many regulations regarding at-fault and no-fault evictions, there is not an agency charged with evaluating the legality of evictions and penalizing landlords who are acting wrongfully.
| Type of Response | Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Regulation
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | Medium (generally some legislation and/or some change of and existing program, and two to three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Planning Department, Department of Building and Inspection (DBI), Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), community partners |
| Key Priority | Yes - Enhancements to Existing City Programs and Policies |
| Benefit | Evaluating the legality of certain eviction types will ensure that tenants are protected from wrongful evictions. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, and an additional enforcement team to follow up on enacted eviction notices. |
Increased Outreach, Education, and Engagement
Provision of required information to new tenants
The Rent Board could require landlords to provide information to new tenants on the roles, responsibilities, rights, and protections of landlords and tenants in rental properties, like that of the mandated lead-based paint disclosures.1 This standardized information could come at a minimum in the City's four official languages (English, Spanish, Chinese, and Tagalog) to overcome language barriers. The Rent Ordinance currently requires this information be shared with tenants when there is a change of ownership.
| Type of Response | Early Intervention |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Regulation
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time would be required
|
| Complexity | Less Complex (generally no or limited legislation and/or an existing program, and one agency involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), Rent Board, community partners |
| Benefit | Providing additional information to tenants on their rights and diversifying the languages this information is provided in would help tenants with identifying illegal actions and to know where to seek help in addressing these situations. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources. Is difficult to enforce and standardize to ensure tenants are receiving accurate information. |
Increased Outreach, Education, and Engagement
Targeted tenant education and outreach
Results of neighborhood-specific investments from Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) and tenants’ organizations could be analyzed to create targeted funding for areas that most need it.
| Type of Response | Early Intervention, Mitigation, Prevention |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Service, Funding
  |
| Resource | Generally only staff time would be required
|
| Complexity | Medium (generally some legislation and/or some change of and existing program, and two to three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Short Term (1 year or under)
|
| Geographic Scale | Neighborhood |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), community partners |
| Benefit | Gaining clarity into which neighborhoods experience different types of evictions and/or buyouts could lead to better funding mechanisms or more targeted outreach to ensure that everyone is reached. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources and frequently updating analysis for neighborhood-level insights. Creating neighborhood-specific investments where the most of a single eviction type or buyout activity occurs may reduce services in other areas of the City. |
Increased Outreach, Education, and Engagement
Outreach and education on the Displaced Tenant Housing Preference program
Refer to Lottery Preference Programs and Affordable Housing for more detail.
Enhance Tenant Protections
Financial and technical support for service providers
While Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) increases funding each year for tenant protections services, providers continue to be overwhelmed by demand for services.
| Type of Response | Early Intervention, Urgent/Immediate, Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Service, Funding
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | Medium (generally some legislation and/or some change of and existing program, and two to three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), community partners |
| Key Priority | Yes - Enhancements to Existing City Programs and Policies |
| Benefit | Increasing funding will allow providers to meet demand, enhance services, and provide the extra services for the more vulnerable populations that may require special assistance. They would also be better equipped to provide services at more accessible hours and track comprehensive data. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources, and a reallocation of budget expenditures for partnering agencies. |
Enhance Tenant Protections
Mediation process enhancement for minor lease violations
In the cases where tenants are receiving eviction notices for minor lease violations, consider revising the mediation process to provide more time to tenants to resolve the issue before an eviction occurs.
| Type of Response | Early Intervention and Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Regulation
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time would be required
|
| Complexity | More research required |
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), Rent Board, community partners |
| Key Priority | Yes - Enhancements to Existing City Programs and Policies |
| Benefit | Defining minor lease violations and appropriate mediation services would lessen their impact on tenants and prevent the loss of stable housing. |
| Challenge | Requires funding and resources and increased mediation services for such cases. May affect legality of lease agreements between a landlord and tenant. Defining minor lease violations may be too subjective based on the various types of cases that fall under each eviction type. Local law might be impacted by state law that defines the eviction process. |
Enhance Tenant Protections
Improved scheduling of hearings
The Rent Board could schedule hearings more quickly and according to urgency of case so that hearings are held before unlawful detainer cases have been decided. Additionally, the purpose of Rent Board hearings could be expanded beyond petitions.
| Type of Response | Early Intervention and Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Regulation
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | Medium (generally some legislation and/or some change of and existing program, and two to three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Rent Board, community partners |
| Benefit | Hearings would allow tenants to voice their concerns in addressing certain types of eviction notices or rent raises. |
| Challenge | Requires funding, office space, and resources, an establishment of priority in case types. May impact length of time for addressing other case types that may not be as urgent but that still affect tenants and landlords. |
Enhance Tenant Protections
Protect underserved populations with an expanded rent subsidy program
An expanded rent subsidy program for specific underserved populations and rent burdened households could respond to crisis situations and provide immediate financial resources to avoid displacement and evictions.
| Type of Response | Urgent/immediate, early intervention |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Funding, Regulation, Policy Implementation
 |
| Resource | Extensive Funding (the kind typically required for capital investments, and staff time would be required)
|
| Complexity | Complex (generally major legislation, and/or new program required, and more than three agencies involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), community partners |
| Key Priority | Yes - Enhancements to Existing City Programs and Policies |
| Benefit | Provides direct financial assistance to residents in crisis situations. |
| Challenge | Requires significant funding and resources. Challenging to administer and monitor. |
Enhance Tenant Protections
OMI eviction restrictions on Short-Term Rentals (STRs)
Refer to Short-Term Rentals Regulations for more detail.
Process Improvements
Enhanced interagency coordination
There is an opportunity to build on existing coordination by holding an interagency working group between Department of Building and Inspection (DBI) and Planning to discuss issues that overlap both agencies and to develop process solutions regarding UDUs, renovation permits, and code enforcement, among others. Participants could include members from both agency’s code enforcement teams and program managers.
| Type of Response | Prevention, Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Regulation, Policy Implementation
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time would be required
|
| Complexity | Less Complex (generally no or limited legislation and/or an existing program, and one agency involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Planning, Department of Building and Inspection (DBI) |
| Benefit | Enhanced collaboration could help close loopholes in programs and bring everyone on the same page in terms of addressing certain housing types or process-related changes. |
| Challenge | Requires additional staff time and coordinating lead to make process efficient and effective. |
Process Improvements
Permit process evaluation
Assessing evictions associated with the capital improvements and soft story retrofit permit process would help ensure that tenants have a first right of return and have relocation assistance for the entirety of construction, rather than the current three-month guaranteed requirement. This evaluation could determine what point during the capital improvement or soft story retrofit process it is appropriate to temporarily evict a tenant. Additionally, an outcome of the evaluation could be a set framework for applicants that includes a standard contingency plan.
| Type of Response | Early Intervention, Mitigation |
|---|---|
| Type of Task | Funding, Regulation
|
| Resource | Generally only staff time and some program funding would be required
|
| Complexity | Less Complex (generally no or limited legislation and/or an existing program, and one agency involved)
|
| Timing | Long Term (more than 5 years)
|
| Geographic Scale | Citywide |
| Partners | Mayor's Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD), Planning, Department of Building and Inspection (DBI), community partners |
| Benefit | Gives displaced tenants the right to return once work has completed in relation to certain eviction types and provides longer term financial assistance to find housing. |
| Challenge | Would require funding and resources, including extending the roles of housing inspection or enforcement teams to follow-up on certain eviction types. May be costly for a landlord to continue to pay relocation assistance throughout the duration of a safety-related construction project, especially a mandated improvement such as a soft-story retrofit. |
