Total sales in 2024 have seen a 45% yearover-year increase compared to 2023, making San Francisco an attractive market for real estate investment. In 2024, we experienced a significant 85% increase in closed transactions for properties with 10 or more units, compared to 2023. This surge reflects growing confidence in San Francisco’s long-term growth potential, driven by favorable market conditions and the return of large-scale investors. As demand continues to rise, it positions the city as a prime opportunity for both current and prospective real estate investors looking to capitalize on the expanding market.
call
APARTMENT SF
APARTMENT
magazine
SF APARTMENT
San Francisco Apartment
Association Office
265 Ivy Street
San Francisco, CA 94102
Tel 415-255-2288 Fax 415-255-1112
Email memberquestions@sfaa.org
Web www.sfaa.org
SFAA Staff
Executive Director Janan New
Deputy Director Vanessa Khaleel
Database & Website Manager Stephanie Alonzo
Government and Community Affairs Charley Goss
Marketing Lara Kisich
Member Services Gershay Castaneda
Education & Member Services Maria Shea
Accountant Crystal Wang
SFAA Officers
President J.J. Panzer
Vice President Robert Link
Treasurer Paul Gaetani
SFAA Directors
Eric Andresen, Oz Erickson, Marina Franco, Craig Greenwood, Andrew Long, Kent Mar, Neveo Mosser, James Sangiacomo, Dave Wasserman
VOLUME XXXVI, NUMBER 2 FEBRUARY 2025
Published by
San Francisco Apartment Association
Publisher Vanessa Khaleel
Editor Pam McElroy
Art Director Jéna Safai
Production Manager Stephanie Alonzo
Tel 415-255-2288
Web www.sfaa.org
SF Apartment Magazine (ISSN 1539-8161) Periodicals Postage Paid at San Francisco, California and at additional mailing offices. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the SF APARTMENT MAGAZINE, 265 Ivy Street, San Francisco, CA 94102.
The SF Apartment Magazine is published monthly for $84 per year by the San Francisco Apartment Association (SFAA), 265 Ivy Street, San Francisco, CA 94102. The SF Apartment Magazine is not responsible for the return or loss of submissions or artwork. The magazine does not consider unsolicited articles. The opinions expressed in any signed article in the SF Apartment Magazine are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the SFAA or SF Apartment Magazine. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is sold with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting or other professional services. If legal service or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent person should be sought. Acceptance of an advertisement by this magazine does not necessarily constitute any endorsement or recommendation by the SFAA, express or implied, of the advertiser or any goods or services offered. Published monthly, the SF Apartment Magazine is distributed to the entire membership of the SFAA. The contents of this magazine may not be reproduced without permission. Publisher disclaims any liability for published articles. Printed by Printing Partners Copyright @2024 by SFAA.
Safety First San
Francisco sees historic crime declines in 2024, marking the lowest rates in decades.
San Francisco’s 2024 crime rates reached their lowest levels in over two decades, with notable declines in violent and property crimes. The city saw a sixty-year low in homicides, with only thirty-five murders reported—down 35% from 2023. Auto break-ins also dropped by 54%, falling below ten thousand incidents for the first time in nearly fifteen years. Property crimes fell by 31% compared to 2023, and violent crimes decreased by 14%, marking the lowest crime rate since 2001.
Key enforcement measures, including new technologies like automated license plate readers (ALPRs), drones, and mobile cameras, contributed to this progress. Additionally, the city’s Drug Market Agency Coordination Center (DMACC), launched in 2023, has made significant strides in addressing the fentanyl crisis and street conditions, leading to over 5,400 drug-related arrests. The Violence Reduction Initiative, focused
on at-risk individuals, has notably reduced gun violence by 50% in the Bayview neighborhood.
San Francisco’s law enforcement agencies, including the Police Department, District Attorney’s Office, and Sheriff’s Office, worked together in close collaboration, as well as with federal and state partners. This coordination helped maximize resources despite staffing challenges. Officers have made numerous key arrests, including taking repeat offenders off the streets. The city’s crime figures, which include 4,739 violent crimes and 30,991 property crimes, represent a significant drop from prior years. The 2001 crime rates remain an outlier, but without that year, 2024 marks one of the safest in decades.
Former Mayor London Breed emphasized the importance of supporting law enforcement with the right tools and coordination to achieve these results. She credited the combined efforts of
city leaders, law enforcement, and residents. Police Chief Bill Scott noted the strain on the department due to staffing shortages but praised officers’ resilience in maintaining public safety. District Attorney Brooke Jenkins and Sheriff Paul Miyamoto also highlighted the importance of continued collaboration to ensure accountability and tackle drug sales, public drug use, and gun violence. The city remains committed to maintaining these gains with further support for its law enforcement teams.
Annual Allowable Rent Increase 1.4%
Effective March 1, 2025, through February 28, 2026, the allowable annual rent increase is 1.4%. This amount is based on a 60% increase in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers in the Bay Area. To calculate the allowable rent increase, multiply the tenant’s base rent by .014.
For example, if the tenant’s base rent is $2,000, the annual increase would be calculated as follows: $2,000 x .014 = $28. The tenant’s new base rent would be $2,028 ($2,000 + $28).
Annual increases must be calculated only on the tenant’s base rent, which does not include capital improvement passthroughs or bond measure passthroughs. Rent increases cannot be “rounded up” to the nearest dollar.
For more information, visit the San Francisco Rent Board website at sfrb. org, or call them at (415) 252-4600. For a history of all allowable increases and effective periods, turn to page 35.
Assessor-Recorder Launches Free Document Access
San Francisco Assessor-Recorder Joaquín Torres has launched an online service that offers free, easy access to over seven million recorded documents, spanning from 1990 to the present. This first-in-the-state initiative
SFAA LANDLORD EXPO
Come join SFAA and local rental property owners for a free educational event covering all things multifamily housing. Attendees will learn all about the latest trends, products and services in the multifamily housing industry. Consult with legal and management professionals, get to know service providers, improve your overall effectiveness at the free educational seminars, and meet peers in the San Francisco rental property market. The event is free!
When: Wednesday, March 19, 2025
Where: Fort Mason Center Gallery 308
For more information on the tradeshow or to become a sponsor, contact vanessa@sfaa.org. We look forward to seeing you! For a schedule of the day’s events, visit sfaa.org
For more information on the Landlord Expo, turn to pages 39 and 43. To become a sponsor, contact stephanie@sfaa.org
allows the public to view documents such as deeds, liens, and reconveyances without the need to purchase or visit City Hall in person. Previously, these documents were only accessible by either purchasing them or viewing them on site.
The service aims to enhance transparency, streamline access, and reduce the public’s reliance on paid document purchases. By registering and undergoing an identification verification process, users can now view vital property records from home or office. This effort is part of Torres’s broader goal to modernize government services, with additional improvements such as a new appointment system for in-person visits, an updated marriage certificate program, and an overhaul of the city’s assessment and tax systems.
This service is expected to alleviate staff workloads, reduce customer inquiries, and ensure a more responsive government in San Francisco.
Informal Review Deadline—March 31
If you believe your property’s assessed value is higher than the market value, you may request an Informal Assessment Review before March 31, 2025. This applies to single-family dwellings, residential condominiums, townhouses, live-work lofts, and cooperative units.
We’ve heard from quite a few members who filled out the form and ended up saving thousands on their tax bill. Why not give it a shot?
Online submissions are preferable (sfassessor.org > Forms & Notices), but alternately you may mail your request to:
San Francisco Assessor-Recorder’s Office
Attn: Informal Review
1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place City Hall, Room 190 San Francisco, CA 94102
San Francisco’s Curbside EV Charging Pilot Program has advanced to its next phase, bringing three electric vehicle charging providers—Urban EV, it’s electric, and Voltpost—closer to installing new charging stations on city streets. This initiative aims to enhance the city’s electric vehicle infrastructure, particularly for residents without off-street parking, and supports the city’s climate action goals.
The program is a collaboration among several city agencies, including the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency (SFMTA) and Public Works, and will involve community input for successful implementation. The selected providers will now work on obtaining necessary permits and installing chargers in neighborhoods like Duboce Triangle and Dogpatch. The project will also collect data on usage and demand, which will inform the development of a citywide policy for curbside EV charging.
Urban EV’s solution focuses on integrating charging stations into residential neighborhoods, while it’s electric aims to offer compact, user-friendly chargers with minimal disruption. Voltpost’s innovative approach retrofits existing lampposts to provide affordable, scalable charging options.
This program builds on San Francisco’s broader efforts to reduce carbon emissions, promote electric vehicle adoption, and improve sustainable infrastructure. It follows previous initiatives such as the CleanPowerSF program and new legislation requiring EV charging stations in commercial parking lots. As the city moves toward an all-electric future, these efforts aim to expand accessibility to EV charging across the San Francisco.
Cole Valley’s New Entertainment Zone
San Francisco is expanding its successful “entertainment zone” program to Cole Valley, a neighborhood poised to become the third area to allow bars and restaurants to sell to-go alcoholic beverages during outdoor events. The initiative, already successful in areas like Front Street and Thrive City, aims to boost local business by attracting visitors and reviving neighborhood economies post-pandemic.
If approved, the Cole Valley Entertainment Zone could launch by March 2025, enabling alcohol sales for outdoor events like Cole Valley Nights, a recent successful night market. The program, part of former Mayor Breed’s strategy to revitalize local businesses, allows bars and restaurants to sell alcohol for outdoor consumption during special events without needing a new Alcoholic Beverage Control (ABC) license.
This expansion is seen as a key opportunity for neighborhoods like Cole Valley that have traditionally been quieter at night. The program has proven successful elsewhere, with participating venues experiencing up to a 1,500% sales increase during events. Local businesses
The News… continued on Page 52
A Running Tally
written by VARIOUS AUTHORS
From a running toilet to a redeeming sale, read on for two insightful and unexpected plot twists.
Editor’s Note: We’re excited to introduce “Tales from the Corridors,” a new quarterly column where property managers and industry professionals can share their funniest, most outlandish, or downright bizarre experiences from the world of real estate. These stories will not only entertain but also provide valuable insights into the everyday realities of property management. Whether you’re laughing or learning, this column will bring a dose of humor and a deeper understanding of our unique challenges in this ever-evolving industry. The stories have been edited for space and clarity.
The Running Toilet
In the world of rent control, sometimes tenants’ expectations can catch you off guard. I’ve owned a rent-controlled building for several years, and most of the time, things run smoothly. But every now and then, I experience something that makes me stop and think about the challenges landlords face when managing these types of properties.
One of our tenants—let’s call her Sarah—has been living in a small one-bedroom apartment for about twelve years. She moved in before we purchased the building, so her rent is well below market value. Sarah works at a local private university, and from what I gather, she’s well-educated and financially stable.
We got a notice from SF Water one day saying that the water meter in the
building was running continuously and that our water bill was climbing fast. So, we sent out a notice to the tenants, and when we went into Sarah’s unit to inspect, we discovered that the toilet had been running nonstop for about five weeks. Apparently, Sarah hadn’t noticed, likely because she’d been away for a while, traveling.
After we repaired the toilet, we thought that was the end of the issue. But the very next day, Sarah reached out with a surprising request. She mentioned that the bathroom light had been left on after the repair work, and she asked if we would reimburse her for the electricity cost. Specifically, she said, “I didn’t see a reduction in my last rent payment for the lights left on when work was done in my apartment.”
At first, I was a bit taken aback. It seemed like an unusual concern over something as small as a light bulb. I did a little research to understand the electricity usage. Based on my calculations, if you leave a 40-watt bulb on for an entire day, the cost would be just under one dollar—$0.96, to be exact, assuming an average electricity rate of 10 cents per kilowatt-hour.
I decided to respond, keeping it professional but also addressing the situation with a bit of clarity. I wrote back, explaining the math (culled from Google): “In the case of a 40-watt
bulb, if you pay an electricity rate of 10 cents per kWh, your savings by turning that bulb off for one hour would be 0.04 cents. We will send you a check for $0.96 to cover the cost of the light being on for one day.”
While it seemed almost trivial to address the cost of one light bulb, I wanted to make sure I didn’t dismiss the tenant’s concern, however minor. I’m sure some would have found the situation frustrating, but in my experience, it’s important to address all issues, no matter how small, in a respectful way.
At the end of the day, I hope that Sarah is satisfied with the response. And as for the light bulb, I bet the check gets cashed. But what about our water bill?
The Tenants Who Bought the Building
Here’s a story about a four-unit building perched at the edge of Noe Valley and Glen Park. In 2008, the current owners—a couple seeking to diversify their investments—purchased the building to stabilize their financial portfolio. It wasn’t a massive property, but it had potential: a two-story building with three units on the lower floor, each about 1,150 square feet, and a spacious 1,300 square-foot unit upstairs. The plan was simple: if things ever went sideways in life, they’d downsize and live in one of the apartments.
Fast-forward to 2024, and those same owners, now looking to reduce their exposure and increase their liquidity,
CALL FOR SUBMISSIONS: “TALES FROM THE CORRIDORS”
Do you have a story that has your colleagues in stitches? Ever experienced a housing industry escapade that’s too wild to keep to yourself? A lesson you learned that we can all heed? We want to hear from you!
SF Apartment Magazine’s quarterly column “Tales from the Corridors ” is your chance to share the funniest, craziest, or most outlandish stories from your life as a property manager or other industry professional. Whether it’s a hilarious mishap, a jaw-dropping encounter, or an unbelievable tale, we want to showcase the unique and entertaining experiences that not only amuse but also offer valuable insights to our community.
SUBMISSION GUIDELINES:
Word Count: Stories should be between 300-750 words.
Tone: Lighthearted, humorous, engaging, and informative.
Anonymity: If preferred, we can publish your story anonymously— just let us know.
How to Submit: Email your story to pam@sfaa.org with the subject line “Tales from the Corridors Submission.” Please include your name, contact information, and relevant details about your story.
Selected stories will be featured in our quarterly publication, giving you bragging rights and a chance to entertain and educate fellow housing professionals across the city.
If you have any questions, please email Pam at the above address. We can’t wait to hear from you!
decided it was time to sell the property. The challenge? Only one apartment had turned over since they bought the place—nearly sixteen years ago. This isn’t unusual in San Francisco real estate, especially in smaller buildings where tenants often stay long-term due to rent control protections.
One of the tenants in the upper threebedroom unit was born in the building in 1967 and had lived there his entire life. His children, now in their mid-20s, would also be protected by rent control, meaning that as the years passed, this unit could become a three-generational tenancy. The family was likely paying only about 27% of the market rate for rent, which meant the owners weren’t receiving anything close to the current market value for the property.
Despite the below-market rent, the property, located just across the street from the Upper Noe Valley Recreation Center, had plenty of appeal. There were four parking spaces and a small yard, as well as potential for further development. And the property had made many improvements: a voluntary seismic retrofitting in 2012, a complete rebuild of the two-sided terrazzo front stairs in 2016, and the property came with vacant storage areas that could eventually be converted into an accessory dwelling unit (ADU).
The building was initially listed for $2.275 million, with brokerage and property management handled by a local firm. After sitting on the market for forty-five days with no serious bites, the price was reduced to $2.1 million, and after another three weeks, it was dropped again to $1.995 million. Around two months into the listing, “Tenant A” approached the property manager with an idea: What if the tenants pooled their resources and bought the building themselves?
The property manager, who was enthusiastic about the idea, advised the tenants to gauge the interest of the other residents. Tenant A got to work and quickly found one financially capable couple who shared his vision of homeownership. The
group of tenants decided to take a serious step forward and hire the listing agent to represent them in their effort to buy the building. Who knew the building better than the people who had lived there for years? The long-time residents were intimately familiar with the quirks, strengths, and shortcomings of the property.
The process moved forward, and after some negotiation, the tenants agreed on a final sales price of $1.85 million. It was a great outcome for everyone involved. The owners were able to cash out and reduce their liability exposure, the tenants got the chance to secure their own piece of San Francisco real estate, and the property itself was in good shape for the next chapter. For the tenants-turned-owners, it was more than just a transaction—it was a chance to become both business partners and homeowners all at once.
Cache-Control
written by VARIOUS AUTHORS
Move forward with caution and sensitivity when checking in on suspected hoarding.
Q.A couple of tenants have notified me about another tenant having a severe hoarding problem. Do I have the right to check in on the situation, even though I haven’t seen evidence of hoarding myself?
A. Unfortunately, hoarding is an all-too-common problem, especially among elderly or infirm tenants. Not only does it affect the tenant engaged in such behavior, but it can also have knock-on effects, such as an increase in pest activity or a danger to the safety of the tenant or first responders in the event of an emergency. In short, hoarding is not good for anyone—including the hoarder.
So, you are caught between seemingly competing interests: the rights of the alleged hoarder to quiet enjoyment of their unit, and the rights of your other tenants to be free of the secondary effects of hoarding.
Pursuant to state law, absent a court order, a landlord may enter a tenant’s unit in case of emergency; to make necessary or agreed-upon repairs or improvements; to show the unit to prospective or actual purchasers, tenants, lenders, workers, or contractors; or to make an inspection regarding the return of a security deposit.
Here, you have a report of a condition that may require a repair. You may, therefore, enter the unit. In general,
you can approach your tenant and agree, orally or in writing, on a time for entry to evaluate or make repairs. All too often, hoarders will not agree to provide access to their units as a result of shame or fear.
If your tenant does not agree to schedule access for you to inspect the unit, you may post a notice on the tenant’s door providing at least twenty-four hours’ notice of entry. This notice must indicate the date and time for entry within a reasonable window. For example, it could say between 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m., but not between 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. The time must be within regular business hours (unless you have the tenant’s agreement for a time outside those hours). The notice must also specify the reason for the entry—in this case, to evaluate repairs.
If you arrive at the specified time and the tenant refuses to let you in, you may not force your way in. You may try again on another day or attempt to schedule a different date and time. Document all of your communication with the tenant regarding access and their refusal to provide it.
If you are able to enter and discover a severe hoarding situation, contact counsel regarding next steps. While Adult Protective Services—in theory—should be able to assist, in reality, the situation can be much more complex, and assistance can be much more limited than is beneficial
to either the tenants or the landlord. And because hoarding can result from mental or physical illness, it is possible the tenant will request a reasonable accommodation for a lengthy period to clear the items and clean the unit.
—Shoshana Raphael
Q. A lease expires next month, but the tenants requested a sixmonth extension. I’d rather they didn’t stay because the neighboring residents consistently contact me about noise and parties in that unit after 10:00 p.m. Can I refuse their request without legal repercussions?
A. Yes, you are free to decline a request for a six-month extension, but please understand that all tenancies in San Francisco automatically revert to a month-to-month status upon lease expiration, and a tenancy can only be terminated by the resident’s voluntary departure or for a legal “just cause” reason under the San Francisco Rent Ordinance.
Lease expiration is not a just cause, and as we often discuss in this forum, the just cause reasons are now increasingly difficult to invoke. Regarding tenant fault evictions (meaning the tenant’s conduct is the cause for severing the relationship), this author believes that outside of a refusal or inability to pay rent, or the commission of a serious nuisance, requiring someone to vacate is usually not feasible. This means that these folks may extend their stay for as long as they want, so you should instead address the reason why you and the neighboring tenants would like to see them leave.
WHAT IS AHEAD FOR 2025?
Above is a 10+ year history of CAP rates in San Francisco. The graph clearly tells a story... Historic sales of buildings can provide valuable insights into future trends in the real estate market by revealing patterns, shifts in demand, and the impact of economic factors. We have been around long enough to see multiple cycles and despite the overall market downturn in the last few years, certain neighborhoods, have demonstrated resilience. When it comes to your most valued possession we advise owners to conduct a thorough market analyis and contact us to consider both the challenges and the opportunities presented in our evolving landscape. While we don’t have a crystal ball, we are feeling optimistic about 2025
Stay informed about the dynamic San Francisco real estate market with our quarterly newsletter. Receive expert insights, market updates, and the latest trends in multi-family and commercial properties. Empower your decisions with timely, reliable information from a trusted real estate team.
As referenced above, all San Francisco tenancies, even those in apartments built after 1979, are “eviction protected,” meaning a housing provider needs legal just cause to compel someone to vacate. Here, the constant late evening parties are likely creating a negative atmosphere for others living in the building. The law terms such behavior as a “nuisance.” The ongoing commission of a nuisance, after the perpetrator is warned to stop, constitutes a lawful just cause reason to terminate one’s tenancy. Accordingly, you may want to begin the formal warning process to curb the boisterous partying. If the conduct continues unabated after sufficient protests, consult legal counsel to initiate the tenancy termination process.
The Rent Ordinance lists as a just cause for lease termination the following:
“The tenant, who had an oral or written agreement with the landlord which has terminated, has refused after written request or demand by the landlord to execute a written extension or renewal thereof for a further term of like duration and under such terms which are materially the same as in the previous agreement…”
This means you may require someone to renew their lease for a like term when the initial term expires. But be careful. Other than adjusting rent in accordance with the rent law (e.g., 1.4% for leases that expire between March 1, 2025, and February 28, 2026), all other tenancy terms must be the same. Very few legal practitioners encourage this just cause because a court or jury might not deem the failure to sign a new lease as a sufficiently legitimate justification to unhouse someone.
Rather, if both parties desire an extension, move forward with a new lease or lease addendum to bind this extended term. Conversely, if you are hesitant to renew a term, whether it be for six months or a year, then accept the month-to-month status for the foreseeable future—unless, of course, the tenants decide to leave on their own. Lastly,
if there is a serious problem with the remaining residents, promptly address the situation with an appropriate legal response, as it is hardly fair to make the building community suffer because of someone’s bad behavior.
—Dave Wasserman
The information contained in this article is general in nature. Consult the advice of an attorney for any specific problem. Dave Wasserman is with Wasserman Offices and can be reached at 415-567-9600. Shoshana Raphael is with SJR Law Corporation and can be reached at 415-408-6044.
Be On Your A Game.
WHAT IS NERT?
NERT is the Neighborhood Emergency Response Team program run by the San Francisco Fire Department. The free NERT training prepares you to help yourself, your family, and your neighbors in the event of a disaster. You’ll learn the skills to help yourself and to help emergency responders save lives and protect property. As a member of a NERT team, you can respond to disasters, participate in drills and exercises, and take additional training.
NERT training provides critical skills in emergency preparedness and response. It takes about 24 hours to complete.
YOU’LL LEARN HOW TO:
• Prepare yourself and your family
• Identify and anticipate hazards
• Reduce fire hazards in the home and workplace
• Extinguish small fires
• Assist emergency responders
• Conduct light search and rescue
• Set up treatment areas
• Apply basic medical techniques
• Help reduce survivor stress
• Become a member of a community team
Volunteer participation is vital to making communities work, and particularly vital to San Francisco’s recovery after a disaster.
Workplace Progress
Written by MARGARET J. GROVER
California’s 2025 employment laws impact freelance contracts, workplace rights, and minimum wage. Read on to learn what employers need to know for the new year.
Once again, the California Legislature has been busy enacting new laws, including several that affect the employer–employee relationship. Many of the laws make changes to existing laws, while others impose significant new obligations. Unless otherwise noted, most of the new laws became effective on January 1, 2025.
Written Agreements for Independent Contractors
The Freelance Worker Protection Act (FWPA) is designed to give greater protection to independent contractors and freelance workers. The FWPA requires a written agreement between the hiring party and any person working as an independent contractor who will be paid $250 or more for their services. The contract must contain the following items:
1. The name and mailing address of each party.
2. An itemized list of all services to be provided by the freelance worker, including the value of those services and the rate and method of compensation.
3. The date on which the hiring party shall pay the contracted compensation or the mechanism by which the date shall be determined.
4. The date by which a freelance worker shall submit a list of services rendered under the contract to the hiring party to meet the hiring party’s internal processing deadlines for purposes of timely payment of compensation.
The hiring party must pay the contractor on or before the payment date specified in the written agreement. If the written agreement does not specify a payment date, payment must be made no later than thirty days after completion of the freelance worker’s services.
The hiring party is required to provide a copy of the contract to the independent contractor and to retain a copy of the contract for at least four years.
The hiring party may not discriminate or take adverse action against an independent contractor for trying to enforce their rights under FWPA.
Independent contractors can recover a variety of damages when a hiring entity violates FWPA. Potentially, the largest award relates to unpaid compensation, which can be doubled if not paid when due.
Limits on Employer Communications
The California Worker Freedom from Employer Intimidation Act (CWFEIA) limits employers’ ability to discuss religion and politics with their employees. Under the CWFEIA, employers may not require employees to attend an employer-sponsored meeting held to communicate the employer’s opinions about religious or political matters. While the CWFEIA does not prevent employers from holding these meetings, both employees who attend and employees who decline to attend must be paid for the time if the meeting occurs during the employee’s working hours.
The CWFEIA prohibits employers from firing, discriminating against, retaliating against, or taking any other adverse action against an employee who declines to attend or receive or listen to communications conveying the employer’s opinion about religious or political matters. Employees harmed by a violation of the CWFEIA may bring a complaint in civil court for damages, including punitive damages. In addition, the employer will be liable for a civil penalty of $500 for violating the new law.
A variety of communications are specifically exempted from the CWFEIA prohibitions, including training on civil rights and occupational safety, communications the employer is required to provide, and information needed for the employees to perform their jobs.
Employers can and should continue to require employees to attend harassment prevention training and safety meetings. However, any discussion of religious or political matters should be avoided, even if raised as a joke. If an employer plans to have a meeting to discuss religious or political matters, the meeting notice should specify that attendance is optional for all employees.
Limits on Help Wanted Advertising
Employers may not state that a driver’s license is required in job postings, advertising, or applications unless they reasonably expect the duties of the position to require driving, and reasonably believe that an alternative form of transportation would not be comparable in travel time or cost.
Requiring a driver’s license can be discriminatory as it may eliminate a larger percentage of minority applicants and those born in other countries. As a result, requiring an applicant or employee to hold a valid driver’s license is prohibited when the job does not require the employee to drive. This act takes the protection one step further, as listing a driver’s license as a requirement may cause potential applicants to refrain from applying.
Eliminating Mandatory Use of Vacation for Paid Family Leave
Paid Family Leave (PFL) is a pay protection program funded through payroll contributions, similar to the California Disability Insurance program. PFL provides partial wage replacement when an employee needs to take time off to care for a family member or bond with a new child. If an employee is eligible for protected time off under the California Family Rights Act or Family and Medical Leave Act—both of which provide for unpaid time off—PFL may provide some income during the leave. However, by itself, PFL does not grant an employee a protected leave of absence.
Employers have been able to require that employees use up to two weeks of accrued existing vacation or paid time off before receiving PFL benefits. That provision has now been eliminated, and employees may begin using PFL benefits as soon as they qualify.
Employers may want to supplement the PFL by integrating vacation pay with PFL so the employee receives full pay. This approach can be complicated, but it benefits both the employer and the employee. The employee will receive their
usual compensation, while the employer will have reduced the amount of vacation available to the employee.
Check your employee handbook and leave policies to ensure that you do not require any vacation or other paid time off before an employee uses PFL benefits.
Protections for Victims of Violence
The protections for employees who are victims of violence have become part of the California Fair Employment and Housing Act. This allows the California Civil Rights Department (CRD) to enforce the protections. The revised law applies to employers with twenty-five or more employees. Covered employers must permit employees who are victims of violence—or whose family member is a victim—to take time off for a variety of activities, including obtaining legal protection, obtaining housing, and obtaining medical and mental health care.
Employees may use sick time for any time off needed to care for themselves or family members who are victims of violence. Employers may limit the total leave taken, depending upon the purpose of the leave. Employees may be required to use time off protected under the federal Family and Medical Leave Act and the California Family Rights Act concurrently with any time off for violence.
Employers are also obligated to provide reasonable accommodations to assure the safety of an employee who is a victim or whose family member is a victim of violence while the employee is at work.
Employers are now obligated to inform each employee of their rights to time off for violence. Notice is to be provided to new employees upon hire, to all employees annually, whenever an employee asks for information about time off for violence, and when an employee tells the employer that the employee or the employee’s family member is a victim of violence. The CRD is developing forms that may be used to satisfy the notice provisions. These forms should be available by July 1, 2025.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• Excellent Nob Hill Location
• Six 2-Bed Units Plus One Studio
• Vacant 2-Bed Owner’s Unit
• $325 Per Square Foot
In
Nob Hill | $2,300,000 Hayes Valley | $3,400,000 FOR SALE FOR SALE
• 7 Units
• Excellent Lower Haight Corner
• Strong Restaurant Tenant
• Vacant 5-Bed/3-Bath Top Floor Unit
A Challenging Environment Has Created Unique Opportunities.
Rising interest rates have had a significant impact on the San Francisco sales market. Experience and first hand knowledge navigating these tricky times matters most. We are not guessing… You shouldn’t be either!
Association with Gino Franco & Nico Toracca
In Association with Gino Franco
• 34 Units
•
•
• 9.4 GRM
• $389/square foot
• 65 Units in Marin
• 2-Bed/1.5-Bath Townhouse Units
• Immaculately Maintained
• $303 Per Square Foot
Specialization
California Fair Employment and Housing Act Revisions
The legislature clarified the protections provided by the California Fair Employment and Housing Act (FEHA). FEHA protects employees against discrimination, harassment, and retaliation based on the employee’s “race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, age, sexual orientation, reproductive health decision-making, or veteran or military status.” It also provides protection when there is a perception that the employee has any of the protected characteristics or is associated with a person who has, or is perceived to have, any of those characteristics. The newly adopted language explains that it is unlawful for an employer to act against an employee based on any combination of the protected characteristics.
The second clarification to FEHA defines protected hairstyles. The current law defines “race” as including “traits historically associated with race, including hair texture and protective hair styles.” The new language eliminates the word “historically” and specifies that protective hairstyles include braids, locs, and twists.
Employers should review their employee handbooks and training materials to assure that the language is broad enough to include the new statutory requirements.
Major Changes to PAGA
The California Private Attorneys General Act (PAGA) has plagued employers and the court system since it first became law in 2004. Before 2004, the California Attorney General could recover penalties from any employer who violated certain provisions of the California Labor Code. PAGA allowed employees to step into the shoes of the Attorney General and recover penalties on their own behalf and on behalf of any other employee who had been harmed by Labor Code violations. The employee could seek penalties for all types of violations, without regard to whether they had been harmed by those violations.
Changes to PAGA became effective in June 2024. Some of these changes benefit employers. For example, an employee can only pursue penalties for violations they personally suffered. They can still pursue those penalties on behalf of the entire workforce, if the same violation affected all other workers.
Employers now have a modestly improved ability to avoid some of the penalties. The new PAGA provisions allow an employer to reduce or, in some cases, eliminate penalties. The best way to avoid penalties is to proactively evaluate timekeeping practices, payroll practices, and company policies and procedures to assure compliance. Employers should keep good records of their ongoing efforts to monitor and fulfill all Labor Code obligations.
Employers may also correct many problems once the employer is on notice of any alleged violation. However, the time for making corrections is short. Notice often arrives in the form of a letter to the California Labor and Workforce Development Agency (LWDA), which will identify specific alleged violations.
The LWDA letter is not the only communication that starts the clock on the employer’s time to cure or remediate problems. A demand for employment records also starts the time running. A demand for records will not usually identify specific alleged Labor Code violations. Few employers will recognize a records request as anything other than the employee seeking the records to which they are entitled.
Any time an employer receives a copy of a letter to the LWDA, they should promptly obtain competent employment counsel to evaluate the allegations and correct any identified problems. An employer who receives a request for payroll or personnel records, and who has not been proactively monitoring their compliance could avoid expensive and time-consuming litigation by having competent employment counsel review their practices and give guidance on any needed corrective actions.
Increased Minimum Wage
California and many local jurisdictions have increased the applicable minimum wage. State-wide, the minimum wage will rise to $16.50 per hour. Because minimum compensation for exempt employees is tied to the state minimum wage, it has also increased. Employees who are paid a salary of less than $68,640 per year cannot properly be classified as exempt.
Bay Area cities and counties that have adopted minimum wage ordinances include:
• Belmont $18.30
• Berkeley $18.67
• Burlingame $17.43
• Cupertino $18.20
• Daly City $17.07
• East Palo Alto $17.45
• El Cerrito $18.34
• Emeryville, $19.36 (adjusts annually on July 1)
• Foster City $17.39
• Fremont $17.30 (adjusts annually on July 1)
• Half Moon Bay $17.47
• Hayward $17.36
• Los Altos $18.20
• Menlo Park $17.10
• Novato from $16.42 to $17.27 (depending on number of employees)
• Oakland $16.89
• Palo Alto $18.20
• Petaluma $17.97
• Redwood City $18.20
• Richmond $17.77
• San Carlos $17.32
• San Francisco $18.67 (adjusts annually on July 1)
• San Jose $17.95
• San Mateo $17.95
• Santa Clara $18.20
• Sant Rosa $17.87
• Sonoma $18.02
• South San Francisco $17.70
• Sunnyvale $19.00
Maggie Grover has practiced employment law in California for nearly forty years. She enjoys working with small to mid-size employers, helping them understand and follow the complex laws that govern the employer-employee relationship. She is pleased to provide policies, contracts, guidance on leave, and help avoiding and resolving claims. You can reach her at mgrover@groverworkplacesolutions.com or 415-596-9433.
NEW LEASE ON LIFE
Written by ERIC ANDRESEN & DAVE WASSERMAN
The new 2025 SFAA Residential Tenancy Agreement (RTA) is now available online and in print. Changes to the RTA were relatively minimal this year. However, several new state laws have necessitated a new three-page addendum (Addenda) to comply with the requirement of offering residents the option of receiving positive rent payment reporting to credit bureaus. This new law is effective on April 1, 2025, but the RTA is only updated once a year, so the change appears now.
Positive Rent Reporting Act
The Positive Rent Reporting Act, formally known as AB 2747 by our own Assemblymember Matt Haney, requires that landlords give tenants an option to have their positive rent payments reported to credit agencies. There is an exemption for properties of fifteen units or less owned by a single, non-corporate owner—but that exemption goes away if an owner has more than one rental property, no matter the number of overall rentals.
The California Apartment Association (CAA) has created two new forms—the Addenda to be used with the RTA and an Annual Offer to be provided to every resident once per year. The Addenda is the RTA’s new three-page addendum. These forms—and a very helpful Industry Insight paper—can be found on CAA’s website (caanet.org), and we encourage all SFAA members to log on and read the documents available. CAA has also produced an insightful video about the Positive Rent Reporting Act and other new laws for 2025, which should be accessible in the Education section of CAA’s website.
Late Fees
The courts have been dissuading the imposition of late fees, with several recent rulings criticizing this practice in the residential context. There have also been arguments relating to the actual fee amount, with excessive, or “usurious” fees being denied. In response, the RTA now assigns a flat $50 late charge and removes the “percentage of rent option” which has been characterized as unlawful. Some members are eliminating late fees altogether (see sidebar on page 32 for more on this issue).
Assignment and Subletting
In the Assignment and Subletting section, a new paragraph discloses that a subtenant may not be charged sub-rent by “Tenant” that exceeds the percentage of housing services the subtenant receives or is entitled to under the sublease.
For example, if rent paid by Tenant to Owner is $1,000 per month for a three-person apartment, and Tenant has two subtenants, Tenant may generally charge each subtenant no more than $333.33. It also reminds Tenant that they are required to disclose the total rent that Tenant is paying to Owner. This new paragraph tracks the existing rent law that permits subtenants to seek refunds for sub-rent in excess of the subtenant’s share of the overall housing services.
Stay ahead of the curve—SFAA’s 2025 Residential Tenancy Agreement brings new language on rent reporting, late fees, fire safety, and more.
FEE FOR THOUGHT?
Our industry has struggled in recent years over whether to demand a fee on rent received beyond the due date, or for payments returned for insufficient funds. Years ago, leases commonly permitted housing providers to charge a percentage of the rent, such as 5%, as a penalty. Indeed, in the commercial rental market, such practices remain commonplace. However, because residential residents are entitled to far greater consumer protection, the courts have increasingly scrutinized the imposition of late fees when a lessee fails to pay on time for whatever reason.
For starters, no fee may be issued unless the lease agreement expressly permits the assessment. The SFAA Residential Tenancy Agreement has allowed a charge for late payment of rent as well as for non-sufficient funds (NSF) payments in all prior versions, with the property owner filling in the actual amount of the fee. This year, for the first time, the lease authors have pre-set the rate at $50.00 per late payment, and even this figure is, for the reasons set forth below, legally questionable.
Courts have been increasingly skeptical of residential late fees. In Del Monte Properties & Investments, Inc. v. Dolan (2018), 26 Cal.App.5th Supp. 20, the appellate court reiterated that an automatic and set late fee must be reasonable because it resembles what is known as “liquidated damages.” To be valid under state law (Civil Code section 1671), a liquidated damages clause must be the result of a reasonable endeavor to approximate actual losses caused by the breach being compensated.
The late fee you charge must reflect the actual monetary loss you incurred as a result of receiving payment late. The court noted that setting the damages to a percentage of rent was, therefore, wrong. Citing an earlier case, Orozco v. Casimiro (2004) 121 Cal.App.4th Supp. 7, the Dolan court affirmed the rule that the losses caused by the tardy payment of residential rent shall be limited to (i) interest and (ii) administrative costs of collecting and accounting for the late rent, period. Moreover, the landlord bears the burden of proving these losses, meaning you must show through competent and admissible evidence that you incurred the monetary loss now claimed as a late fee.
The courts have also warned that calculating the losses caused by a tardy payment better be done before (not after) the lease is entered into. So, housing providers must compute and assess the resulting damage prior to including a late fee clause in the rental agreement. Composing this calculation after there is a breach is not acceptable. In addition, don’t even think about evicting someone for failing to pay assessed late fees. Your remedy lies in small claims court, not the unlawful detainer forum.
Tread lightly when imposing late fees. You will have to prove that interest and administrative costs justify the charge. Receiving a $2,000 rent payment on the sixth or seventh as opposed to the fourth or fifth likely won’t persuade a court that you lost $50. Instead, you may want to supplant going down this path with a stern warning email instead of imposing a late fee.
—Dave Wasserman
Fire Safety and Smoke Alarms
Fire hazards continue to be a major concern, and we continue working with the San Francisco Fire Department to ensure we use the most appropriate language. In the Balconies/Patios section, there is an added line stating that using charcoal grills, propane grills, propane heaters, and other open-flame devices is prohibited.
Other fire safety changes can be found in the Electrical Safety section, where there is additional language to align the RTA with the current Fire Code and State Fire Marshall recommendations. The State Fire Marshal Bulletin regarding the safe use and charging of battery-operated devices is also an optional addendum, which we encourage everyone to review and consider adding to your RTAs.
The Smoke and Carbon Monoxide Alarms section has been updated to include new language about Tenant’s responsibility for costs or damages related to the tampering or disabling of required alarms. And, since almost all fire alarm systems have now been updated to the new code requirements, we have removed the paragraph about cooperating with contractors.
In-Unit Flooding
There have been a few recent instances of flooding caused by tenant-installed bidets or bidet-type attachments to existing toilets. We added language requiring prior Owner approval for this alteration, and that a licensed and qualified contractor must install any such devices.
Domestic Violence Protections
State laws have been amended this year to enhance protections for domestic violence victims, including the requirement that locks be changed by Owner or, if Owner does not act timely, by the victim at Owner’s expense, which is a departure from the current language.
Consequently, the Locks section now contains the phrase “except as provided by
sfaa2024calendar
sfaa 2024
February 2025
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 3
Board of Directors Meeting 11:30 a.m.
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 21
Intellirent: Creating a Listing That Works Zoom
10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. FREE for SFAA Members Only
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12
Landlord & Tenant Updates 2025 Zoom
11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Members $45 Non-Members $65
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25
Asset Protection Open Forum Zoom
2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Members $45 Non-Members $65
TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18
Landlord Etiquette Zoom
11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Members $45 Non-Members $65
MONDAY, MARCH 3
Board of Directors Meeting
11:30 a.m.
FRIDAY, MARCH 14
Roommates & Revolving Doors Zoom
10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Members $45 Non-Members $65
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19 Virtual Member Meeting 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.
SFAA office will be closed Monday, February 17, 2025 for President’s Day, and Monday, March 31, 2025 for Cesar Chavez Day.
March 2025
TUESDAY, MARCH 11 Termites 101 Zoom
1:30 p.m. to 2:30 p.m.
Members $45 Non-Members $65
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19
Annual Landlord Expo Fort Mason Center 2A Marina Blvd, Gallery 308 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 12
P’s & Q’s: Landlord Etiquette Zoom
1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m.
Members $45 Non-Members $65
FRIDAY, MARCH 21
Intellirent: Resident Screening: How to Compare Data & Use Reports Zoom
10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. FREE for SFAA Members Only
THURSDAY, MARCH 13
Preventative Plumbing Maintenance for Rental Properties Zoom 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
Members $45 Non-Members $65
TUESDAY, MARCH 25 Tenant Liability & How to Protect Your Assets Zoom 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. Members $45 Non-Members $65
SFAA’S TENANT SCREENING SERVICE
THROUGH INTELLIRENT
STEP 1:
Create a free account at sfaa. myintellirent.com/agent-signup.
STEP 2:
Invite an applicant to apply via an online application customized to SFAA’s criteria. You can also publish your available rental on Intellirent across mulitple ILSs.
RATES
Intellirent is your free, online rental application and property marketing tool, partnered with Transunion to instantly return complete credit reports and nationwide eviction notices. Renters pay the $40 application fee, which covers your costs. For more information, simply create your free account or go to sfaa.org and choose the “Resources” tab. Then select “Tenant Screening.”
Please note that the maximum you can charge a tenant for screening services is $49.12.
CONTACT INTELLIRENT FOR MORE INFORMATION:
415-849-4400
SAN FRANCISCO’S
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
The capital improvement interest rates for 3/1/24 through 2/28/25 are listed below:
ALLOWABLE RENT INCREASES
2025 - 2026: 1.4%
Effective March 1, 2024 through February 28, 2025, the allowable annual rent increase is 1.7%. This amount is based on 60% of the increase in the Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers in the Bay Area. A history of all allowable increases and their effective periods is provided. ALLOWABLE RENT INCREASES
03/01/25 - 02/28/26 1.4%
03/01/24 - 02/28/25 1.7%
03/01/23 - 02/29/24 3.6%
03/01/22 - 02/28/23 2.3%
03/01/21 - 02/28/22 .7%
03/01/20 - 02/28/21 1.8%
03/01/19 - 02/29/20 2.6%
03/01/18 - 02/28/19 1.6%
03/01/17 - 02/28/18 2.2%
03/01/16 - 02/29/17 1.6%
03/01/15 - 02/29/16 1.9%
03/01/14 - 02/28/15 1.0%
03/01/13 - 02/28/14 1.9%
03/01/12 - 02/28/13 1.9%
03/01/11 - 02/29/12 0.5%
03/01/10 - 02/28/11 0.1%
03/01/09 - 02/28/10 2.2%
03/01/08 - 02/28/09 2.0%
03/01/07 - 02/29/08 1.5%
INTEREST ON DEPOSITS
Deposits include all tenant monies that the owner holds, regardless of what they are called. At the landlord’s option, the payment may be made directly to the tenant or by allowing the tenant to deduct the amount of interest due from the rental payment.
INTEREST ON DEPOSITS PERIOD AMOUNT
03/01/24 - 02/29/25 5.2%
03/01/23 - 02/29/24 2.3%
03/01/22 - 02/28/23 0.1%
03/01/21 - 02/28/22 0.6%
03/01/20 - 02/28/21 2.2%
03/01/19 - 02/29/20 2.2%
03/01/18 - 02/28/19 1.2%
03/01/17 - 02/28/18 0.6%
03/01/16 - 02/28/17 0.2%
03/01/15 - 02/29/16 0.1%
03/01/14 - 02/28/15 0.3%
03/01/13 - 02/28/14 0.4%
03/01/12 - 02/28/13 0.4%
03/01/11 - 02/29/12 0.4%
03/01/10 - 02/28/11 0.9%
03/01/09 - 02/28/10 3.1%
03/01/08 - 02/28/09 5.2%
03/01/07 - 02/29/08 5.2%
RENT BOARD FEE
$29.50
Chapter 37A of San Francisco’s Administrative Code allows the city to collect a per-unit fee for each residential dwelling unit that is subject to the San Francisco Rent Ordinance. This fee defrays the entire cost of operation of the Rent Board. If you are an owner of a residential dwelling unit or guest unit, you must pay a Rent Board Fee by March 1 of each year unless you have a current exemption on file with the Rent Board or a Homeowners’ Exemption on file with the Office of the Assessor-Recorder.
While this fee was previously collected on the property tax bill, owners must pay this fee to the Rent Board directly as of 2022. Payment can be made through the Rent Board Portal. ALLOWABLE RENT BOARD FEE COLLECTABLE FROM TENANTS
7
03/01/06 - 02/28/07 1.7%
SAN FRANCISCO RENT BOARD
25 Van Ness Avenue #320 San Francisco, CA 94102 415-252-4600 www.sfgov.org/rentboard
SFAA Professional Services Directory
1031 TAX DEFERRED
EXCHANGE SERVICES
FIRST AMERICAN EXCHANGE COMPANY
Lisa Jackson 415-244-1339 lisajackson@firstam.com
SEQUENT
Eric Scaff 415-834-1031 sequent-rewm.com escaff@sequent-rewm.com
ACCOUNTANTS
SHWIFF, LEVY & POLO LLP
Elizabeth Shwiff 415-291-8600 x232 www.slpconsults.com
ALARM COMPANY
AEC ALARMS
Yat-Cheong Au 408-298-8888 Ext: 188 sales@aec-alarms.com
ARCHITECTURE
OPENSCOPE STUDIO ARCHITECTS
Mark Hogan 415-891-0954 www.openscopestudio.com
Q ARCHITECTURE
Dawn Ma 415-695-2700 www.que-arch.com
ASSOCIATIONS
PROFESSIONAL PROPERTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION
Renee A. Engelen www.ppmaofsf.org renee@hrhrealestate.com
ATTORNEYS
BARTH CALDERON, LLP
Paul Hitchcock 415-577-4685 Paul@barthattorneys.com All languages welcome
BORNSTEIN LAW
Daniel Bornstein, Esq. 415-409-7611 www.bornstein.law
The following members are SFAA Property Management Members. They fully support the organization and are dedicated to SFAA’s goals. For more information about the benefits of becoming a Property Management Member, contact Maria Shea at maria@sfaa.org or 415-255-2288 x 110.
ADVENT PROPERTIES, INC.
Benjamin Scott, CCRM 510-289-1184 www.adventpropertiesinc.com
MARCUS & MILLICHAP Sanford Skeie 415-625-2153 www.marcusmillichap.com
MAVEN COMMERCIAL Matthew Sheridan 415-867-7711 matt@mavenproperties.com
THE MEZA GROUP AT SOTHEBY’S INTERNATIONAL REALTY Christopher Meza 415-794-5194 cmeza@me.com chrismeza.com
NET LEASE EXCHANGE MehdiStar 858-243-3954 mehdi@theNLX.com nlx.colliers.com
PRIME METROPOLIS PROPERTIES, INC. Tom Chan 415-731-0303 tomchan@pmp1988.com
SF BAY RENTAL COMPANY Leslie Burnley 415-717-8709 leslie@sfbayrentalco.com www.sfbayrentalco.com
S&L REALTY Robert Link 415-386-3111 www.slrealty-sf.com
TERRENCE CHAN
Terrence Chan 415-317-7011 tchanhomes@gmail.com
NERT
NEIGHBORHOOD EMERGENCY RESPONSE TEAM (NERT)
Get prepared and be involved. NERT is a communitybased training program that takes a neighbor-helping-neighbor approach, creating lifelines between families, neighbors, and San Francisco’s emergency responders.
NERT is a free training program for individuals, neighborhood groups, and community-based organizations in San Francisco. Individuals learn the basics of personal preparedness and prevention. Participants learn hands-on disaster skills that will help them as members of an emergency response team and/or as a leader directing untrained volunteers during an emergency, allowing them to act independently or as an adjunct to City emergency services.
Enrollment is easy! Want to host a NERT training in your San Francisco building or neighborhood? Classes will be scheduled based on program need and location. To request a class, you must have thirty sign-ups and an ADA compliant space able to accommodate at least eighty people.
Neighborhood Emergency Response Team (NERT) (415) 970-2022
SFFDNERT@sfgov.org
NERT Class Sign-Up Hotline (415) 970-2024
HRH REAL ESTATE SERVICES CORPORATION
Renee A. Engelen 415-810-6020 www.hrhrealestate.com
DRYFAST PROPERTY RESTORATION LLC Ivan Angelov 415-861-8003 info@dryfast.net https://www.dryfast.net/ FIRE AND WATER DAMAGE RECOVERY
Window of Opportunity
written by THE SAN FRANCISCO RENT BOARD
Cutting corners on repairs often costs more than doing the job right from the start.
Editor’s Note: The following San Francisco Rent Board cases are real, though they have been edited for space and clarity. They have been selected to highlight some of the more interesting cases that the board reviewed at its recent commission meetings. For full Rent Board agendas and minutes, please visit sfrb.org.
1400 Block of 40th Avenue
The landlord appealed the decision granting the tenant’s claims for decreased housing services and failure to repair and maintain the rental property. In her appeal, the landlord explained that since 2019, she had made repeated attempts to quickly address the necessary repairs. She acknowledged that the tenant had complained about the quality of the repairs, claiming that she did not pay the contractor well enough. However, the landlord argued that as long as the repairs were completed, the cost of the contractor was not an issue. She explained that she preferred to work with a contractor she trusted, even if they were not the most expensive option.
One of the key issues was a damaged window. The landlord stated that after the tenant initially reported the issue, she had it repaired, only for the tenant to damage it again. She told the inspector that, instead of repairing it a second time, she decided to replace the window entirely. Her reasoning was that, should the tenant damage it
again, the cost of replacement would be the tenant’s responsibility, as outlined in the lease agreement.
The tenant, however, strongly contested the landlord’s claims. He described the landlord’s allegations as unfounded and absurd, made in an attempt to avoid responsibility. He questioned why he would go to the trouble of battling for years, following up repeatedly, only to damage things again. He emphasized how the long process of dealing with the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) and submitting evidence had taken a toll on both his professional and personal life.
In the initial decision, the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) found the landlord liable for $14,905.00 due to various unresolved issues, including a malfunctioning bathroom window, lack of heating, rodents, broken light fixtures, detached shower tiles, and a leaking kitchen sink. However, some of the tenant’s other claims were denied. In her appeal, the landlord contested the decision, alleging that the tenant had provided false testimony and had not allowed the landlord to enter the unit to perform necessary repairs. Additionally, she claimed that she was prohibited from testifying at the hearing.
Decision: To deny the appeal (4-0).
100 Block of Albion Street
In June 2018, the tenant and his cotenant were paying a total of $4,425.58 in monthly rent. On June 5, 2018, the landlord served them with a 120day Ellis Act eviction notice, with a withdrawal date of October 4, 2018. After his co-tenant vacated, the tenant paid $2,500.00 for his September 2018 rent, which the landlord accepted and cashed without comment. However, at the hearing, the landlord characterized this payment as an underpayment. The tenant claimed that on October 4, 2018, when his original tenancy was officially terminated, the landlord had the opportunity to file an unlawful detainer action but chose not to. Instead, the landlord cashed his October rent check for $2,500.00, which the tenant argued indicated that the landlord had agreed to create a new tenancy at this reduced rent.
The tenant further pointed out that the landlord’s appeal response claimed the tenancy was never terminated if the Ellis Act notice was invalid, but the tenant argued that there was no evidence to suggest the notice was invalid. The landlord had also testified that no rent extension or reduction was agreed to, but the tenant believed the new rent constituted a new tenancy rather than a mere extension or reduction.
The landlord’s attorney disagreed with the tenant’s interpretation, asserting that the tenancy was never terminated by the Ellis Act notice. She explained that the landlord had dismissed the Ellis Act eviction case and that the tenant never gave up possession of the unit. The landlord continued to accept rent checks at the reduced amount
because the landlord assumed the property would soon be withdrawn from the rental market under the Ellis Act. As a result, the landlord believed there was no need to pursue a non-payment eviction for the disputed amount. The attorney argued that since the tenant remained in possession and the eviction was dismissed, no termination of the tenancy had occurred.
The tenant appealed the decision, which granted the landlord’s petition to determine the lawful rent. The ALJ had ruled that the tenant’s rent had been temporarily reduced for reasons unrelated to market conditions, allowing the landlord to restore the rent to $4,375.58 upon proper written notice. The tenant, however, argued that a new tenancy was created with an initial rent of $2,500.00 because the landlord had terminated the original tenancy and accepted the reduced rent. Alternatively, the tenant claimed that the reduction to $2,500.00 was permanent and tied to market conditions, making it ineligible for restoration.
Decision: To deny the appeal (4-1).
00 Block of Lupine Avenue
The landlord’s attorney argued that it was the tenants’ responsibility to prove that the landlord’s plans to construct new Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) would result in the removal or significant reduc tion of their housing services. She pointed out that the tenants’ petitions, filed in July 2023, had already delayed the landlord’s construction plans for over a year. The attorney emphasized that the ALJ had thoroughly reviewed the tenants’ objec tions and correctly concluded that the proposed ADU project would not cause a permanent loss or substantial reduction of housing services. She stated that the tenants’ appeal mainly raised concerns about the construction process itself—is sues such as noise, access disruptions, and how laundry services would be affected during construction. However, she argued that these were temporary inconveniences and not related to the permanent removal of housing services, which would justify overturning the decision. Therefore, she
contended that the ALJ’s ruling should be upheld, as the appeal did not present any new, relevant issues.
In response, one tenant appealed the decision that denied their objection to the landlord’s request for approval to construct the ADUs. In the original decision, the ALJ determined that the construction of the ADUs would not result in the permanent removal or substantial reduction of tenant housing services. However, in the appeal, the tenant argued that the ALJ had not adequately addressed the potential impact of construction-related disruptions, such as noise, reduced access to the garage and common areas, and interference with laundry machine usage during the construction phase. The tenant contended that these disruptions, while temporary, could significantly affect their living conditions.
Decision: To deny the appeal (5-0).
The above information was reprinted from the Rent Board website. For more information, visit. Sfrb.org.
Background
Landlord & Leasing Agent, A Winning Combo.
Having over 25 rental units of her own, Jackie brings rst-hand experience as a landlord to all of our Rentals In S.F. clients.
Every day, our team endeavors to nd quali ed tenants for our clients. With an expert understanding of the ever changing San Francisco rental market, we have made it our priority to ll your vacant unit quickly, e ortlessly, at market rent and with your ideal tenant!
With just one phone call, Jackie will come over to access your needs, appraise your unit, and do all the marketing, prospecting and screening. We then present you with a quali ed tenant ready to move in.
Call Jackie at Rentals In S.F. to ll your vacancy. It will be one of the best calls you’ll ever make. Just ask all our clients!
Former SFAA winner
* Leasing Agent of the Year
* Landlord of the Year
2025 Spring Day CCRM Webinar Series Schedule & Registration
and
Total Due: Class Location Zoom Webinar System Upon registration the Zoom link will be emailed to the student Class is every Wednesday Instructor Amy Hull, Amy E. Hull Consulting Course material included. Does not include the $75 CCRM application fee To Register Online: www.sfaa.org Call: 415 255 2288 x.110 Email: maria@sfaa.org
Attendee Information:
Name:
Cancellation
requesting CalBRE
extra extra READ ALL ABOUT IT Speak Up!!
In San Francisco, managing and owning rental property can be a tough business. Keep your manager up to date with the latest news, legislation, trends and analysis of the industry. SFAA members can now send their managers or friends SF Apartment Magazine for only $84 a year.
Subscriptions must be registered and billed to an SFAA member. Sign up today!
415-255-2288
about SFAA
Tell SFAA what you think of the services that it offers. You’ll be helping SFAA reach new members by telling prospective members about your firsthand experience!
Please take a few moments to answer the questions below (please be as specific as possible):
• Would you recommend SFAA services and products?
• What is the biggest benefit that SFAA provides?
• How has SFAA helped you with your rental property?
• What do you like most about SFAA?
Email your answers to Maria Shea at maria@sfaa.org with the subject line, “Speak Up!” Include your member name and SFAA ID number, and let us know if we may use your testimonial in future SFAA marketing materials.
& SF SECTION 604 CALIFORNIA SB-721
INSPECTIONS
Pacific Coast Real Estate Inspections
The premier provider of SB-721 and Section 604 compliance inspections in the Bay Area. With over 9,000 inspections performed! Save time, money, and inspector visits with our Combo 604/721 Inspection package.
Licensed General Contractor Licensed Home Inspectors Over 30 years of Building Expertise 415-516-8110 PCREInspections.com
law” to ensure that Owner is compliant with this new law.
Maintenance & Repairs Disruptions
With many tenants working from home, there have been ongoing issues with work being performed in units or the building that could be disruptive. Thus, there is added language to the Maintenance and Repairs section clarifying that repair work may occur during regular business hours, whether Tenant works from home or offsite. Tenants are further reminded that repair requests must be communicated to Owner in advance of filing a complaint with any government agency.
House Rules
In the House Rules sections, there are several updates related to issues reported to SFAA by the members over the past year.
Parking —There is now language requiring Tenant to cooperate with Owner and allow access for work being done in the parking areas. There is also new language stating that living, sleeping, working, and/or storage are not allowed in parking spaces.
Building Appearance —There is a new reminder that entryway attachments, such as key boxes, are not permitted.
Floor Coverings —There is new language requiring, in addition to rugs covering hardwood floors, that hardwood floors be protected from damage by the bases of furniture, and that appropriate protective pads be placed under furniture and chairs.
Unit Care —There is new language related to the proper use of garbage disposals and what may not be discarded down drains. We also added restrictions on what can be flushed down toilets.
Other
The Entire Agreement section has been updated to include the new Addenda, both optional and recommended, and
SFAA RTA GOING DIGITAL
We encourage all of you to transition to the digital version of SFAA’s Residential Tenancy Agreement sooner rather than later. We also recommend you use the many CAA forms available to SFAA members, which are already in digital format and accessible through both the SFAA and CAA websites. One immediate benefit is the ability to update the forms instantly when edits are required due to a sudden change in law or policy.
The digital version of the lease will be available to SFAA members only for $30 (one-time use) at sfaa.org.
To access SFAA’s 2025 Residential Tenancy Agreement online, click “Online Lease Access” under the “Resources” tab on the SFAA website. After you submit payment, you’ll receive a link to the lease agreement, hosted by DocuSign. Click the link to being filling out the agreement.
Once you’ve filled it out, you can either save it or print it. DocuSign will also email you a copy of your filled-out agreement.
If you have questions, please contact Gershay Castenada at gershay@sfaa.org or 415-255-2288, ext. 117, or Maria Shea at maria@ sfaa.org or 415-255-2288, ext 110.
there is an opportunity to identify and include Other (additional) addenda in this section of the RTA.
As always, we want to thank the lease committee and SFAA staff for their help in making this year’s amendments. We also want to thank the SFAA members who continue to provide valuable feedback and suggestions each year. The creation of our RTA is a collaborative effort, and it is a state-of-the-art document that we should all be proud of and confident to use.
SFAA Needs You.
Support SFAA’s legal challenges to unjust legislation by donating to the SFAA Legal Fund. SFAA needs to stay relevant to remain effective. Help to further grow the legal fund. It will make a difference. Check out sfaa.org/Public/Fundraising/Give_Now to find out more.
sfaa sfaa 2024
What You Need to Know
VIRTUAL MEMBER MEETING
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19
10:00 a.m. to. 11:00 a.m. SFAA LANDLORD EXPO—FREE!
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 19
Fort Mason Center
2A Marina Blvd, Gallery 308 11:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
2ND INSTALLMENT OF PROPERTY TAXES DUE
THURSDAY, APRIL 10
The News… continued from Page 10
like Zazie and Finnegans Wake support the initiative, expecting increased foot traffic and sales.
The entertainment zone model is gaining traction statewide, with other communities eager to replicate San Francisco’s success. By enhancing neighborhood events and fostering community engagement, the program supports both economic recovery and local culture.
$36 Million for Infrastructure
Former Mayor London Breed announced $36 million in grants from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission to fund key transit and street safety projects in San Francisco. The funds, awarded through the Housing Incentive Pool Grants, aim to enhance infrastructure in areas where affordable housing was built. San Francisco received $35.8 million for projects that improve traffic flow, transit service, and street safety.
Notable initiatives include the installation of new traffic signals along Lincoln Way, improvements to Folsom and Howard Streets, streetscape upgrades on Powell Street, and enhancements to the Muni bus fleet. These projects are designed to improve transit reliability and make streets safer for pedestrians and cyclists.
The Lincoln Way project will add new signals at two intersections, improving traffic flow and access to Ocean Beach.
The Folsom-Howard Streetscape Project will upgrade bike facilities, bus bulbs, and traffic signals. The Powell Street revitalization will widen sidewalks, add custom street furniture, and improve lighting. Additionally, funds will help support the Yerba Buena Island Multi-Use Path and perform critical maintenance on Muni’s bus fleet to ensure reliability.
SFAA Office Update
SFAA’s office is open Monday through Friday. Members are welcome to come into the office to pick up rental forms or for counseling services between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m. Please call
sfaa rental forms 2025
Thank
for joining the
and
sfaa sfaa 2025 membership application
the SFAA office to confirm your lease order and make an appointment for counseling whenever possible.
All SFAA staff members are available to assist you every day of the week. Rental forms can be accessed online at sfaa.org. The best way to have your questions answered is by calling the office at 415-255-2288 and, if needed, selecting a staff member’s extension. Questions can also be submitted via email to MemberQuestions@sfaa.org.
If you or your tenants need help with any part of the application SFAA will assist you at no charge. SFAA is available to help underresourced tenants and housing providers navigate the application process with counseling, translation services, and with completing and submitting the application.
