SF Apartment Magazine October 2022

SF

contents

APARTMENTSF

Features 22

Who’s On First

BY CHARLEY GOSS & PAM MCELROY

School Board Round-Up BY VARIOUS AUTHORS

District

APARTMENT

BY CHARLEY GOSS

Estate

Vacancy BY JUSTIN A. GOODMAN

BY DANIEL F. FRATTIN & DANIEL J. TURNER

VARIOUS AUTHORS

SF APARTMENT magazine

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 Education Specialist Stephanie Alonzo

Government and Community Affairs Charley Goss Marketing Lara Kisich Member Services Gershay Castaneda

Member Services Maria Shea Accountant Crystal Wang

SFAA Officers President Chris Bricker Vice President Robert Link Treasurer Jim Hurley

SFAA Directors

Eric Andresen, Honor Bulkley, Andre Ferrigno, David Gruber, Kent Mar, Neveo Mosser, J.J. Panzer, Bert Polacci, James Sangiacomo, Dave Wasserman

VOLUME XXXV, NUMBER 10 OCTOBER 2022

Published by

San Francisco Apartment Association

Publisher Vanessa Khaleel

Editor Pam McElroy

Art Director Jéna Safai

Production Manager Cameron Shaw

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 @2022 by SFAA.

Cast a Wide Bet

Election Day:

Tuesday, November 8, 2022

Mark Tuesday, November 8, on your calendar for California’s state and local General Election. San Franciscans will vote on twenty-five local and state mea sures, as well as several elections, includ ing five Board of Supervisors seats, three San Francisco School Board seats, four City College seats, and District Attorney.

For more information on the ballot measures and candidates, check out the articles on pages 12, 22, and 32.

Return your vote-by-mail ballot by mail with prepaid postage—it must be post marked on or before Election Day—or in-person to a secure ballot drop box, a voting location, or your county elections office by 8:00 p.m. on November 8, 2022. For a map of secure ballot drop box

locations, voting locations, and polling places, visit sfelections.sfgov.org

Don’t forget to register to vote if you haven’t already! Monday, October 24, is the last day to register to vote for this election.

Poll workers are needed. Responsibili ties include setting up polling places, opening for voters by 7:00 a.m. on Elec tion Day, checking-in voters, closing the polls, and transferring voting materials. Poll workers receive a stipend between $225 and $295 for their service.

HCD Cracks Down on Housing Practices

The State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) an nounced that its Housing Accountabil ity Unit (HAU) will conduct a first-ever

Housing Policy and Practice Review of San Francisco, aimed at identifying and removing barriers to approval and con struction of new housing in the City.

According to the City’s self-reported data, it has the longest timelines in the state for advancing housing projects to construction, among the highest hous ing and construction costs, and HAU has received more complaints about San Francisco than any other local ju risdiction in the state. U.S. Census data shows that Seattle—a city of compa rable size—approves housing construc tion at more than three times the rate of San Francisco.

Over the next nine months and beyond, HAU, in partnership with U.C. Berkeley Institute of Urban and Regional Devel opment, and others, will conduct a com prehensive analysis of San Francisco’s housing approval policies and practices. The review will examine discretionary decision-making patterns that lead to abnormally long housing delays. The review also intends to identify barri ers to the approval and development of housing at all income levels, including housing that is affordable to lower- and moderate-income households.

Separately, in an August 8 letter to Plan ning Director Rich Hillis, HCD was both critical and encouraging of the City’s Draft Housing Element. Califor nia cities are required to update their General Plan Housing Elements by January 2023. HCD praised the City’s “bold and meaningful actions to both reduce barriers to higher-opportunity neighborhoods while simultaneously reinvesting in historically underserved neighborhoods.” Yet HCD also identi fied a number of revisions that would be necessary for the Housing Element to comply with state law.

The November 8 General Election brings ample opportunity to clean up our city and support the rental housing industry.

MARK YOUR CALENDARS!

There are big opportunities to sup port the rental housing community in the coming months.

October 13

SFAA TROPHY AWARDS

Celebrate with colleagues and fellow industry professionals at SFAA’s annual Trophy Awards.

The awards show will take place at the St. Regis Rooftop Terrace in San Francisco. The Trophy Awards honors the firms, employees, and properties leading San Francisco’s Rental Housing Community. Dress to impress and put on your danc ing shoes!

Purchase tickets at sfaa.org/events. You can also email Vanessa Khaleel at vanessa@sfaa.org. For more in formation, turn to page 47.

October 24 REGISTER TO VOTE

The last day to register to vote for November’s General Election. For more information on the ballot mea sures and candidates, turn to pages 12, 22, 32, and 39.

November 8 ELECTION DAY

Head to the polls and cast your vote. Don’t forget to bring the SFAA slate card (page 39)! If you’re vot ing by mail, make sure your ballot is post marked on or before No vember 8. You can also drop your vote-by-mail ballot in a secure drop box. For a map of secure drop box locations and polling places, visit: sfelections.sfgov.org.

In yet another letter on August 11, HCD asked the City to explain itself concern ing a specific project approval, express ing concern that the City violated housing law. HCD was concerned with the City’s decision, in granting conditional approval, to downsize a 19-unit group housing project at 3832 18th Street in the Mission District. HCD expressed concern that the

downsizing violated the State Density Bonus Law.

This project-specific letter follows HCD’s letter to the City last November expressing concern that the City’s denial of two large housing projects, at 450 O’Farrell Street and 469 Stevenson Street, may have violated state law. In those cases, the Planning Com mission had approved the projects, but the Board of Supervisors denied them.

The aforementioned Housing Account ability Unit at HCD is part of an unprec edented new initiative to support the production of housing statewide. Accord ing to its website, “California’s housing crisis has reached historic proportions despite the passage of numerous laws in tended to increase the supply of housing affordable to Californians at all income levels.” As part of the 2021-2022 state budget, HCD received additional staff to grow its accountability efforts and formed HAU. HAU holds jurisdictions accountable for meeting their hous ing element commitments and comply ing with state housing laws. One of its primary tools is technical assistance to the public and enforcement letters. More information on these powers is avail able at the HCD website: hcd.ca.gov/ accountability-and-enforcement.

The above information was reprinted with permission and authored by Reu ben, Junius & Rose Attorney Thomas P. Tunny. The issues discussed in this up date are not intended to be legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is established with the recipient. Readers should consult with a legal counsel before relying on the information.

Domestic Violence Legislation

Senate Bill 1017, written by Senator Susan Eggman (D-Stockton) was passed by both houses of the Legislature and is—at the time of this writing—being considered by Governor Gavin Newsom. The bill would create added protections for victims of domestic violence and impose penalties against landlords who violate the pro tections under the law for survivors of domestic violence.

California law currently provides sig nificant protections to residents who are survivors of domestic violence. The law prohibits a landlord from terminating a tenancy or failing to renew a tenancy based solely upon an act against a resident or a resident’s household member that consti tutes domestic violence.

The existing law gives a resident who is a victim of domestic violence flexibility to move out to avoid their abuser; the victim can terminate a lease early upon fourteen days prior written notice, without further financial penalty. The resident or a member of the resident’s household who is a vic tim of a violent crime, domestic violence, sexual assault, stalking, human trafficking, or who has faced elder abuse must provide specified documentation of that violence or abuse to the landlord for the protections to apply.

SB 1017 would impose penalties against landlords who violate specific provisions of the law, making the owner liable to the resident for actual damages sustained by the resident, as well as statutory damages of between $100 and $5,000.

The bill provides that the landlord is not li able if the resident did not provide the land lord with documentation as specified in the law (such as a restraining order to verify that the crime or act occurred).

If the landlord brings an eviction against the residents in the unit, the bill allows a resident who is a victim of domestic violence to answer an eviction action and claim the landlord failed to comply with the law that forbids eviction or non-renewal of the tenancy based on acts of abuse or vio lence. This defense can take one of the two following forms, depending on whether the abuser lives in the dwelling unit:

If the perpetrator of the domestic violence is not a resident in the same dwelling unit with the victim resident(s), then the victim(s) can file an answer claiming they are protected and cannot be evicted so

Poll Goals

written by CHARLEY GOSS

As summer fades, it’s hard to believe that residents will vote in their fourth (yes, fourth!) election of calendar year 2022 on November 8, 2022.

In February, voters recalled three members of the San Francisco Unified School District’s Board of Education after several personal and professional controversies, includ ing prioritizing renaming dozens of schools instead of getting kids physi cally back in classrooms.

In April, voters resoundingly recom mended then-District 6 Supervisor Matt Haney to the State Assembly in his primary race against former Mission District Supervisor David Campos by almost a 2:1 spread.

In June, San Francisco voters affirmed their decision to send Matt Haney to Sacramento. They recalled the heavily scrutinized District Attorney Chesa Boudin.

And now, this November, voters will consider more than twenty bal lot measures and a host of local and statewide offices. All in all, November’s ballot will have eighteen local San Francisco measures—which arrived on the ballot by initiative petition or through the Board of Supervisors (BOS)—as well as seven statewide bal lot measures. There are also several crucial elections at the Board of Super visors, the San Francisco School Board, and at City College.

SFAA’s endorsed positions on the School Board recall, the Assembly race, and the DA recall were all successful. With so many races on the ballot, we look to continue our momentum this year—and this November’s election presents an opportunity to change the course of San Francisco for the better.

In November’s election for the Board of Supervisors and the School Board, voters can change the makeup of these influential policy-making bodies, partic ularly the BOS, which has run rampant with increasingly ideological, aggres sive, and hostile legislation toward prop erty owners in recent years.

Each of the even-numbered districts is up for election (five of eleven seats in total), and two of those elections will be hotly contested. For a discussion of those races and SFAA’s endorsed candi dates, turn to “Who’s On First” on page 22. For more information on the School Board election, turn to “School Board Round-Up” on page 32.

Now, let’s move on to a partial list of our (lengthy) slate of ballot measures. Because my word count is limited, I’ll provide an overview and a recom mendation on some of the more con tested measures and the measures that are of importance to SFAA members. SFAA’s full November slate card is on page 39, which you can rip out and take to the polls.

Yes on B. Proposition B is a charter amendment that arrives on the ballot

from the Board of Supervisors. The char ter amendment would eliminate the De partment of Sanitation and Streets and transfer its responsibilities to the De partment of Public Works. While SFAA members might question why we’d want to transfer responsibilities from the Department of Sanitation and Streets when our streets and neighborhoods have never been filthier, this measure would prioritize funds for street clean ing instead of the status quo, where a significant chunk of funds went toward program administration. Prop B would create oversight for the Department of Public Works while also redirecting money toward actually cleaning our streets. Billed as “Oversight Done Right,” SFAA recommends a Yes vote on Prop B.

Yes on C. Prop C was submitted unani mously by the Board of Supervisors and would create the Homelessness Oversight Commission to oversee the Department of Homelessness and Sup portive Housing and clarify specific responsibilities for the Commission. The measure comes after the 2016 elec tion, in which residents voted to create the Department of Homelessness and Supportive Housing to help homeless people find permanent housing and connect individuals to critical support ive services. Despite the creation of the new department, the City’s inability to grapple with homelessness has undoubt edly gotten worse, while the Depart ment has more than doubled its budget in the subsequent years since its incep tion. Prop C would ensure that the City Controller audits homeless services and establish a commission to investigate departmental activities. It also requires the Commission to set clear goals to measure success and progress. Prop C is a meaningful step to providing essential oversight and accountability to current

Need help understanding November’s ballot? Read on for a discussion and SFAA’s recommendations.

homelessness programs without raising taxes. Vote Yes on C.

Yes on D; No on E. These measures are in direct competition with each other, and the measure that receives the most votes will become effective (assuming at least one of the measures reaches the 50% +1 majority threshold). Proposition D is sponsored by the SF Housing Action Coalition and SPUR; it made the ballot after enough signatures were collected from residents. Proposition E was placed on the ballot for the sole pur pose of competing with Prop D, and is the brainchild of Supervisor Connie Chan.

Under Prop D, permitting and funding for projects where 100% of the units are afford able for low- and middle-income house holds would no longer be discretionary. Proposed projects that conform to existing zoning rules would not require additional environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and would be protected from lawsuits under the same law. Prop E does not remove fund ing decisions from discretionary review, so 100% affordable housing projects seeking City funds would be subject to CEQA re view and vulnerable to lawsuits.

Prop D also requires that streamlined mixed-income projects provide 15% more affordable units than currently required by the city’s existing inclusionary policy. Today, 22% of units in new rental housing projects must be affordable to low- and moderate-income households. Under Prop D, a 100-unit rental project would require a total of 25 units (22 units + 3 additional units [15% of 22] = 25 units). The additional affordable units would have the same maxi mum sales prices and rent tiers as those established in the City’s inclusionary policy.

Prop E requires that mixed-income projects have an increased inclusionary rate of 8% above the existing rate, mean ing that the inclusionary requirement for rental housing would be 30%. For a 100-unit rental project, thirty units would be required. The City’s Housing Afford ability Strategies and other studies have repeatedly demonstrated that the existing inclusionary rate is already challenging for

many mixed-income projects. Increasing it to 30% will render most mixed-income projects in San Francisco infeasible, which means that Prop E is not likely to increase affordable housing production.

One serious roadblock to building enough affordable housing is that the median time frame for the approval and permitting process is twenty-seven months in San Francisco, far longer than any other city in California. Prop D would expedite approval of eligible projects by mandating clear and limited time periods for the City to determine an application’s completeness and eligibility for stream lining and by restricting the City’s ability to delay or reject permits for an eligible housing project that complies with the planning and building codes. The Plan ning Department would have to approve projects of more than 150 units within 180 days of application submission. Projects of 150 or fewer units would be approved within 90 days of submission. Prop E does not provide any timeframes for deeming that an application is com pleted and eligible for streamlining. Many projects could continue to experience significant permitting delays if projects are deemed incomplete, and there would be no recourse.

On the face of it, the two competing charter amendments to streamline housing may look similar to voters. But a deeper look at these measures shows that Prop D is likely to produce more affordable housing than Supervisor Connie Chan’s Prop E.

No on H. Proposition H will move City elections to only even-numbered years. While nobody knows what impact this will have on our elections, it is being repre sented as an attempt to drive voter turnout in citywide elections for the Mayor, Dis trict Attorney, and other citywide seats. The measure comes from Supervisor Dean Preston. The measure is likely to pass, but I have one consideration: even with yearly elections, our ballot has more than twentyfive measures. It stands to reason that if we eliminate our odd-year elections, voters will be asked to vote on more than forty measures each election.

No Endorsement on I or J. Should JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park and the Great Highway remain pedestrian walkways, or should they be reopened for vehicles? This question has drawn an incredible amount of passion from San Franciscans. SFAA sees it both ways; while the closure of JFK and the Great Highway has benefitted our members with properties nearby, many are frustrated by increased traffic and the inter ruption of more direct driving routes. As an organization, SFAA is not recommending a position on Props I and J.

No on K! Proposition K was advertised as a gross receipts tax on Amazon when the measure first qualified for the ballot, but in reviewing the text of the measure, it be came clear that Amazon was exempt from the proposal, and instead, the severe gross receipts tax increase would apply to many of San Francisco’s small businesses. Once this was discovered, the deadline to remove Prop K from the ballot had already passed, but TODCO, the measure’s proponents, have agreed to suspend their campaign and will join the opposition in recommending a No on K vote. TODCO will likely come back with a gross receipts tax increase on businesses in future elections, but for now, members should join TODCO and the small business community to vote No on K.

No on M! Proposition M is a residential va cancy tax. It appears on the ballot after the Democratic Socialists of America success fully gathered enough signatures to qualify. Proponents of the measure commissioned a report on residential vacancies from the City’s budget and legislative analyst. They then weaponized the report to misrepre sent the number and nature of residential vacancies citywide. Prop M imposes a tax on units that are vacant or unoccupied 182 or more days per year but exempts singlefamily homes and duplexes while taxing apartments, units occupied by family mem bers or relatives, and condominiums in buildings of three or more units. The mea sure also exempts rent-controlled tenants who use their apartments as a pied-à-terre, but it taxes property owners with pied-àterre in buildings with three or more units.

ESTATE

No Vacancy

written by JUSTIN A. GOODMAN

Proposition M is an unmitigated inva sion of privacy and property interests.

San Francisco’s first major foray into scrutinizing the occupancy of real property was the rent stabilization and arbitration ordinance in the late 1970s. As a tool to stabilize rental housing, it imposed evic tion controls to prevent landlords from terminating tenancies of “tenants in oc cupancy” merely because tenants were unwilling to pay illegal amounts of rent.

It has always been the case that a ten ant has quiet enjoyment of the leased premises—the ability to exclude the landlord from their home until the lease term ends or the tenant defaults. But with eviction controls, the tenant’s law ful occupancy continued so long as they were in good standing. San Francisco commandeered the most valuable of the real property rights—the right to posses sion—and gave it to the tenant, essen tially in perpetuity.

If the policy of these regulations was to control rents to stabilize communities, that policy was not achieved where the landlord can prove the tenant is not re siding there. (While the Rent Ordinance still does not permit capricious evictions in this scenario, it at least does not im pose rent control when the tenant is us ing their unit as a pied-à-terre: the tenant can keep the apartment but they have to pay the prevailing market rate to do so.)

But for tenancies where the original les see continues to reside there, landlords lost more and more power to control occupancy over the years. Once upon a time, contractual prohibitions against

subletting were actually enforceable. (Landlords, of course, have an interest in knowing who lives at their property— which they otherwise only get to do at the beginning of a tenancy—and it was really easy to waive vacancy decontrol rights in the early days of rent con trol—for instance, where the landlord responded to a repair request from a subtenant. (Simply excluding sublessees therefore helped safeguard a valuable property right.) San Francisco, however, viewed this as a de facto rent increase— two lease, one leaves, and the remaining lessee’s rent doubles—and so requests for subletting could no longer be unrea sonably refused.

At the peak of the last boom, citycompelled rental occupancy grew to roughly two persons per bedroom (if the lease had an occupancy limit) and swelled to the maximum occupantper-square-foot under the Housing Code (if it didn’t). And while a landlord might naturally assume they’d have the right to at least “restart” a tenancy at a market rate when all the original adult occupants have left, a pair of decisions affirmed a child’s ability to inherit his parents’ rent-controlled tenancy when he grows up and they move out. The landlord’s right of occupancy is de ferred for another generation.

There are also some sensible examples of the City imposing itself on a private home even when it is owner-occupied. A prime example focuses on when the landlord’s property interest actually overcomes a tenant’s. Landlords can

perform an “owner move-in” eviction (with some limitations as to protected tenants or where the owner is already living in a comparable unit). This pro cedure cannot merely be used to exit a rent-controlled tenant, unload the U-Haul, reload the U-Haul, rinse and repeat, to cycle through rent-controlled housing stock. The owner actually has to reside there as their primary resi dence for the next 36 months, and if they fail to do so without a compelling justification, they have probably com mitted actionable wrongful eviction. The City therefore requires annual affi davits, with supporting documentation, for owners to announce a detail of their private life—namely, where are they pri marily residing.

This logic is at work in the Residential Unit Conversion Ordinance (i.e., “Airbnb law”) as well. Another legacy of the last run up, the ordinance addressed the problem of de facto conversions of rental housing stock into transient use. (An occupant—particularly a vaca tioner—of fewer than 30 days is not a “tenant.” Where rent control never at taches, and an occupant never remains, the accommodations can always be offered at the prevailing price.) The ordi nance worked a compromise: it effected a citywide change in zoning, potentially allowing any housing unit to become a “hotel.” But now the City is the hotel manager: the host must be primarily residing in their unit, such that they can not offer the entire unit to a guest any more than 90 days out of the year. The City had better not find a mint on the owner’s pillow the other 275 days.

There is no time limit on hosting a single room (while the owner is still there).

But the in-law unit creates a special prob lem here: if the offered space is illegally converted, the City’s interest in occupancy is heightened even further. Obviously, owners should not be doing unpermitted work. But the aggregation of a few bad acts opens the literal door on the City entering an owner’s property for investigation and enforcement. In general, a report of unper mitted work to create an “in-law” unit likely finds a DBI inspector inside your home, scrutinizing the portions where you live, the portions where your tenant lives, and deciding whether you have to now perform an expensive alteration of your own home to turn it into two permitted ones. In offer ing that same portion for short-term leas ing, the two wrongs do not make a right, as the owner has probably violated both the Planning Code and the Airbnb law.

Now, all the above examples illustrate an invasion of privacy and property rights following the property owner entering a highly regulated market. But what about when the owner withdraws from that mar ket or never entered it in the first place?

Proposition M is on the ballot this Novem ber. Backed by Supervisor Dean Preston and aimed at disincentivizing prolonged vacancies to decrease blight, increase the number of housing units available for oc cupancy, and raise funds for rent subsidies and affordable housing, the “Empty Homes Tax” (EHT) is an unmitigated invasion of privacy and property interests.

The EHT imposes an inflation-adjusted, annual tax on each person who owns a residential unit for keeping that unit vacant in a particular tax year. The tax is based on square footage of the unit (with the lowest first-year tax being $2,500), and it doubles for each of two successive years the unit is vacant.

The EHT is about occupancy. If the owner “occupies, inhabits or uses” the unit at least 183 days per year (i.e., more than half), they can avoid the tax. They can also avoid the tax if they rent the unit to a tenant under a “bona fide lease.” Signifi cantly, the tax cannot be avoided by a non-owner family member (a spouse,

domestic partner, child, parent, or sib ling) even if they were paying market rate rent. And while this bizarre treatment of family use is absurdly punished, the EHT does logically toll the taxation meter when, for instance, the unit is newly con structed or is being rehabilitated, the unit is going through probate, or there is a di saster causing damage to the building.

The EHT does not apply to single family homes or duplexes. But it would apply to a single condo in a multi-unit build ing, and it would punish the owner of a “tenancy-in-common” unit if his TIC co-owner left his unit vacant, by making them jointly liable merely by owning a portion of the building.

The concept here is not new. This type of tax has been imposed in Vancouver and Oakland—presumably trying to solve the problem of big money investors riding up a housing boom, while keeping the unit vacant, awaiting its new owner. A similar initiative is on the ballot in November for Berkeley.

San Francisco has infamously under-pro duced housing, and this isn’t the first time it’s looked inward to try to deploy existing housing stock. (For instance, since 2014, the City has embraced a policy of compelled le galization for unauthorized dwelling units (i.e., “illegal in-laws”), figuring there were as many as 40,000 of these units and that they were essentially viable housing, but for the lack of a certificate of occupancy. The owner could therefore obtain permits to “add” the unit (through legalization) notwithstanding a zoning density limit in the neighborhood.) But even this was an example of regulating property that the owner put into the market.

The EHT presumes to tax units that never were in the market, as well as those that have been withdrawn from the market via the Ellis Act (a state law that dictates that an owner cannot be compelled to offer or continue to offer a unit for rent). It oper ates to prevent (or at least disincentivize) a property owner from organizing their private family affairs by providing a home to close relatives.

The EHT’s stated purpose is to add units to the market, but it seems to prefer they stay vacant to subsidize rent on existing, already affordable units. (Couldn’t it just work to create more housing?) It pun ishes the under-utilization of housing by owners, but where the vast majority of San Franciscans are renters, it is conspicu ously silent about levying a tax on piedà-terre apartments. And to the extent this is aimed at discouraging speculators (like the Vancouver vacancy tax), there are surely more efficient ways to turn future homes for owner-occupiers into shortterm homes for tenants—like, dare I say it, eliminating just cause for eviction in separately alienable dwellings for tenan cies shorter than five years. As with all voter initiatives, it will be up to San Fran cisco’s voters to decide whether to enact it. If they do, it will be up to the courts to decide whether it is lawful.

The information contained in this article is gen eral in nature. Consult the advice of an attorney for any specific problem. Justin A. Goodman is with Zacks, Freedman & Patterson, P.C. and can be reached at 415-956-8100.

Passthroughs

way to manage your properties

Affordable Self Storage Condo/HOA Manufactured

Easy

Billed to Build

written by DANIEL FRATTIN & DANIEL J. TURNER

AB 2011, along with SB 6 (Senators Ca bellero, Eggman, and Rubio), passed the California Legislature with large majori ties in both houses. The two bills will create ten-year housing programs with similar aims: increasing housing produc tion and increasing the skill level, wages, and number of residential construction workers. However, the bills differ in important ways—in their approach to density, allowances for ministerial ap provals, and the degree of deference to local zoning rules. They also take mark edly different approaches to growing, training, and better compensating the residential construction workforce.

The bills were the product of a political compromise between the State Build ing & Construction Trades Council and the Carpenters Union. They effectively set up an experiment to test the relative efficacy of the SB 6 labor rules favored by the State Building & Construction Trades Council—basically requiring union labor on any SB 6 project and the rules preferred by the Carpenters Union—requiring payment of prevailing wages and benefits to all workers on an AB 2011 project.

A good deal of attention has been given to improving the regulatory conditions for getting new housing approved, ex panding access to sites, and requiring cities to upzone. However, less atten tion has been paid to the fact that—even if there were shovel-ready projects for the Governor’s declared goal of 3.5

million new homes over ten years—the current residential construction work force could only build about a third of that number without significant in creases in the number and productivity of workers, who currently build hous ing at a rate of one home per worker per year. By comparison, average pro ductivity per worker was 1.4 units per year from 1990-2005. Put simply, the state cannot meet its housing targets without an increase in the number of workers and productivity.

However, attracting new workers has proven difficult. Median residential con struction worker pay in California ranks 46th in the country when adjusted for the high cost of living. On average, a resi dential construction worker’s income is two-thirds of their commercial counter part’s, and they get about one-third the amount of fringe benefits. Less than half have insurance through employers. This is a dramatic shift since the 1970s and 1980s, when average pay in both sectors was roughly equal.

AB 2011 provides for time-limited ministerial approvals for properties on commercial corridors that meet certain criteria for affordable housing, and over rides local zoning rules that conflict with its minimum standards for density and height. It also mandates payment of prevailing wages to all construction workers, or at least the prevailing ap prentice wages for apprentices enrolled in state-approved apprentice programs.

Projects of fifty units or more with quali fied construction craft workers must provide family health care benefits to those workers, while projects without such workers can credit qualifying ex penditures toward the prevailing wage requirements. Essentially, AB 2011 bets that rapid approvals under more liberal standards will entice employers to pay higher wages and create a strong, nearterm incentive for developers to invest in apprenticeship programs to elevate worker productivity.

A final version of SB 6 has yet to be published but takes a less aggressive approach than AB 2011, with lower minimum density requirements, greater deference to local zoning, and no man datory ministerial approval process un less a project otherwise qualifies under SB 35. Thus, many SB 6 projects would be subject to lengthy CEQA reviews and modified discretionary approvals. SB 6 would require lower amounts of afford able housing subsidies than AB 2011, but would effectively require the use of union labor if two qualified bids are received from union contractors. While SB 6 expands potential building sites, most projects would not realize the cost savings associated with quick ministe rial approvals or the elimination of most entitlement/CEQA risk. Without these incentives in place, it may be years be fore the state sees its first SB 6 project, or additional demand for workers.

AB 2011 passed the Assembly 67-4 with nine abstentions, and the Senate 33-0 with seven abstentions. While the four Nos in the Assembly were from rural and suburban districts leaning more conservative (three Republicans, one Democrat), notably seven of the nine abstentions were from urban

The California Legislature passed two new bills that will create ten-year housing programs.

investments

OUR SERVICES

After signing up, a member of our team will reach out to perform a walk through of our process, developing an agreement tailored to your needs.

Mlcspaces uses technology and automation to maximize number of tours on your property, do tours whenever tenants are available, and be transparent as much as possible. Our permanently powered smart locks remove a need for keys. Our customized website is particularly designed for your needs. To maximize your return, we also offer co living, if it is a better option.

Our team of leasing agents will market the property on various platforms to maximize the traffic towards your listing. We offer in person and virtual tours around the clock.

Sit back and collect rent. Allow MLCSpaces to keep you in the know and send you rent along with monthly reporting's. In addition, our in house maintenance team allows for constant up keep of the property at a low cost.

WHO’S ON FIRST

The San Francisco Board of Supervisors has five seats up for reelection this year, presenting an opportunity to vote for common-sense leadership.

Written by CHARLEY GOSS & PAM MCELROY

This November’s elections for the Board of Supervisors (BOS) and the School Board present a unique opportunity to change the makeup of these influential policy-mak ing bodies, particularly the BOS, which has run rampant with increasingly ideologi cal, aggressive, and hostile legislation toward property owners in recent years.

On the November ballot, each of the even-numbered districts is up for election (five of eleven seats in total), and two of those elections will be hotly contested. Read on for a discussion of those races, a highlight of SFAA’s endorsed candidates, and brief Q&As with District 4 candidate Joel Engardio and District 6 Supervisor Matt Dorsey.

District 4: Joel Engardio

In District 4, we find one of the two hotly contested Board of Supervisors races. Incumbent Gordon Mar has not been openly antagonistic toward the rental housing industry, but he’s a consistent vote for the “progressive” block on the Board. Mar has recently found himself out of touch with the voters of his district, who, in precinct after precinct, overwhelmingly voted to recall the members of the School Board as well as former District Attorney Chesa Boudin. Mar opposed both recalls.

Mar faces a challenger whom SFAA members are sure to recognize: Joel Engardio. Engardio previously ran for election to the Board of Supervisors in District 7, but he found himself a District 4 resident (without moving) after redistricting efforts oc curred early in the year. Engardio is pragmatic and realistic in his view of homeown ership and the rental housing industry, and has been supportive of efforts to increase public safety citywide through his nonprofit organization Stop Crime SF.

SF Apartment Magazine spoke with Engardio about his plans for the city, and below is what he had to say.

Candidate for District 4, Joel Engardio.

SF Apartment Magazine: What led you toward a career in San Francisco politics? What keeps you going?

Joel Engardio: As a journalist covering the bureaucracy at City Hall, I saw how the budget doubled and nothing was twice as good. I realized that we need new city Supervisors if we’re going to fix San Francisco’s problems. Our elected officials must focus on getting the basics right: safer streets, better schools, more middleincome housing, and vibrant small businesses.

SFAM: As the Executive Director of Stop Crime SF, can you tell us about the organization’s mission? What have been the organiza tion’s most notable achievements so far?

Engardio: We led a campaign to mobilize San Franciscans against anti-Asian discrimination and attacks on Asian seniors. We also forced the recalled DA, Chesa Boudin, to turn over records he’d been refusing to share with victims. We believe in criminal jus tice reform. For it to succeed, residents must feel safe, and victims cannot be ignored.

SFAM: What are District 4’s most significant challenges? How do you plan on overcoming them?

Engardio: Too many families are leaving San Francisco, and this jeopardizes our future. We must become a more

family-friendly city. We must focus on safety, schools, housing, and quality of life. This requires electing new city Supervisors who are willing to put ideologies aside when they get in the way of good ideas that would improve our city. I’m a forward-thinking and practical Democrat. That means I embrace innovation and I’m focused on results. I’m going to fight for common-sense solutions to our problems.

SFAM: If you could wave a magic wand and change anything in the city, what would you do?

Engardio: End the toxic, tribal local politics where city Supervisors are consumed by sideshows and infighting. There’s a lot to fix in our city, and it can feel daunting. But we can fix things if we elect new Supervisors and change direction now. We deserve to live in a city that works.

SFAM: What do you love most about District 4? What’s your favorite way to spend a day off in the district?

Engardio: We have wonderful neighborhood parks, an incredible farmer’s market, a diversity of restaurants, and nearly all of San Francisco’s coastline. Just being able to wander the Sunset, Parkside, Pine Lake Park, Lakeshore, and Merced Manor neighborhoods of District 4 offers new discoveries every time.

District 6 Supervisor Matt Dorsey. Learn more about Supervisor Dorsey on page 26.

These

were not

There is a

an offer to buy any

may not receive

Such offers can be made only

SFAM: If you had just a few sentences to speak to District 4 residents, what would your message be?

Engardio: Being a candidate for city supervisor often means talking about what’s wrong with our city and what needs to be fixed.

But I want District 4 residents to remember that there is still a lot of joy in San Fran cisco. The joy in our natural beauty, the people, and the food. So much great food.

I know it’s been frustrating—and even scary—living in San Francisco lately. Every thing seems to be going in the wrong direc tion. Yet San Francisco is worth fixing and I’m not giving up. I believe the city we love can realize its full potential. I’m running for Supervisor to create our best San Francisco.

District 6: Supervisor Matt Dorsey

In District 6 (Tenderloin, SOMA), we’ll see perhaps the closest race of this election cycle, where incumbent Supervisor Matt

Dorsey will face off against community leader Honey Mahogany.

Dorsey finds himself as the incumbent due to his appointment by Mayor London Breed after Matt Haney’s election to the Califor nia Assembly in the aforementioned June election. Dorsey is a longtime PR specialist around City Hall and is a former spokesper son for the SFPD. He was appointed to the District 6 seat in part because of his lived experience with addiction, and the dif ficulties that District 6 neighborhoods are having with fentanyl, overdose deaths, and open-air drug dealing.

His opponent, Honey Mahogany, has over seen the district over the past several years as Matt Haney’s Chief of Staff, and each has raced to “out-YIMBY” each other, focusing on making it easier and faster to produce new housing. Notably, Honey Mahogany is also leading the campaign to impose a residential vacancy tax on apartments and condominiums (learn more about Prop M on page 14). In this race, which is a dead

heat right now, SFAA members should sup port Matt Dorsey for his thoughtfulness and his willingness to work proactively with diverse stakeholders citywide.

SFAM: What first attracted you to a career in San Francisco poli tics? What are you most passionate about in your career now?

Supervisor Matt Dorsey:

My career in San Francisco politics began with my first job after graduating from Emerson College in Boston, when I worked for former DA Arlo Smith’s 1990 campaign for Attorney General, and then managed his successful reelection the following year. I later spent fourteen years on the execu tive staff of City Attorney Dennis Herrera’s office before serving for two years as the highest-ranking LGBTQ+ civilian member of the San Francisco Police Department.

What’s different now is the deeply per sonal stake I feel in working to reverse the harms resulting from rampant drug

District 2 Supervisor Catherine Stefani. Learn more about Supervisor Stefani on page 48.

dealing, open-air drug scenes, and drug overdose deaths. As a person in recovery from addiction, these challenges are per sonal to me in ways few local issues have been in years past. That’s why I asked Mayor London Breed to appoint me to the Board of Supervisors, and it’s why I’m going to make the most of it by working hard to solve problems rather than just gripe about them.

SFAM: You’ve said that we need to build more housing at all income levels in every neighborhood. Do you have a hous ing plan for District 6? What roadblocks does the district face?

Supervisor Dorsey: I think the most important policy initiative San Francisco has on housing is its ambitious sixth-cycle Housing Element. If we fulfill the promise of what that seeks to accom plish and satisfy the legitimate concerns the California Department of Housing and Community Development has identified, it may be the most consequential and

progressive public initiative I will have worked on in my career.

SFAM: What are District 6’s biggest challenges, and how do you plan on over coming them?

Supervisor Dorsey: From every corner of my district, the number one challenge residents identify and want to discuss with me is public safety. I think police staffing is a critically important part of that, but I also think getting our City’s arms around the myriad harms emerging from street-level drug dealing, open-air drug scenes, and drug overdose deaths will go a long way toward solving many related problems.

SFAM: If you could wave a magic wand and change anything in the city, what would you do?

Supervisor Dorsey: It would be to invest everyone in solutions and achieve better consensus in answering

San Franciscans’ demands that we start making real progress in how we’re govern ing at City Hall.

SFAM: What do you love most about District 6? What’s your favorite way to spend a day off in the district?

Supervisor Dorsey: I have no intention of taking a day off until after November’s election, so we’ll have to see in a couple of months.

SFAM: If you had just a few sentences to speak to District 6 residents, what would your message be?

Supervisor Dorsey: Don’t give up on our City. It’s okay to be skeptical, but please don’t be cynical. We can make prog ress in solving our city’s problems, and I’m absolutely convinced that San Francisco’s best days are still to come.

District 8 Supervisor Rafael Mandelman. Learn more about Supervisor Mandelman on page 48.

School Board Round-Up

Written by VARIOUS AUTHORS

Get to know the candidates running for San Francisco School Board.

We know you have a lot to research and consider for Election Day on November 8. We asked the candidates running for San Francisco School Board to introduce themselves and tell us a bit about what they hope to achieve if elected. Their responses (edited for space and clarity) are below.

Ann Hsu

After a twenty-five-year career in the technology and internet industries—spanning from Silicon Valley to China—I took a hiatus to care for three generations of family members full-time. I worked for multinational companies, including Tandem Computers (now HP), Philips Electronics, and Siebel Systems, as well as built companies from the ground up. I helped Tandem start their Shanghai software development joint venture in 1994. I co-founded an online competitive intelligence company in 1999 in Silicon Valley and operated it for thirteen years, before leaving for a career in low tech in 2012, when I co-founded a dairy products social ven ture in far western China to provide economic opportunities to local farmers and ethnic minorities.

I have helped UC Berkeley with various initiatives in China and have led Berkeley’s alumni organizations in both China and the United States. I received my Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from Penn State University and my Master of Science in Electrical Engineering and MBA from UC Berkeley.

Forty years ago, I immigrated from China to the United States, and I have lived in the Bay Area for more than thirty years. I am the only immigrant on the San Francisco School Board. My children attend San Francisco’s public schools. I was president of the Galileo High School PTSA as well as chair of San Francisco Unified School District’s Citizens’ Bond Oversight Committee until appointed to the Board of Education (BOE).

Since being appointed by Mayor Breed to the BOE in March 2022, I have worked with colleagues to accom plish the following:

• Hired a student-focused superintendent

• Passed a balanced budget and rescinded virtually all layoff notices

• Reinstated criteria-based admissions at Lowell High School

• Dropped the appeal of the George Washington murals lawsuit

• Restored JROTC at Galileo, Balboa, and Mission high schools

My priorities on the BOE are:

• Student achievement and academic excellence

• Physically and emotionally safe schools

• Fiscal discipline and operational excellence

Lainie Motamedi

I am a San Francisco Unified School District parent with a long track record of engaging at school sites and on district committees. I bring broad-ranging professional experi ence in government, clean energy, and the technology sector. My professional and community engagements emphasize con vening people to develop shared solutions to challenging issues and improving overall organization performance.

I currently serve on the San Francisco Uni fied Board of Education—appointed by Mayor London Breed in March of this year.

In my professional career, I spearheaded climate-change coordination efforts for the California Public Utilities Commission, resulting in long-term systemic investments in clean energy. I consulted with state agen cies nationwide on how to govern and de velop clean energy programs, and I worked in technology implementing telecommuni cations advancements, for both large com panies and start-ups.

I am an active parent at my children’s public schools, volunteering in class rooms, leading fundraising efforts, and serving on Student Site Councils and PTAs. I recently completed a four-year term serving as the co-chair of the Public Education Enrichment Fund Committee (PEEF), where I advocated for account ability and transparency reform to ensure that San Francisco funds are utilized for student benefit as mandated by the City Charter. In this role, I reviewed SFUSD programming, advised the Board of Edu cation, and provided recommendations to best serve our students.

I am active in the San Francisco community, serving on both the Bicycle Coalition and Botanical Garden boards as they under went organizational change and growth. I

am currently the personnel manager and a park ranger with the National Park Ser vice’s volunteer horse patrol program in the Marin Headlands. Earlier this year, I was honored to receive the Presidential Award for Outstanding Volunteer Service in recog nition of my ongoing contributions.

I grew up in Southern California, and my mother and stepfather were teachers in the Los Angeles Unified School District—serv ing a combined fifty-six years. My father is an Iranian immigrant who benefited from California’s public education system on his path to becoming a college professor.

I am a graduate of public schools, earning a Bachelors from UC Santa Cruz, and an MBA from the University of Washington. I was a Coro Public Affairs Fellow, where I interned for, among others, the San Francisco Fire Fighters Union and Public Defender Jeff Adachi’s initial political campaign.

I have lived in San Francisco for over twenty years. I live with my family in the Inner Sunset.

Lisa Weissman-Ward

I am the product of public schools—from kindergarten through college and law school. I understand and have personally benefited from quality public education.

I am an attorney and an educator. As the Associate Director of Stanford Law School’s Immigrants’ Rights Clinic, I have two roles. Wearing my attorney hat, I represent in dividuals facing deportation and asylum seekers fleeing persecution. Wearing my educator hat, I supervise and mentor law students who are participating in a clinical (practical learning) experience.

Working under the supervision of my law license, students have an opportunity to represent clients before the immigration courts and the asylum office. I teach and model the value of a growth mindset. I teach how to engage in critical discourse, negotiation, and consensus building, and how to interview clients with a cultural humility and trauma-informed lens. My work has allowed me to value the con cept of meeting each individual where they are and the importance of starting

conversations from a point of commonal ity rather than a point of difference.

Perhaps most important to my commit ment to the Board of Education is that I am a mother of two public school children. I am committed to ensuring that every child in SFUSD receives the quality of education that I want for my own children.

It was an honor to be appointed to the School Board in March by Mayor Breed. I joined the School Board because I know (and experienced first-hand as a parent) how badly the trust was broken between the School Board and the public. That’s why I have been focused on student- cen tered outcomes to rebuild that trust and promote equity and excellence for all SFUSD students.

In five short months, my colleagues and I have:

• Passed a balanced budget

• Rescinded teacher and staff layoff notices

• Hired a student-centered Superintendent

• Helped bring new revenue to the District

• Created a transparent and communitydriven framework to improve high schools citywide

• Engaged in intensive work to improve our processes and governance struc tures so that we can focus on improv ing student outcomes and closing the opportunity gap

SFUSD is at a crossroads. Since I was ap pointed to the School Board, my skills have helped contribute to the progress that my Board colleagues and I have made. These are the skills that will move us forward toward the quality education that all our students deserve. I look forward to continu ing to do the work.

For more information on the San Francisco Board of Education, with the website: sfusd.edu/ about-sfusd/board-education.

Founded 35 years ago, Kaufman, Dolowich & Voluck is an internationally recognized litigation firm, meeting the diverse demands of our clients.

The Bay Area’s complicated and fast-moving real estate industry presents property owners with exceptional oppor tunities and challenges. KDV’s real estate practice provides a full spectrum of services, allowing clients to rely on one firm for all of their real estate needs.

Ashley E. Klein

Managing Partner of San Francisco Office Co-Chair of Real Estate Practice Group Landlord-Tenant Disputes

Ashley E. Klein represents clients ranging from real estate investment trusts, homeowners in wrongful eviction defense, unlawful detainer, and property management matters. She counsels Bay Area homeowners about their rights and options under the SF Rent Ordinance, statewide rent control regula tions and the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act.

A. Jeanne Grove

Managing Partner of Sonoma Office Co-Chair of Real Estate Practice Group HOA Disputes

A. Jeanne Grove focuses her practice on real estate and business litigation, including HOA and co-ownership issues, purchase/sale disputes and nondisclosure claims, and boundary, title, develop ment, and construction matters. She has 15 years of experience in mediation and arbitration, as well as all phases of civil litiga tion, from the pleading stage to trial and post-trial proceedings.

Laura L. Campbell Attorney Land Use Disputes

Laura L. Campbell has extensive experience in landlordtenant litigation. She represents clients in breach of contract matters, quiet title actions, unlawful detainer lawsuits, tenant buy-out negotiations, and property management resolutions.

specializes in SF Rent Board matters, and routinely handles lot splits, mergers public hearings, zoning issues and ADU permitting.

San Francisco, CA Office

Prop M’s tax rate is based on unit size, and it escalates each year an apartment is va cant. In year one, the tax rate is $2,500 for each unit under 1,000 square feet. That rate doubles the following year if the unit is still vacant, and it doubles again the year after to top out at $10,000. For units between 1,000 and 2,000 square feet, the tax rate starts at $3,500 and doubles each subse quent year the unit is vacant until it reaches a rate of $14,000 if vacant for the follow ing two years. For units greater than 2,000 square feet, the tax rate starts at $5,000 per unit and doubles if the unit is still vacant in year two to $10,000 per unit, before doubling again if the unit is vacant in year three, where it tops out at $20,000 per unit.

While we know our members are generally not keeping units off the market for any considerable length of time, the fact is that Prop M doesn’t account for many reasons why a unit may be vacant, and it provides very few exemptions. Our members have suffered significant vacancy rates coming out of the pandemic, and many still strug gle to rent their apartments, particularly in SOMA and the Tenderloin and close to the downtown core, where the City has al lowed street and safety conditions to dete riorate to a shocking extent. SFAA members and homeowners should vote No on M for its harmful and deleterious effects on prop erty owners and our housing stock.

No on O! Proposition O is also known as the additional parcel tax for City College. The measure, which is opposed by Mayor London Breed and Supervisors Catherine Stefani and Aaron Peskin, comes when property owners are already paying for an existing parcel tax for City College until 2032, as well as an $860+ million bond for CCSF. The College has recently stumbled through fiscal mismanagement and declin ing enrollment; it has hired nine chancel lors over the last eight years. City College is a noble institution with worthwhile goals, but its leadership doesn’t deserve another bailout from property owners and residents. In addition, the tax is substan tial. Owners of residential property would pay $150 yearly per single-family home

and condominium, while owners of two or more residential units would pay $75 yearly per apartment. Owners of mixed-use buildings of more than two units would pay the $75 yearly per unit fee and another yearly fee based on the building’s nonresi dential square footage. There is an extra yearly charge of $150 for buildings with under 5,000 nonresidential square feet, while buildings between 5,000 square feet and 24,999 square feet would pay an extra $1,250 yearly on top of the residential-perunit fee. Owners of larger nonresidential spaces would pay an extra $2,500 yearly in addition to the per-unit fee, and owners of over 100,000 nonresidential square feet would pay $4,000 yearly in addition to the per-unit fee. It’s time to show tough love to City College and reject their third bond measure since 2012.

We hope this article has helped you under stand our upcoming ballot and that our slate card finds its way to the polls with you. If you’d like to read more about the ballot measures, visit the Department of Elections website at sfelections.sfgov.org/measures

If you’d like to support SFAA’s endorsed candidates or ballot measures by donat ing or volunteering, contact SFAA staff to see how you can help. While the SFAA Political Action Committee makes all bal lot recommendations, you can contact the SFAA office anytime with your questions or concerns.

Make sure you get out to the polls for the fourth (and last) time in 2022.

Charley Goss is the Director of Government Af fairs at the San Francisco Apartment Association.

SFAA Slate Card Recommendations

November 6 2022, California Election Ballot

BALLOT MEASURES

Proposition A

Retiree Supplemental Cost of Living Adjustment; Retirement Board Contract with Executive Director YES

Proposition B Building Inspection Commission YES

Proposition C

Proposition D

Homeless Oversight Commission YES

Affordable Housing- Initiative Petition YES

Proposition E Affordable Housing – Board of Supervisors NO

Proposition F Library Preservation Fund YES

Proposition G

Student Success Fund – Grants to the San Francisco Unified School District NO POSITION

Proposition H City Elections in Even-Numbered Years NO

Proposition I Vehicles on JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park and the Great Highway (open JFK to cars) NO POSITION

Proposition J

Proposition K

Recreational Use of JFK Drive in Golden Gate Park (keep JFK closed to cars) NO POSITION

Gross Receipts Taxes for Guaranteed Income Programs, Small Business Assistance, and Homeless Services NO

Proposition L Sales Tax for Transportation Projects YES

Proposition M Tax on Keeping Residential Units Vacant NO

Proposition N

Golden Gate Park Underground Parking Facility; Golden Gate Park Concourse Authority YES

Proposition O Additional Parcel Tax for City College NO

Assessor Recorder Joaquin Torres

Public Defender Mano Raju

Board

Education

Ann Hsu, Lainie Motamedi, Lisa Weissman-Ward

Ways to Connect.

Email SFAA at MemberQuestions@sfaa.org to have your questions and concerns promptly addressed, or call the office at 415-255-2288. You can also follow the happenings of your fellow SFAA members and find out the latest in the industry by connecting with SFAA on Facebook. Search “San Francisco Apartment Association” and “Like” it to add it to your news feed. Follow SFAA on Twitter at twitter.com/SFAptAssoc

New sfaa.org website launched!

Email SFAA at MemberQuestions@sfaa.org

Connect with SFAA on Facebook

Follow SFAA on Twitter at twitter.com/SFAptAssoc

Q&A

Signed & Sealed

written by VARIOUS AUTHORS

Q. Tenants in my non-rent-con trolled condo are seven months into the one-year lease, however, I’d like to give them 30 days’ no tice to vacate. Is this legal?

A. No, it is not legal to terminate a ten ancy before the expiration of the origi nal term (assuming the tenant has not materially breached the lease). A lease is a contract, and you are bound to the contract, the same as your tenants are. If they left after month seven of twelve, you would have the right to sue them for breaking the lease early, right? Similarly, if you breach the lease, they would have the right to sue you for breaching the lease (and would likely win).

Your question raises two additional is sues: (1) Is the tenancy actually not rentcontrolled? (2) Is there eviction control in place that would prevent you from serving a 30-day notice after the expira tion of the one-year lease?

In 2019, the California legislature passed AB 1482, also called the Tenant Protec tion Act of 2019 (TPA). The TPA included a wide range of provisions, most nota bly, statewide rent control and evic tion control (also known as just cause provisions) where local controls do not apply. This means that local rent control continues to apply where it already exists (like San Francisco), otherwise, state limits apply. Condos and singlefamily residences are exempt from the state-level rent control provisions of AB 1482—as long as certain requirements are met, including a notice requirement.

Even if you are permitted under state law to impose a rent increase in excess of the local limits, there are additional considerations. The local tenant harass ment provision of the Rent Ordinance does not allow a landlord to impose a rent increase for the purpose of coerc ing a tenant to vacate, and there is no hard rule on the amount of rent increase before it is considered coercive. There are also state-level limits on increases during declared states of emergency. As always, when in doubt, consult counsel before you serve the notice.

Condos and single-family residences are exempt from state-level eviction control of the TPA, if the correct notices are served on the tenants. However, the TPA also allowed local governments to expand existing eviction control. And, if a local eviction control is more protective than the TPA, the local ordi nance applies.

Before the TPA, eviction controls in San Francisco did not apply to build ings constructed after 1979. In response to the TPA, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors expanded the application of local eviction control to all residen tial buildings. What this means is that even though a condo is not subject to local rent control, it is subject to local eviction control, meaning you cannot evict without just cause either under the Tenant Protection Act or under the Rent Ordinance, even after the original term of the lease expires.

Q. I got a rent check from a subtenant who I haven’t acknowl edged. If I don’t cash his check, could I be liable for breaching the “refusing to accept receipt of payment” clause of the anti tenant-harassment ordinance?

A. San Francisco has a comprehensive tenant-harassment scheme that voters adopted in 2008, via Proposition M. While it includes some common sense and important prohibitions (e.g., land lords cannot interrupt housing services or refuse repairs), it included some pernicious provisions as well, like penal izing a landlord’s continued offers of payment to vacate after their tenant noti fies them that they no longer wish to re ceive further offers. (In other words, San Francisco is so concerned about vacancy decontrol that it punished “talking.” As you might imagine, landlords leapt to ac tion to invalidate this provision on free speech grounds, in Larson v. CCSF.)

In the fray, some provisions survived and others were stricken. However, while the Rent Board website acknowl edges the Larson decision, the Board of Supervisors has never removed the offending language! (While inert, it still stands as a relic to these efforts to chill landlords’ lawful exercise of their rights.)

You’re asking about a provision that was not challenged: the refusal to accept or acknowledge receipt of a tenant’s law ful rent payment. (The ordinance also has a related provision, prohibiting the refusal to cash a rent check for over 30 days.) Now, given that receipt of rent is the core reason to rent out your housing, it would seem unnecessary to compel

—Shoshana Raphael

A lease is a contract that you are bound to—the same as your tenants.

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

extra extra read all about it

Prevent Fires.

Tape and Bag Lithium Batteries

What should you do with old lithium batteries? A big part of the answer is clear tape. Old lithium batteries may no longer have the power to run devices, but they can still release energy though their contact points. Lithium bat teries that are not taped can cause fires in collection trucks and recycling facilities, and harm workers.

• Place clear tape over the contact points of used lithium batteries.

• Put taped lithium batteries in a clear plastic bag, and seal it shut.

• Place the bag on top of your landfill bin. Recology will collect the bag, sort the batteries, and safely ship them to companies that specialize in battery recycling.

it. But these provisions serve a practical purpose: nefarious landlords should not be permitted to gimmick a rent default (and re cover possession) by holding on to checks from a tenant who doesn’t balance their books and may go in the red after months of unaccepted payments.

Of course, these provisions would also serve a manipulative purpose if read to require acceptance of payments from someone other than your tenant. After all, while contract law places you in a rela tionship only with your tenant, and while Costa-Hawkins preserves your ability to increase the rent to market rate when that tenant vacates (while leaving others behind), San Francisco defines “tenant” to include approved subtenants, no longer re ally lets landlords not approve subtenants, and would appreciate very much if you cre ated a direct contractual relationship with younger, later-in-time occupants to sustain lower rental housing pricing, when you’d otherwise have the opportunity to earn market rent.

Having said that, a plain reading of the anti-harassment ordinance supports your refusal to accept this payment. (Put simply, it isn’t “lawful” if it isn’t from your tenant.) But even if your tenant (or subtenant) argued that this section required receipt, then this would just have to be one more section of the anti-harassment ordinance that is preempted, as applied here. CostaHawkins permits you to keep subtenants at a distance, unless and until they remain after the last “original occupant” no longer permanently resides at the dwelling. (Gen erally speaking, they cannot be evicted at this point, but they would become your ten ant at the higher rental rate.) San Francisco is not permitted to evade this important protection by re-labeling who is your “ten ant” or penalizing your refusal to waive your rights.

—Justin A. Goodman

The information contained in this article is gen eral in nature. Consult the advice of an attorney for any specific problem. Shoshana Raphael is with SJR Law Corporation and can be reached at 415-408-6044. Justin A. Goodman is with Zacks, Freedman & Patterson, P.C. and can be reached at 415-956-8100.

sfaa sfaa

Planning Ahead… continued from page 20

What You Need to Know

2022 SFAA UPDATES

SFAA 2022 TROPHY AWARDS

Save October 13, 2022, for the the SFAA Trophy Awards. For more information, turn to page 47.

To sponsor the event or reserve tickets, contact Vanessa Khaleel at vanessa@sfaa.org.

To nominate an employee, coworker–or yourself!–turn to page 65 for instructions.

UPCOMING CLASSES

During the pandemic, the monthly SFAA member meetings and classes will be held virtually. For member meeting topics and schedules, go to www.sfaa.org. For a list of virtual SFAA classes, turn to the calendar on page 50.

SFAA OFFICE CLOSURE

As the SFAA pivots to a hybrid in-office work model, members are welcome to make an appointment. However, please refrain from coming in person if you have tested positive for, were exposed to, or have symptoms of COVID-19. The best way to have your questions answered is through email at MemberQuestions@sfaa.org

and suburban districts along the coast between Ventura and San Diego with a high number of Democratic representa tives (six Democrats, three Republicans). Conversely, SB 6 passed the Assembly 67-0 with thirteen abstentions and the Senate 34-0 with six abstentions. Of the four Nos for AB 2011, three abstained from SB 6 and one voted yes (a Democrat Representative from District 29, encompassing Santa Cruz and the surrounding area). The Assembly abstentions followed a similar pattern as AB 2011, with those abstaining coming from both parties and primarily represent ing rural districts or coastal urban and suburban districts in Southern California. For both AB 2011 and SB 6, the Senate abstentions followed a similar geographic pattern as in the Assembly.

While union support was split between the two bills, with both construction and other unions on either side, pro-housing and business organizations tended to support both. Most affordable housing develop ers supported AB 2011 and opposed SB 6, presumably because the latter would tend to increase cost and time for approval without offsetting benefits. San Francisco’s Council of Community Housing Organiza tions, which frequently opposes marketrate development, was a notable outlier, supporting SB 6 and opposing AB 2011 despite its clear benefits to affordable hous ing developers.

Both bills still need to be signed by the Governor and will not take effect until July 2023. Annual reports of projects approved under both bills are required from cities and the Department of Housing & Commu nity Development is to provide two reports on the use of each during the ten-year pe riod prior to their sunset date.

This article was reprinted with permission and written by Reuben, Junius & Rose LLP attorneys Daniel Frattin and Daniel J. Turner. The issues discussed in this update are not intended to be legal advice and no attorney-client relationship is established with the recipient.

Laura Strazzo

Brian O’Neill

Robert Little Attorney at Law

Little’s practice focus es on real es tate litigation, including chal lenges to local ordinances and

decisions, landlord/ten

disputes,

gree

sfaa 2022sfaa2022calendar

October

MONDAY, OCTOBER 3

Board of Directors Mtg. 11:30 a.m.

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 4

You Bet Your Assets Webinar Zoom Webinar System

10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m.

Members $45 Non Members $65

FRIDAY, OCTOBER 7

2022 Legislative & Judicial Recap Webinar

Zoom Webinar System

10:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

$25 Legal Fund Donation

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 13

Annua SFAA Trophy Awards 5:00 p.m. to 8:00 p.m. St. Regis Hotel Terrace

**WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 19

Lunch & Learn Move Out Assessment Webinar Zoom Webinar System 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Members $45 Non Members $65

WEDNESDAY, OCTOBER 26

Lunch & Learn Security Deposit Returns Webinar Zoom Webinar System 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. Members $45 Non Members $65

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 27

Passing Property to the Next Generation Webinar Zoom Webinar System 10:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. Legal Fund Donation Suggested

SFAA MEMBER MEETINGS ARE HELD VIRTUALLY DUE TO COVID-19. FOR TOPICS AND SCHEDULES, VISIT SFAA.ORG.

THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20

Resident Screening: How to Compare Data and Use Reports Webinar Zoom Webinar System 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m.

FREE for SFAA Members

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 11

Rent Increases, Anti-Price Gouging, and State of Emergency Webinar Zoom Webinar System 11:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m. Legal Fund Donation Suggested

TUESDAY, OCTOBER 25

Lunch & Learn Addressing the Needs of Aging Tenants Webinar Zoom Webinar System 11:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. Members $45 Non Members $65

SFAA offices will be closed on October 10th in observance of Columbus Day and November 24th &25th in observance of Thanksgiving.

November

TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 1

Renting to Residents with Limited English Proficiency Webinar Zoom Webinar System

12:00 p.m. to. 1:00 p.m. Members $45 Non Members $65

MONDAY, NOVEMBER 7

Board of Directors Mtg. 11:30 a.m.

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. This fee is billed to the landlord each year on the property tax statement sent in November, but the law permits landlords to collect a portion of the Rent Board fee from those tenants in occupancy as of November 1 of each year. A landlord is allowed to collect 50% of the cost of the fee from the tenant. If you have not collected Rent Board fees in the past, you can collect back to 1999.

ALLOWABLE RENT BOARD FEE COLLECTABLE FROM TENANTS

2021-2022 $29.50

2020-2021 $25.00

2019-2020 $25.00

2018-2019 $22.50

2017-2018 $22.50

2016-2017 $20.00

2015-2016 $18.50

2014-2015 $18.00

2013-2014 $14.50

2012-2013 $14.50

2011-2012 $14.50

2010-2011 $14.50

2009-2010 $14.50

2008-2009 $14.50

2007-2008 $13.00

2006-2007 $11.00

2005-2006 $10.00

2004-2005 $11.00

2003-2004 $21.50

SAN FRANCISCO

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:

CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS

The capital improvement interest rates for 3/1/22 through 2/28/23 are listed below:

AMORTIZATION INT. RATE MULTIPLIER

7 YEARS 1.1% .01237

10 YEARS 1.4% .00894

15 YEARS 1.7% .00630

20 YEARS 1.9% .00501

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

03/01/22 - 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%

ALLOWABLE RENT INCREASES 2022 – 2023: 2.3%

Effective March 1, 2022, through February 28, 2023, the allowable annual rent increase is 2.3 %. 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

PERIOD AMOUNT

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%

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

LAWYERS EQUITY EXCHANGE

Brian Fogarty 415-701-1234 www.lex1031.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

Stephanie Chen 408-298-8888 Ext: 121 sc36@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

BORNSTEIN LAW

Daniel Bornstein, Esq. 415-409-7611 www.bornstein.law

DOWLING & MARQUEZ, LLP

Jak S. Marquez 415-977-0444 x232 www.dowlingmarquez.com

FRANK KIM ESQ., EVICTION ASSISTANCE Jo Biel 415-752-6070

KIMBALL, TIREY & ST. JOHN LLP Kelli Dodson 800-525-1690 kelli.dodson@kts-law.com www.kts-law.com

FRIED, WILLIAMS & GRICE CONNOR Clifford E. Fried 415-421-0100 www.friedwilliams.com

HERZIG & BERLESE

Barbara Herzig 415-861-8800 bherzig@hbcondolaw.com

ILENE M. HOCHSTEIN, ATTORNEY AT LAW

Ilene Hochstein (650) 877-8288 ilene@hochsteinlaw.net

KAUFMAN, DOLOWICH, VOLUCK Ashley Klein 415-926-7612 aklein@kdvlaw.com

LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL HEATH Michael Heath 415-931-4207 Mheath_law@sbcglobal.net

LAW OFFICES OF DENISE A. LEADBETTER Denise Leadbetter 415-713-8680 www.leadbetterlaw.com

LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT T. OKAMOTO Scott T. Okamoto 415-766-5871 www.scottokamotolaw.com

LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL PICCININI Daniel Piccinini 415-345-8610 danielpiccinini@att.net

LAW OFFICE OF JULIANA E. PISANI Juliana Pisani 415-800-7562 Juliana@jpisanilaw.com

LAW OFFICES OF LAWRENCE M. SCANCARELLI Lawrence M. Scancarelli 415-398-1644 www.sfrealestatelaw.com

THE LAW OFFICE OF ED SINGER Edward Singer 650-393-5862 www.edsinger.net

MASTROMONACO REAL PROPERTY LAW GROUP Leonard Mastromonaco 415-354-2702 len@mastrolawgroup.com

MCLAUGHLIN SANCHEZ, LLP Michael McLaughlin 415-655-9753 www.msllp.law

NIVEN & SMITH Leo M. LaRocca 415-981-5451 leo@nivensmith.com

REUBEN, JUNIUS & ROSE, LLP Kevin Rose 415-567-9000 www.reubenlaw.com

STEVEN ADAIR MACDONALD & ASSOCIATES, PC Steven Adair MacDonald (415) 956-6488 www.samlaw.net sam@samlaw.net

WASSERMAN Dave Wasserman 415-567-9600 Dave@wassermanoffices.com www.davewassermansf.com

WIEGEL LAW GROUP

Andrew J. Wiegel 415-552-8230 www.wiegellawgroup.com

ZACKS, FREEDMAN & PATTERSON, P.C. Andrew M. Zacks 415-956-8100 www.zfplaw.com

ZANGHI TORRES ARSHAWSKY, LLP

John P. Zanghi 415-977-0444 www.zatlaw.com

BEDBUG DETECTION

CROWN & SHIELD PEST

SOLUTIONS-PREMIER

Aurora Garcia-Vidaca 415-893-9551 www.crownandshieldpestsolutions.com

PREMIER CANINE DETECTION

Jordan Garcia 415-612-6645 www.premiercaninedectection.com

COMMERCIAL/RETAIL LEASING SERVICES

BLATTEIS REALTY CO. David Blatteis 415-981-2844 www.sfretail.net

CONSULTANTS: PERMITS & PLANNING

EDRINGTON AND ASSOCIATES Steven Edrington 510-749-4880 steve@edringtonandassociates.com

CONTRACTORS

DECK & BALCONY INSPECTIONS, INC. Dan Cronk 916-548-6943 dan@deckandbalconyinspections.com

CORPORATE RENTALS

AMSI Robb Fleischer 415-447-2020 www.amsires.com

CREDIT REPORTING

INTELLIRENT

Cassandra Joachim 415-849-4400 www.myintellirent.com

DRAIN SERVICES

PRIBUSS ENGINEERING, INC. Selina Pribuss 650-588-0447 selina.p@pribuss.com www.pribuss.com

EMERGENCY SERVICES

THE GREENSPAN CO./ ADJUSTERS INTERNATIONAL Rebecca Holloway 707-540-5584 rebecca@greenspan-ai.com

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTING

P.W. STEPHENS ENVIRONMENTAL

Sheri Buenz 510-651-9506 sherib@pwsei.com

FIRE ESCAPE INSPECTION & MAINTENANCE

ESCAPE ARTISTS

Jabal Engelhard 415-279-6113 www.sfescapeartists.com

GREAT ESCAPE SERVICES

Rich Henderson 415-566-1479 www.greatescapeservice.com

FIRE PROTECTION CONTRACTORS

AEC ALARMS

408-298-8888 Ext: 121 SFfire@aec-alarms.com

BATTALION ONE FIRE PROTECTION Tim Morse 510-653-8075 www.battaliononefire.com

COMMERCIAL FIRE PROTECTION, INC. Laine Sims 925-300-9534 www.fireprotected.com

EMERGENCY SYSTEMS, INC.

Eric Hagerman (415) 564-0400 esmfire@earthlink.net

PRIBUSS ENGINEERING, INC.

Selina Pribuss 650-588-0447 selina.p@pribuss.com www.pribuss.com

GARBAGE COLLECTION SERVICES

RECOLOGY GOLDEN GATE RECYCLING Minna Tao 415-575-2423 recologysf.com

RECOLOGY SUNSET SCAVENGER Dan Negron 415-330-2911 recologysf.com

VALET LIVING

Briana Sellers 813-613-5073 briana.sellers@valetliving.com www.valetliving.com

INSURANCE COMPANIES

ARM MULTI INSURANCE SERVICES Lisa Isom 866-913-6293 www.arm-i.com

BARBARY INSURANCE BROKERAGE Gerald Becerra 415-788-4700 www.barbaryinsurance.com

COMMERCIAL COVERAGE INSURANCE AGENCY Paul Tradelius 415-436-9800 www.comcov.com

GORDON ASSOCIATES INSURANCE SERVICES

Dave Gordon, CLU 650-654-5555x6972 David.gordon@gordoninsurance.com

INTERNET SERVICES PROVIDERS

COMCAST/XFINITY Michael Juliano 925-495-9922 www.xfinity.com

LENDING / FINANCIAL SERVICES

FIRST FOUNDATION BANK Michelle Li 415-794-2176 www.ff-inc.com

LENDING / FULL SERVICE BANKS

LUTHER BURBANK SAVINGS Gabriel Basso 510-601-2400 www.lutherburbanksavings.com

LENDING / INSTITUTIONS

CHASE COMMERCIAL TERM LENDING Sharon Groenendyk 415-315-8464 www.chase.com/commercialbanking

LOCKSMITHS

CROWN LOCK & HARDWARE Joe Schoepp 415-221-9086

WARMAN SECURITY Peter Badertscher 415-775-8513 www.warmansecurity.com

MAINTENANCE REPAIR SERVICE

MAVEN MAINTENANCE, INC. Craig Lipton 415-829-2207 www.mavenmaintenance.com

OGREENA

Christopher Sheilds 510-899-0238 jenniferbenassi@ogreena.com

WEST COAST PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Joseph Keng 415-885-6970 ext. 101 www.wcpm.com

MEDIATION

THE BAR ASSOCIATION OF SAN FRANCISCO CONFLICT INTERVENTION SERVICE Scott Goering 415-782-8940 sgoering@sfbar.org

PACKAGE SERVICE

FETCH

Dan Beary 978-503-9540 dbeary@fetchpackage.com

PAINTING CONTRACTORS

KRUITPAINTING, INC.

Pieter Kruit 415-254-7818 www.kruitpainting.com

PAC WEST PAINTING INC. Brian Beaulieu 415-457-0724 www.pacwestpaintinginc.com

PETERS PAINTING SERVICES

Peter Pantazelos 415-647-4722 www.peterspainting.com

TARA PRO PAINTING INC. Brian Layden 415-822-2011 www.tarapropainting.com

PAINTING SUPPLIES

DUNN-EDWARDS PAINTS

Daniela Franco 415-656-9951 daniela.franco@dunnedwards.com

PEST CONTROL

ATCO PEST & TERMITE CONTROL & HOME RESTORATION

Richard Estrada 415-898-2282 www.atcopestcontrol.com

CROWN & SHIELD PEST SOLUTIONS-PREMIER

Aurora Garcia-Vidaca 415-893-9551 www.crownandshieldpestsolutions.com

PLUMBING & HEATING

C.R. REICHEL ENGINEERING CO. INC. Tim Lordier 415-431-7100 www.crreichel.com

PRIBUSS ENGINEERING, INC.

Selina Pribuss 650-588-0447 selina.p@pribuss.com www.pribuss.com

R & L PLUMBING

Larry Bustillos 415- 651-4977 larry@rl.plumbing www.rlplumbingsanfrancisco.com

URGENT ROOTER AND PLUMBING INC.

Albert Lee 415-387-8163 urgentrtr@sbcglobal.net

PROJECT MANAGEMENT

MELGAR REAL ESTATE SERVICES

Suzy Melgar 650-745-8186 info@mresbayareahomes.com

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

ADVENT PROPERTIES, INC.

Benjamin Scott, CCRM 510-289-1184 www.adventpropertiesinc.com

ALEXANDERSON PROPERTIES

Eric Alexanderson 415-285-3737 www.alexandersonproperties.com

AMORE REAL ESTATE, INC

Jerry Hsieh 415-567-4800 www.amoresf.com

AYS MANAGEMENT

Kevin Newsome 510-708-0165 ayspropertymanager@gmail.com

BEAM PROPERTIES, INC.

Darius Chan 415-254-8679 darius@sfbeam.com

BORN PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

Jason Born 650-271-7048 x 111 Jason@bornpm.com

BROOKFIELD PROPERTY GROUPPRESIDIO LANDMARK

Jon King 855-327-5376 jon.king@brookfieldproperties.com

CITYWIDE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

Carol Cosgrove 415-552-7300 www.citywidesf.com

CREATIVE WEALTH CAPTIAL

Michael Gallin 415-779-6241 mike@creativewealthcapital.com

DEWOLF REALTY CO. INC.

William A. Talmage 415-221-2032 www.dewolfsf.com

EBALDC

Felicia Scruggs 510-287-5353 FScruggs@ebaldc.org

EMBC

Nancy Wong (707) 584-5123 www.ebmc.com nancywong@ebmc.com

EQUITY ONE

Brenda M. Obra 415-441-1200 www.equity1sf.com

GAETANI REAL ESTATE

Paul Gaetani 415-668-1202 www.gaetanirealestate.com

GEORGE GOODWIN REALTY, INC.

Chris Galassi 415-681-1265 www.goodwin-realty.com

GREENTREE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Scott Moore 415-828-8757 www.greentreepmco.com

GM GREEN REAL ESTATE INC. George Green 415-608-6485 ggreen@gmgreen.com www.gmgreen.com

GORDON CLIFFORD PROPERTIES, INC.

Patrick Clifford 415-613-7694 patrick@gcpropertiessf.com

HOGAN & VEST INC.

Simon Wong 415-421-7116 hoganvest.com

HRH REAL ESTATE SERVICES CORPORATION

Renee A. Engelen (415) 810-6020 www.hrhrealestate.com

INCOME PROPERTY SPECIALISTS

Clayton Llewellyn 408-446-0848 www.ipsmanagement.cc

JACKSON GROUP

PROPERTY MANGEMENT, INC.

Raymond Scarabosio 415-608-8300 ray@jacksongroup.net

JAMES D. MULLIN REAL ESTATE BROKER

James D. Mullin 415-470-0450 jamesdmullinre@gmail.com

JD MANAGEMENT GROUP, INC.

Jonathan Davis 510-387-7792 jonathan.davis@jdmginc.com

LINGSCH REALTY

Natalie M. Dress 415-648-1516 www.lingschrealty.com

MERIDIAN MANAGEMENT GROUP

Randall Chapman 415-434-9700 www.mmgprop.com

MICSPACES, INC.

Naeem Farhokhnia 818-404-8996 naeem@mlcspaces.com

MYND MANAGEMENT, INC.

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 10.

ADVENT PROPERTIES, INC.

Benjamin Scott, CCRM 510-289-1184 www.adventpropertiesinc.com

AMSI

Robb Fleischer 415-447-2020 www.amsires.com

CECCHINI REALTY CO.

Dante Cecchini, CCRM 415-550-8855 www.cecchinirealty.com

CITYWIDE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Carol Cosgrove 415-552-7300 www.citywidesf.com

DEWOLF

William Talmage 415-221-2032 www.dewolfsf.com

GAETANI REAL ESTATE

Paul Gaetani 415-668-1202 www.gaetanirealestate.com

GREENTREE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT 415-828-8757 www.greentreepmco.com

HRH REAL ESTATE SERVICES CORPORATION

Renee A. Engelen (415) 810-6020 www.hrhrealestate.com

J. WAVRO PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

James Wavro 415-509-3456

LINGSCH REALTY

Natalie M. Drees 415-648-1516 www.lingschrealty.com

PAUL LANGLEY COMPANY

Misha Langley 415-431-9104 x 301 misha@plco.net

PONTAR REAL ESTATE

Merri Pontar 415-421-2877 www.pontarrealestate.com

PROGRESSIVE PROPERTY GROUP Dace Dislere & Joe Gillach 415-515-4329

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS Michelle L. Horneff-Cohen 415-661-3860 www.propertymanagementsystems.net

REAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY

J.J. Panzer 415-821-3167 www.RMCsf.com

S&L REALTY Robert Link 415-386-3111 www.slrealty-sf.com

STRUCTURE PROPERTIES

Corey Eckert 415-794-0064 www.structureproperties.com

SUTRO PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC. Salman Shariat 415-341-8774 www.sutroproperties.com

VERTEX PROPERTY GROUP Craig Berendt 415-608-3050 vertexsf.com

WEST & PRASZKER REALTORS

Michael Klestoff 415-661-5300 www.wprealtors.com

WEST COAST PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Eric Andresen 415-885-6970 www.wcpm.com

VESTA ASSET MANAGEMENT

property management members

Paul Griffiths 415-360-9292 x 1 paul@vesta-assetmanagement.com

Stacy Winship 510-306-4440 www.mynd.co

NEW GENERATION INVESTMENTS

Jonathan Ng 415-735-8233 jtng.ngi@gmail.com

OPEN WORLD PROPERTIES

Jonathan Daryl Fleming 510-250-0946 jonathan@openworldproperties.com www.Openworldproperties.Com

PAUL LANGLEY COMPANY

Misha Langley 415-431-9104 x 301 misha@plco.net

PILLAR CAPITAL REAL ESTATE

Jonathan Ng (415) 885-9584 jonathan@thepillarcapital.com

PONTAR REAL ESTATE

Merri Pontar 415-421-2877 www.pontarrealestate.com

PRIME METROPOLIS PROPERTIES, INC. Tom Chan 415-731-0303 tomchan@pmp1988.com

PROEQUITYAM

Frank Bumbalo 415-531-2669 frank@proequityam.com

PROGRESSIVE PROPERTY GROUP

Dace Dislere 415-794-9727 www.progressivesf.com

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Michelle L. Horneff-Cohen, Broker, CCRM, MPM®, RMP® 415-661-3860 www.propertymanagementsystems.net

RAMSEY PROPERTIES

Brian E. Ramsey 415-474-5175 Brian@RamseyPropertiesSF.com

REAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY

J.J. Panzer 415-821-3167 www.RMCsf.com

ROCKAWAY RESIDENTIAL MANAGEMENT

Kristine Abbey 650-290-3084 www.rockawayresidential.com

ROCKWELL PROPERTIES

Mark Kaplan 415-398-2400 propertymanagement@rockwellproperties.com

RNB PROPERTY MANAGEMENT -

GOLDEN GATE

Kaveh Gorgani 415-413-3827 kaveh@rnbemail.com www.rnbgoldengate.com

SAN FRANCISCO RENTAL CONCIERGE

Danielle Mahoney 415-532-0041 danielle@sfrentalconcierge.com www.sfrentalconcierge.com

SHARVEST PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, LLC

Timothy D. Gilmartin 650-347-2020 tim@thegilmartins.com

SIGNATURE REALTY

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

Paul Montalvo 650-364-3167 paul@paulmontalvo.com

SIERRA PROPERTY PROFESSIONALS

Sonali Herrera sierrappinc@gmail.com

SKYLINE PMG, INC.

Nicholas Bowers 415-968-9903 Nicholas@skylinepmg.com

STRUCTURE PROPERTIES

Corey Eckert 415-794-0064 www.structureproperties.com

SUTRO PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC. Salman Shariat 415-341-8774 www.SutroProperties.com

THRIVE PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, INC. Giovani Franco 650-296-3880 www.thrivecommunities.com

W. PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

Gary Petrison 707-545-6187 gary@wpropertymanagement.com

WEST COAST PROPERTY MANAGEMENT Eric Andresen 415-885-6970 www.wcpm.com

WEST & PRASZKER REALTORS

Michael Klestoff 415-699-3266 www.wprealtors.com

WOOD PARTNERS

Melissa Rankin 628-251-1101 melissa.rankin@woodpartners.com

VERTEX PROPERTIESS

Craig Berendt 415-608-3050 craig.berendt@gmail.com

YMPG

Yelena Gelzer 415-260-6325 yglezer@ympg-management.com

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT

SOFTWARE

APPFOLIO

Mindy Sorenson 805-364-6098 mindy.sorenson@appfolio.com

HEMLANE, INC.

Dana Dunford 385-355-4361 dana@hemlane.com

PROPERTY ATLAS

Serina Calhoun 415-922-0200 serina@mypropertyatlas.com

YARDI

Kelly Krier 805-699-2040 kelly.krier@yardi.com

REAL ESTATE APPRAISALS

MARK WATTS COMMERCIAL APPRAISAL Mark Watts 415-990-0025 www.markwattscommercialappraisal.com

REAL ESTATE BROKERS & AGENTS

ALAIN PINEL INVESTMENT GROUP

Mirella Webb 415-814-6699 mwebb@apr.com

BERKSHIRE HATHAWAY

FRANCISCAN PROPERTIES

Edward Milestone 415-994-5969 MilestoneRealEstateSF@gmail.com

CHUCK & ASSOCIATES

Kevin Chuck 415-595-5832 chuckassoc@gmail.com

COLDWELL BANKER COMMERCIAL NRT Steven Caravelli 415-229-1367 steven.caravelli@cbnorcal.com

COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL- JAMES DEVINCENTI

James Devincenti 415-288-7848 www.THEDLTEAM.com

COLLIERS INTERNATIONAL Payam Nejad 415-288-7872 www.colliers.com/payam.nejad

COMPASS COMMERCIAL BROKERAGE

John Antonini 415-794-9510 john@antoninisf.com

COMPASS COMMERCIAL BROKERAGE Chris J. Connor chris.oconnor@compass.com

COMPASS COMMERCIAL BROKERAGE Adam Filly 415-516-9843 adam@adamfilly.com

COMPASS COMMERCIAL BROKERAGE John Kirkpatrick (425) 412-0559 john.kirkpatrick@compass.com www.johnkirkpatrick.com

COMPASS COMMERCIAL BROKERAGE Jay Greenberg (415) 378-6755 jay@jayhgreenberg.com

FERRIGNO REAL ESTATE Chris Ferrigno 415-641-0661 www.ferrignorealestate.com

HRH REAL ESTATE SERVICES CORPORATION Renee A. Engelen (415) 810-6020 www.hrhrealestate.com

ICON REAL ESTATE INC. Jason Quashnofsky (415) 370-7077 jason@iconsf.com

JHG415, INC. Jay Greenberg 415-378-6755 jay@jayhgreenberg.com

KENNEY & EVEREST REAL ESTATE, INC. Everest Mwamba 415-902-3411 maureen@kenneyrealestate.com

KILBY STENKAMP-VANGUARD PROPERTIES Kilby Stenkamp 415-370-7582

LESLIE BURNLEY

Leslie Burnley 415-717-8709 leslie.j.burnley@gmail.com leslieburnley.com

MARCUS & MILLICHAP

Sanford Skeie 415-625-2153 www.marcusmillichap.com

MAVEN PROPERTIES

Matthew Sheridan matt@mavenproperties.com

MORGAN REAL ESTATE ADVISORS, INC. Laurence Morgan 415-300-6503 laurence@morganrealestateadvisor.com www.morganrealestateadvisor.com

S&L REALTY

Robert Link 415-386-3111 www.slrealty-sf.com

WEST & PRASZKER REALTORS

Michael Klestoff 415-312-2245 klestoffmre@aol.com

VANGUARD COMMERCIAL

Allison Chapleau 415-516-0648 allison@allisonchapleau.com www.allisonchapleau.com

ZEPHYR REAL ESTATE

Dawn Cusulos 415-678-8854 dawncusulos@zephyrre.com

REAL ESTATE INVESTMENTS

CITY REAL ESTATE

Arthur Tom 415-987-6788 art@cityrealestatesf.com cityrealestatesf.com

COMPASS COMMERCIAL BROKERAGE Trigg Splenda 415-593-8616

KENNEY & EVEREST REAL ESTATE, INC. Everest Mwamba 415-902-3411 maureen@kenneyrealestate.com

MARCUS MILLICHAP

Clinton C. Textor III 415-425-9123 www.marcusmillichap.com

REFINISHING / RESURFACING SERVICE

MIRACLE METHOD OF SAN FRANCISCO Claire Gray 415-673-4211 www.miraclemethod.com

RENT BOARD PETITIONS

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS

Michelle L. Horneff-Cohen 415-661-3860 www.propertymanagementsystems.net

REAL MANAGEMENT COMPANY Melinda Greene 415-230-8895 www.RMCsf.com

RENT BOARD PASSTHROUGHS Kim Boyd Bermingham 415-333-8005 www.rentboardpass.com

RENTAL LISTING SERVICES

COSTAR

Aj Herlitz (844) 459-1495 www.costargroup.com aherlitz@costar.com

HRH REAL ESTATE SERVICES CORPORATION Renee A. Engelen (415) 810-6020 www.hrhrealestate.com

REALPAGE

Stacey Blackwell 972-820-3015 stacey.blackwell@realpage.com www.realpage.com

ZUMPER, INC. Connor Hodges 949-702-1508 connor@zumper.com www.zumper.com

sfaa

membership application

RESIDENTIAL LEASING

GORDON CLIFFORD PROPERTIES, INC.

PatrickClifford 415-613-7694 patrick@gcpropertiessf.com

HAMILTON FAMILY CENTER Mayo Lunt 510-763-8540 x230 www.hamiltonfamiles.org

HRH REAL ESTATE SERVICES CORPORATION

Renee A. Engelen (415) 810-6020 www.hrhrealestate.com

J. WAVRO ASSOCIATES

James Wavro 415-509-3456 www.jwavro.com

KENNEY AND EVEREST REAL ESTATE, INC. Maureen Kenney 415-929-0717 maureen@kenneyrealestate.com

LINGSCH REALTY

Natalie M. Drees 415-648-1516 www.lingschrealty.com

RELISTO

Eric Baird 415-236-6116, x101 www.relisto.com eric@relisto.com

RENTALS IN S.F. Jackie Tom 415-409-3263 www.rentalsinsf.com

RENTSFNOW Claussen 415-762-0213 kclaussen@veritasinv.com

STRUCTURE PROPERTIES

Corey Eckert 415-794-0064 www.structureproperties.com

VERTEX PROPERTIES

Craig Berendt 415-608-3050 www.berendtproperties.com

ROOFING

AGUILERA CONSTRUCTION & ROOFING

Javier Aguilera (707) 495-3932 javier@aguileraco.com

SECURITY

ADT SECURITY MULTIFAMILY Jeanette Mendez (817) 776-0301 jjmendez@adt.com

TRKA AMERICAS

Isabella Restrepo 407-735-1728 irestrepo@trakausa.com

SEISMIC RETROFIT & STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING

BAI CONSTRUCTION Behnam Afshar 510-595-1994, x101 www.baiconstruction.com

W. CHARLES PERRY Charles Perry 650-638-9546 www.wcharlesperry.com

WEST COAST PREMIER CONSTRUCTION, INC. Homy Sikaroudi, PhD, PE 510-271-0950 www.wcpc-inc.com

STAFFING

BG MULTI-FAMILY Shannon Valentino 714-654-9498 svalentino@bgmultifamily.com

SUBMETERS

LIVABLE

Daniel Sharabi 415-937-7283 www.livable.com

TENANT PLACEMENT & LISTING

CAZERIA, INC

Julia D’Antonio 415-754-5373 julia@cazeira.com

STRUCTURE PROPERTIES

Corey Eckert 415-794-0064 www.structureproperties.com

WATER CONSERVATION SERVICE

SF PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSION

Chandra Johnson 415-554-0704 www.conserve.sfwater.org

WATER DAMAGE SERVICE

FIRE AND WATER DAMAGE RECOVERY

Maria Neumann 800-886-1801 www.waterdamagerecovery.net

WATERPROOFING

KELLEY PAINTING AND WATERPROOFING

Mitchell Kelley 415-847-7883 www.kelleypaintingandwaterproofing.com

Please note that acceptance of associate membership does not necessarily con stitute any endorsement or recommendation, express or implied, of the associate member or any goods or services offered.

ad index NEED A PROFESSIONAL CONTRACTOR OR VENDOR?

ALARM COMPANIES

AEC Alarms 29

ARCHITECTURE & DESIGN SERVICES Openscope Studio 41

ATTORNEYS

Dowling & Marquez, LLP 60

Fried, Williams & Grice Conner LLP 30 Kaufman, Dolowich & Voluck 38 Koster & Leadbetter, LLP 41 Zacks, Freedman & Patterson, PC 49

FIRE ESCAPE CONTRACTORS

Great Escape Fire Escape 64

LOCKSMITHS

Crown Lock & Safe 40 Warman Security 58

PAINTING CONTRACTORS

Colores Painting 40 Pac West Painting 58 Peter’s Painting Services 61 Tara Pro Painting 64

PETITION SERVICES

Rent Board Passthroughs 18 PROCESS SERVERS / PRIVATE INVESTIGATORS Rhino Process Serving, LLC 61

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT & MAINTENANCE & RESIDENTIAL LEASING Gaetani Real Estate, Inc. 68 Maven Maintenance 37 MLC Spaces 21

Real Management Company 49

Rentals in SF 44

Vertex Properties 6 West Coast Property Management 44

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE

Yardi Breeze 19

REAL ESTATE BROKERS

Amore Real Estate 60

Coldwell Banker Commercial / McGue 13

Coldwell / Caravelli 15

Colliers / Devincenti 2

Compass / Antonini 67

Compass / Bonn & Webb 17

Compass / Filly 11

Compass / Greenberg & Splenda 3 Compass 31

Corcoran Jones Team 43

HRH Real Estate 45

Kay Properties 25

Marcus & Millichap 34-35

Maven Multifamily 27

Vanguard Commercial / Chapleau 9 Vanguard Properties / Stack 39

UTILITIES BILLING SERVICES Livable 30

Acceptance of an advertisement by this magazine does not necessarily constitute any endorsement or recommendation by SFAA, express or implied, of the advertiser or any goods or services offered.

Be On Your A Game.

Sign up for SFAA classes at www.sfaa.org or by calling 415-255-2288.

San Francisco Apartment Association,

Street, San Francisco,

Pam McElroy, 265 Ivy Street, San Francisco CA, 94102

Pam McElroy, 265 Ivy Street, San Francisco

Francisco

Check Out What’s New at SFAA!

The San Francisco Apartment Association is your rental housing resource. SFAA has been working round-the-clock educating, advocating for, and supporting the rental housing community so that its members operate ethically and fairly.

1.

SFAA’s New and Improved Website Is Live!

Our new website makes it easier than ever to access the information, market surveys, education, and forms you need to manage your rental properties. The streamlined website allows SFAA members to quickly sign up for classes, access preferred vendors, and get legislative updates. Go to sfaa.org today!

2.

SF Apartment Magazine is Now Available Digitally!

The official publication of SFAA, SF Apartment Magazine reaches approximately 6,000 readers in print each month. Now that the publication is accessible digitally, members can access the invaluable content from anywhere—and advertisers have an even broader reach. Go to sfaa.org/magazine today!

Interested in advertising?

Your ad will appear in the feature-length magazine, alongside articles written by San Francisco’s top landlord attorneys, industry professionals, and small rental property owners. With a readership of rental property owners and industry professionals, your ad will reach the right targeted audience to grow your business.

FOR ALL

REAL ESTATE NEEDS

long as the victims do not invite the abuser back to the property.

If the perpetrator of the abuse is a resident, then the court can order a partial eviction, allowing the victim to remain in the unit, while the unlawful detainer action can pro ceed against the abuser.

Notwithstanding these protections, the bill clarifies that the defendants raising the de fense can still be found guilty of unlawful detainer on other grounds.

A landlord may proceed to terminate or not renew a tenancy due to acts involving abuse or violence—even after receiving proper documentation from the resident— allowing the landlord to proceed if: a) The perpetrator is a resident in the same dwell ing unit as the resident or other victim; or b) The perpetrator’s words or actions have threatened the physical safety of other residents, guests, invitees, or licensees and the resident continues to voluntarily permit or consent to the perpetrator’s presence on the premises after a three-day notice requiring the resident not to do so.

The California Apartment Association (CAA) has an Industry Insight that provides a comprehensive overview of all exist ing protections for victims of domestic violence; that paper can be found on CAA’s website: caanet.org

While the bill was substantially amended at CAA’s request, CAA continued to oppose the bill, arguing that SB 1017 gives perpe trators of domestic violence added protec tions, which can result in harm or death to the victim, family members, workers at the property, the property owner, and the neighboring residents.

For updates about whether the governor signs this bill and other bills, go to CAA’s website at www.caanet.org

The above content was written by Embert Madison, Vice President, State Public Af fairs, California Apartment Association.

SFAA Updates

SFAA has updated its website! The im proved, easy-to-navigate site is up and run ning. Check it out at sfaa.org

SFAA Office Reopening Status: As the SFAA pivots to a hybrid in-office work model, members are welcome to make an appointment to visit the office with questions. However, please refrain from coming in person if you have tested posi tive for, were exposed to, or have symp toms of COVID-19.

The best way to have your questions answered is through email: Member Questions@sfaa.org. And just a friendly reminder, timely payment of membership dues is the best way to help the association help you.

SFAA Classes: Classes are available online. We understand keeping up with education is crucial and want to assist our members in staying current. See the calendar on page 50 for a complete list of classes.

SFAA Needs

BEGINNING OF TENANCY FORMS

Application to Rent

MEMBER PRICE

Member

NON-MEMBER PRICE QUANITY COST

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

SFAA Residental Rental Agreement- 2022 $25 each $125 each

SFAA Residental Rental Agreement- 10 Pack

CAA Lease Agreement

CAA Rental Agreement- Month to Month

Guarantee of Rental Agreement

Holding Deposit

Lead Pamphlet - Protect your Family- 25 pack

Addendum to Rental Agreement

Parking Agreement

Pet Agreement

Storage Agreement

Assistive Animal Request & Documentation Packet

Move In/Move Out

Fire Safety Disclosure - SF

$225 pack N/A

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$25 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

24 Hour Notice to Enter $15 per 25 $40 per 25

AB 1482 - Notice of Exemption

AB 1482 - Properties Subject to

DURING TENANCY FORMS

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

15 Day notice - Pay Rent or Quit $15 per 25 $40 per 25

15 Day Notice - Perform Covenants

$15 per 25 $40 per 25

30 Day Notice - Change of Monthly Rent - SF $15 per 25 $40 per 25

30 Day Change of Monthly Rent under AB-1482 $15 per 25 $40 per 25

90 Day Notice - Change of Monthly Rent- SF $15 per 25 $40 per 25

25

END OF TENANCY FORMS

Acknowledgement

per

per 25

25 $40 per 25

per 25

sfaa’s 2022 Legislative & Judicial Recap

Please join our class to breakdown the major changes of 2022 and beyond. Included will be a discussion about the various declared states of emergency and how those impact rent increases, issuance of rent demands with post-July 1 defenses, rent relief updates, in surance coverage issues, and the new 10-day warning requirements.

Moderator: Dave Wasserman, Wasserman & Wasserman

Panelists: Justin A. Goodman, Zacks, Freedman & Patterson, PC; Steve Williams, Fried, Williams & Grice Conner LLP, Ashley Klein, Kaufman, Dolowich & Voluck, LLP; Jak Marquez, Dowling & Marquez, LLP

DATE & TIME:

Friday, October 7, 2022 10:00am – 12:00pm

COST Legal Fund Donation Suggested

REGISTRATION:

Contact Maria Shea at 415.255.2288 x110 or maria@sfaa.org

WEBINAR

Once you complete registration you will be sent a separate link to register for the Zoom system.

sfaa’s Rent Increases Anti-Gouging Rule & States of Emergency

California’s Penal Code Section 396 prohibits raising the price of consumer goods and services by more than 10% when a state of emergency has been declared. How does this effect your rent in creases or rental listings, and for how long?

Presenter: Ashley Klein, Kaufman, Dolowich & Voluck, LLP

DATE & TIME:

Tuesday, October 11, 2022

11:00am – 12:00pm

COST Legal Fund Donation Suggested

REGISTRATION:

Contact Maria Shea at 415.255.2288 x110 or maria@sfaa.org

WEBINAR

Once you complete registration you will be sent a separate link to register for the Zoom system.

Who’s

District 2: Supervisor Catherine Stefani

In District 2, the Marina and Cow Hol low, current Supervisor Catherine Stefani will run unopposed and should cruise to victory. Stefani represents one of the few “adults in the room” on the Board of Supervisors, and she has focused much of her recent legislative efforts around sup port for gun control, victims of domestic violence, and fiscal responsibility. Supervi sor Stefani is also one of the few current elected officials who has come out and taken a No position on Prop O, the Ad ditional City College Parcel Tax (see page 38). Supervisor Stefani deserves your support if you reside in District 2.

District 8:

Supervisor Rafael Mandelman

In District 8, SFAA-endorsed candidate Rafael Mandelman is running essentially unopposed. Mandelman has found himself in an interesting position on the Board of Supervisors, first as a part of the progres sive faction of the Board, but he has since moderated and become a voice of reason as the BOS has been driven toward Demo cratic Socialist ideals in recent years behind the efforts of Supervisors Preston and Chan. Mandelman has an open-door policy and has worked with SFAA to improve pro cedures around helping aging tenants who are no longer able to help themselves. He deserves your vote this November.

District 10: No Endorsement

In District 10, incumbent Shamann Walton is likely to be elected over challenger Brian Sam Adam. Walton doesn’t have much of a legislative track record at the Board, but he has stirred up controversy recently with his alleged harassment of a cadet sheriff at City Hall and the recent revelation that he bought a house outside of the City in Vallejo. While it appears the home pur chase was cleared by the City Attorney, there are real questions about mortgage fraud around his home loan and alleged use of the homeowners’ exemption. Walton doesn’t deserve your vote, and SFAA has No Endorsement for the District 10 race.

AWARDS NOMINATIONS

2022 Fall CCRM Webinar Series Schedule & Registration PRICE

Series Full CCRM Series (Value Savings)

See schedule below

PMR100 Introduction to Ethical Property Management 9/7/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR101 Renting the Property 9/14/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR102 Beginning and Maintaining the Tenancy 9/21/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR103 Renewal of Tenancy and Ending the Tenancy 9/28/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR104 Maintenance Management: Maintaining the Property 10/5/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR105 Liability & Risk Management 10/12/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR106 Budget Development and Implementation 10/19/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR107 Fair Housing: It’s the Law 10/26/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

PMR108 Professional Skills for Supervisors 11/2/2022 2PM 5PM $85.00 $100.00

EXAM CCRM Final Exam 11/9/2022 2PM 5PM FREE FREE

To Register

Total Due:Class Location Zoom Webinar System

(includes 9th Edition Managing Rental Housing textbook, CCRM binder and Welcome Packet; does not include the $75 CCRM application fee)

requesting

CCRM Certification

Policy:

Non Member

of Attendees

TO

We know the properties we manage mean more to owners like you than meets the eye. That’s why, for over 70 years and across three generations of our own family, we’ve taken the long view -- building great working relationships as we build value. Because when it comes to taking care

your investment, we definitely see eye-to-eye.