Skip to Body

Blog Posts By Date: June 2019

06/26/2019

Updated Prop 65 Warning Regulation

Updated Prop 65 Warning Regulation

Information Courtesy of the California Apartment Association   more...

06/14/2019

Owner Move-In Evictions in San Francisco

Owner Move-In Evictions in San Francisco

The San Francisco Rent Ordinance allows property owners to evict tenants so that the owner can move into the unit and use it as their primary residence. This type of eviction is known as an Owner Move-In eviction or “OMI.” There are a number of technical requirements and restrictions that apply to OMI evictions:
The landlord must have a minimum 25 percent ownership in the property and must have the honest intent to reside in the unit as his or her principal place of residence for at least three years. In addition, the landlord must move into the unit within 90 days of the date the tenant vacates.The landlord may not evict the tenant under the OMI provisions if there is a comparable vacant unit available. Similarly, if the owner has a vacant, non-comparable unit available, he must offer that unit to the tenant. The landlord may not evict protected tenants (including seniors, disabled, catastrophically ill, or with children in school) unless the dwelling is the only dwelling owned by the landlord in the building, or if the landlord is also senior or disabled. The landlord must use a 60-day notice to terminate the tenancy, unless the tenant has resided in the unit for less than one year, in which case, a 30-day notice is sufficient. The notice must contain numerous disclosures and explanations of tenant's rights under the Rent Ordinance. The landlord must also pay each tenant monetary relocation assistance in the amount specified by the Ordinance (currently over $6,000 each). Additional payments must be made if the tenants are protected or if there are children in the home. In an effort to crack down on perceived abuses of OMI evictions, the San Francisco Board of Supervisors recently added a number of additional restrictions and requirements that apply to OMI evictions.Those new restrictions include:   more...

06/12/2019

URGENT: Protect the Rights of Small Landlords!

URGENT: Protect the Rights of Small Landlords!

From Steven Edrington, CCIM, CPM2019 Women’s Auxiliary PresidentEdrington and Associates Please donate to our Legal Action Fund in support of the Owens v. City of Oakland case that is now going to the state court of appeals. The central issue on appeal is whether or not a local rent board can circumvent the single-family home exemption under the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act by creating an exception. This is a major case for our industry and community. If the ruling stands, single-family homes where an owner rents out rooms under separate leases may become subject to rent control laws.The City of Oakland, through it's Rent Adjustment Program (RAP), has decided to penalize homeowners as a means to solve the housing crisis by declaring that persons occupying rooms of a single-family home on separate lease agreements shall now be subject to rent control.This is a direct attempt by a local government to exert control over homeowners in the name of tenants' rights. It will ultimately have the unintended consequence of making fewer such units available for rent, thus worsening the housing crisis.Traditionally, an owner-occupant of a single-family home choosing to have a roommate or roommates has been an acceptable form of housing controlled by the homeowner. The owner should be able to establish control of the living space in a shared home to maintain a peaceful environment, unique to each homeowner and those renters within a private home.We must preserve small homeowners' ability to buy and maintain their homes and property and not treat them the same as large corporate landlords of apartment buildings.We must maintain a process for people to buy a home and at the same time provide a safe and secure place for others to live — it's a win win.Mr. Owens is not a large property owner. He owns his single-family home and is able to afford to live in his house only by renting out rooms to roommates. He has expended funds fighting Oakland's writ of mandate. He lacks the resources to continue his battle in the state court of appeals for what is really a larger issue for the greater landlord community.
DONATE NOW!   more...