No on Prop H

October, 2006 -- The Supervisors are at it again. On the very last day to place a proposition on the ballot, the Supervisors snuck an anti-homeownership proposition on the November ballot. This proposition – called Proposition H – would significantly increase payments for no-fault tenant removal (i.e. new construction on a building).

The current law requires payments of $1,000 per tenant who has lived in the unit for at least one year for an owner or relative move in displacement. For a capital improvement displacement, the payment is $1,000 per unit. Prop H would increase the payment to $4,500 per tenant (up to a maximum of $13,500) with an additional payment of $3,000 to any tenant over the age of 60, disabled or with a child under the age of 18.

The SF TIC Coalition opposes this proposition simply because it will hurt tenants who want to be first-time homeowners. The increased “relocation payment” would make it much more difficult for first time homeowners to purchase their first home. For more information, go to www.TruthonPropH.com

It's Time to Dump Daly

September, 2006 -- Election season is upon us. This year, we have the opportunity to "right" one of the
major "wrongs" plaguing San Francisco. Supervisor Chris Daly -- one of the staunchest anti-homeownership advocates -- is up for re-election. Over the past several years, Supervisor Daly has introduced a barrage of anti-homeownership bills making it harder for first-time homeowners to own property in San Francisco. The San Francisco TIC Coalition is pleased to endorse Rob Black for Supervisor to replace Chris Daly in District 6. Rob supports homeownership rights and shares our vision for creating an a more homeownership-friendly San Francisco.

What can you do to Dump Daly?

• Support Rob Black at www.RobBlack2006.com
• Get the Facts: Read a copy of the "Case Against Chris Daly" here.
• Join the Dump Daly movement here.
• Vote on November 7th!!

Condo Conversion Odds Get Worse

September 7, 2006 -- This past summer, the Department of Public Works (DPW) released its study on the past condo-conversion lottery. The study includes specific details on winners and losers of the past condo-lottery. The report cited that Supervisor Dufty's condo-fairness bill has provided immediate relief to those waiting the longest in the condo-lottery. Sadly, with more people purchasing TICs in San Francisco, the DPW estimates that incoming groups will wait even longer to clear the condo-lottery hurdle. For example, applicants who enter the lottery four years from now, in 2010, could face a waiting period of up to 24 years.

Dufty's condo-conversion fairness bill is set to expire at the end of this year. Dufty has not stated if he plans to renew his bill. Send an email to Supervisor Dufty and urge him to renew this important piece of legislation before the November election. Finally, this study underscores the need to increase the number of TICs that are allowed to condo-convert every year.

To learn more, click here.

SF TIC Coalition Election 2006 Endorsements

September, 2006 -- In November, five Supervisors face re-election. As we've seen over the past 2 years, four votes are required to sustain a Mayoral veto whenever homeownership opponents propose flawed legislation. Six votes are required to pass any pro-homeownership legislation. This is a critical year to start to move the pro-homeownership pendulum on the Board of Supervisors in our direction. The SF TIC Coalition supports the following candidates:

District 2: Michela Alioto-Pier

District 4: Ron Dudum and Doug Chan (joint endorsement)

District 6: Rob Black

District 8: No endorsement. Supervisor Dufty is a friend of the Coalition and has passed the first positive piece of TIC/homeownership legislation in many years. While we do not endorse an extreme anti-homeownership candidate such as Alix Rosenthal, Bevan's inconsistent track record -- such as his support for Supervisor Aaron Peskin's recent condo-conversion restrictions -- has left us troubled.

District 10: No endorsement

Proposition B Passes... barely

June, 2006 -- Proposition B, the eviction disclosure measure placed on the June ballot by Supervisors Ammiano, Daly, Maxwell, Mirkarimi and Peskin was narrowly approved by San Francisco voters. Homeownership opponents -- while obviously happy about this development -- should be concerned about the narrow margin of victory. As previously reported, Proposition B seems quite reasonable -- the TIC Coalition and its allies are strong supporters of disclosing eviction history. The fact that this misleading bill was able to eek out such a narrow victory with four percentage points shows that perhaps San Franciscans are starting to get tired of the Board of Supervisor's divisive politics and anti-homeownership policies.

The TIC Coalition expects this bill to eventually be thrown out in the courts as the mechanics of the bill make it impossible for buyers and sellers to comply. For more information about our position on Proposition B, click here.

Peskin's "Eviction-year" Politics Prevails with the Support of Dufty and Newsom

May, 2006 -- Supervisor Peskin's anti-homeownership bill was approved -- with amendments -- with the support of Supervisor Dufty and Mayor Gavin Newsom. The bill passed the Board of Supervisors by a 7-3 vote (Elsbernd, Ma and Alioto-Pier in opposition). The Mayor has publicly stated that he will sign the measure into law. The final bill will prohibit any building where an Ellis Act eviction or the eviction of senior, disabled or catastrophically ill person occured from ever being able to enter the condo-conversion lottery. In addition, any building where two or more no-fault evictions occured will be barred from converting to condos for 10 years. Most of the bill's retroactivity back to 1999 was removed. Buildings with an eviction as described above that occurred after May 1, 2005 will now be ineligible for the condo-conversion lottery.

This bill puts San Francisco one step closer to banning condo conversions altogether. Obviously, the SF TIC Coalition is disappointed by the passage of this legislation. We are also disappointed with Supervisor Dufty and Mayor Newsom for supporting this bill -- even with amendments. Our position can be found in the San Francisco Examiner. While we appreciate Supervisor Dufty's and Mayor Newsom's past support, this extreme bill pales in comparison to previous anti-TIC legislation which they've opposed. And, while the final Peskin bill does not affect many current TIC owners, the bill stifles long-term homeownership in San Francisco. For Dufty and Newsom to let this bill pass -- without fighting for an anything that benefits homeowners -- will further erode homeownership opportunities in San Francisco.

Peskin's "Eviction-year" Politics

April, 2006 -- It's election year. So, Supervisor Aaron Peskin and his allies on the extreme left are energizing their base by fabricating a frenzy around Ellis Act evictions. Welcome to "Eviction-year" politics in San Francisco. As part of his campaign, Peskin has introduced one of the most restrictive and dangerous anti-TIC bills in years. Peskin's bill would prohibit any building where at least one no-fault eviction occurred to be prohibited from entering the condo-conversion lottery. Here’s the dangerous part that affects many TIC owners: the bill is retroactive to all buildings with evictions that occurred after January 1999.

No fault-evictions include Ellis Act evictions, owner move-in evictions, and demolition or capital improvement-related evictions. Peskin’s bill would affect buildings where an eviction impacted two or more people or at least one senior or disabled person.

Peskin's bill will seriously affect the lives of many TIC homeonwers. Under this bill, many buildings will not be able to condo-convert while considerably eroding property values. This bill is a carefully choreographed ploy (along with Proposition B) by Peskin to put pressure on moderate Supervisors and Mayor Newsom. It’s unfortunate that Peskin resorted to playing "eviction-year" politics with our homes and livelihood – all for political gain. Perhaps Peskin wants to put a dent in the Mayor’s high approval ratings (at 77 percent) during an election-year and stop the negative approval ratings of his Board of Supervisors (at 39 percent). Perhaps Peskin is concerned that homeowners are starting to fight back and shut down anti--homeownership legislation at the Board of Supervisors.

In any case, here are four reasons why this bill is detrimental and unfair to TIC homeowners and why the "eviction issue" isn't what Peskin is making it out to be. More here.

Proposition B: Flawed, Unnecessary and Misleading

March 2006 -- A few weeks ago, Supervisors Maxwell, Peskin, Amiano, Mirkarimi, and Daly voted to place a new anti-TIC bill on the June ballot.  This measure -- called Proposition B -- would make it unlawful for a landlord when offering a property for sale that includes two or more residential units to knowingly fail to disclose in writing to any prospective purchaser:   1.) The specific legal ground(s) for the termination of the tenancy of each residential unit to be delivered vacant at the close of escrow; and, 2.) whether the unit was occupied by an elderly or disabled tenant at the time the tenancy was terminated.  

This disclosure would be required to be made up front to prospective buyers presumably through advertising and marketing materials.  Sound familiar?  In February, Supervisor Chris Daly proposed the exact same bill but could not muster enough votes to override a Mayoral veto. On the outset, this bill appears quite reasonable.  Every prospective buyer is entitled to this important information. However, upon closer inspection, the bill is seriously flawed, unnecessary, and is being misrepresented to the voters of San Franicsco.

The voters of San Francisco must now decide. We need your help to fight this misleading proposition. More here.

Chris Daly's Anti-Homeownership Legislation Falls Short

January 2006 -- Chris Daly's anti-homeownership bills failed to muster the required votes to override a mayoral veto. The first bill that would require converting TICs to obtain Planning Commission approval passed 6-3. However 4 of the Supervisors opposed the bill including Supervisors Ma, Dufty and Elsbernd and Alioto-Pier (who was out of town during the vote). The Mayor immediately indicated that he would veto this bill. Daly would require 8 votes to override the Mayor's veto.

Voting for the measure were Supervisors Maxwell, Peskin, McGoldrick, Daly, Amiano, and Sandoval. Supervisor Mirkarimi abstained as he is a current TIC owner.

Daly's second bill that would require disclosure of evictions when a TIC is put up for sale bill reached the same outcome (7-3) with Mirkarimi voting for the measure. The same four Supervisors opposed this bill. The Mayor indicated that he will also veto this bill.

Supervisor Dufty's Condo-conversion Fairness Bill Signed into Law

The bill would prioritize buildings that had lost the lottery at least three times through a "seniority" system. Unlucky buildings that consistently lost the lottery would ultimately see a light at the end of the tunnel and be able to convert. More details on the updated conversion process can be found here.

Both pieces of legislation are bad news for TIC owners, families, and the middle class. More here...

November, 2005 -- This past fall, the San Francisco TIC Coalition participated in San Francisco's Ellis Working Group task force. The task force was formed by Mayor Gavin Newsom and Aron Peskin, President of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors, to explore strategies that promote home ownership while discouraging Ellis Act and other unwanted evictions.

The Task force was comprised of pro-homeownership groups such as Plan C, the SF TIC Coalition, the Coalition for Better Housing, San Francisco Apartment Association and the San Francisco Realtors Association. Tenants rights advocates were also represented including the San Francisco Tennant Union, the Aids Housing Alliance, the Housing Rights Committee, and the Tenderloin Housing Clinic.

After six weeks of discussions, the pro-homeownership and tenants rights groups could not reach an agreement and the Working Group was disbanded. How did this happen? Politics as usual. More here...