Judge strikes down San Francisco eviction law / attempt to impose socialism / fag welfare.

[Rebel Flag Bitches]

San Francisco’s latest attempt to make landlords pay relocation
costs for tenants they evict when the property owners go out of
the rental business has hit another judicial roadblock.

The ordinance, scaled down from a previous measure, would
require landlords to pay displaced tenants the difference
between their current rent and the market rate for a similar
unit in the city for two years, up to a maximum of $50,000.
Tenants would have to show they were using the funds solely for
relocation costs and rents, and landlords who faced hardships
could appeal to the city Rent Board to reduce their payments.

But Superior Court Judge Ronald Quidachay said the required
payments exceed the “reasonable” relocation assistance
authorized by the Ellis Act, the state law that allows landlords
to evict all their tenants when they leave the rental business
without having to show any other grounds for an eviction.

Reasonable payments are those that would offset the immediate
costs of eviction — first and last months’ rent, the tenant’s
security deposit and moving expenses, Quidachay said in his
ruling Friday. He said additional charges to “subsidize the
payment of rent that a displaced tenant will face on the open
market, regardless of income ... have no relationship to the
adverse impact caused by the landlord’s decision to exit the
rental market.”

He also noted that the $50,000 maximum payment for two years is
more than three times the current payment for displaced San
Francisco tenants — $4,500 a year, adjusted annually for
inflation — authorized by a 2005 city ordinance that was upheld
by the courts.

The ruling is “a major victory for San Francisco property
owners,” said Andrew Zacks, a lawyer for three landlords and the
Small Property Owners of San Francisco Institute, who challenged
the ordinance. “No matter how many times it tries, the city
cannot disregard state law.”

The city plans to appeal.

The issue in the case is, “Can we make landlords compensate
tenants for what we know are the real impacts of Ellis Act
evictions,” Deputy City Attorney Christine Van Aken said Tuesday.

She said the state law allows local governments to “require
mitigation of any adverse impact” on evicted tenants. “We think
having to pay dramatically new, higher rents is an adverse
impact of the eviction,” Van Aken said.

The author of the ordinance, Supervisor David Campos, said he
was confident that the law would be upheld on appeal. “I think
that in the midst of the worst housing crisis in the history of
San Francisco, adjusting relocation payments to reflect the
crisis in which we are is a reasonable step,” he said.

An earlier Campos ordinance, which took effect in June 2014,
required the same two-year rent subsidy but without the $50,000
limit, and did not require tenants to show that they used the
funds solely for housing.

U.S. District Judge Charles Breyer declared the measure
unconstitutional in October 2014, saying it violated property
rights by forcing owners to pay for problems they didn’t cause —
the skyrocketing prices of rental housing, and the gap between
market rates and the city’s rent-control law. Quidachay, in a
separate case, ruled later that the ordinance also conflicted
with the Ellis Act’s authorization of only “reasonable”
relocation assistance. The city has appealed both rulings.

City supervisors approved Campos’ new ordinance in May and it
was scheduled to take effect in June but has been on hold during
the legal challenge.

Bob Egelko is a San Francisco Chronicle staff writer. E-mail:
beg...@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @egelko

http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Judge-strikes-down-San-
Francisco-eviction-law-6554447.php