San Francisco’s single-room occupancy hotels (SROs), which provide housing for the city’s working-class and low-income residents, face a significant change as a new state bill heads to California Gov. Gavin Newsom’s desk.
Long considered a vital part of the city’s affordable housing supply, SROs have been protected by local laws that make demolition and reconstruction challenging.
However, the proposed SB 21 could potentially override these restrictions if Newsom signs it by October 12.
Proponents of the bill argue it’s necessary to prevent situations like the one in Los Angeles’s Skid Row, where properties owned by a nonprofit trust went bankrupt due to costly repairs.
Tiffany Spring, the chief operating officer for the Southern California Association of Non-Profit Housing (SCANPH), remarked, “There are SRO buildings across the state that struggle to keep the lights on and need to be redeveloped.”
The legislation, driven by SCANPH and Senator Maria Durazo of Los Angeles, would allow cities with inadequate affordable housing, including San Francisco, the ability to demolish and replace SROs more easily.
This bill emerges amid intense housing debates in San Francisco, where home prices remain extremely high.
Mayor Daniel Lurie’s housing plan seeks to increase density throughout the city by the end of January, allowing for taller buildings and more housing units.
While this plan aims to create thousands of subsidized homes, it faces criticism for potentially fostering demolition and displacement, even with San Francisco’s strong renter protections.
As part of SB 21, a maximum of 25 percent net loss of affordable units per project would be permitted during renovations or replacements of SROs.
Bethany Renfree, the legislative director for Durazo, noted current laws requiring a one-to-one replacement of units aren’t practical given construction and maintenance costs.
While new buildings would still maintain affordability, they might include larger units, which raises concerns among tenant advocates about the potential loss of overall affordable housing.
Nonetheless, the bill received overwhelming bipartisan support in the legislature, sailing through eight different votes without any dissenting votes.
Single-room occupancy hotels are unique affordable housing venues that offer small rooms, sometimes less than 100 square feet, with shared bathrooms.
Estimates suggest around 19,000 SRO rooms exist across nearly 400 properties in San Francisco, with the majority operated for profit.
SRO rents average approximately $890 per month, significantly lower than the city’s average for standard studios.
These rooms are often all that stand between many low-income residents and homelessness.
The majority of SROs are located in neighborhoods like the Mission, Tenderloin, and Chinatown.
Kevin Wong, co-director of the documentary Home Is a Hotel, highlights the financial struggles of residents, stating, “You’re talking about people for whom $100 can be the difference between making rent that month.”
Many of these buildings are historical, with some over a century old, and were not originally intended for permanent housing.
The high rates of vacancy, reportedly up to 50 percent in some buildings, further complicate the maintenance costs associated with aging structures.
A recent Pew Research report indicated that as SROs have declined, homelessness rates have surged nationally, pointing out the significance of SROs in San Francisco’s historical context as a pillar of working-class housing.
In response to a critical lack of affordable housing, San Francisco instituted the Hotel Unit Conversion and Demolition Ordinance (HCO) in 1980.
This ordinance mandates special permission for converting or demolishing SROs.
A recent case in which the Planning Commission voted against allowing an SRO owner near 4th and Market Streets to convert their property into a standard hotel illustrates the rigor of these protections.
SB 21 includes provisions ensuring that new units must remain affordable for at least 55 years, and tenants displaced by demolition have the right of first refusal on new apartments.
Additionally, protections are in place to ensure that no tenant can be removed more than six months before demolition, and if renovations are delayed, their rent cannot be increased.
Sam Moss, the executive director of Mission Housing, which operates several SROs in San Francisco, acknowledges the challenges but emphasizes the need for maintenance and repair of existing structures.
Moss emphasizes, “No one would ever accept putting anyone out on the street, but we need to fix these buildings.”
However, he warns that solving the issues around SROs will require significant public funds, not just for repairs but also to move residents during necessary renovations.
The impact of SB 21 on SRO operations and affordable housing remains uncertain, with little feedback from community members and housing advocates after its introduction.
Tan Chow, representing the Chinatown Community Development Center, stated, “We don’t support or oppose it,” highlighting the ambivalence surrounding the bill among nonprofit owners.
SCANPH’s Spring noted that the bill’s authors consulted with the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development (MOHCD) and the Tenderloin Neighborhood Housing Clinic, indicating some level of community engagement.
When inquiries were made about the bill’s application, the MOHCD’s spokesperson Anne Stanley mentioned their office lacked enough information to provide an informed opinion.
San Francisco Planning spokesperson Dan Sider characterized SB 21 as a “moving target” in the current housing landscape.
District Supervisor Bilal Mahmood expressed that there are still unknown variables regarding SB 21’s effects on SROs, stating their critical importance to the city.
The Frisc also attempted to contact several tenant advocacy groups, including the Central City SRO Collaborative and the Anti-Displacement Coalition, but received no responses.
Community Organizer Curtis Bradford noted the bill has not garnered much attention, stating, “I’d be surprised if anyone has really heard of it.”
The emergence of SB 21 comes at a precarious moment for nearly 20,000 lower-income homes in San Francisco, amidst rising concerns about displacement.
Residents often face urgent maintenance issues, impacting their livability.
At the Apollo Hotel, a Mission Housing-operated SRO, tenants reported various complaints about plumbing problems, trash accumulation, and evidence of vermin infestations over the last year and a half.
Residents alleged mold issues and showed photographs of faucets producing discolored water.
In another Mission Housing building, the Altamont Hotel, occupants complained about continuous elevator breakdowns, leaking pipes, and inadequate shower facilities.
Concerns were raised about staffing issues as it was reported that only one maintenance worker was available in the 88-unit facility.
At the for-profit 16th St. Hotel, residents voiced grievances about mold and conditions caused by unsecure building management, with DBI inspections failing to reveal violations.
Meanwhile, at the Frances Hotel, complaints surfaced about plumbing issues, hazardous wiring, and structural damage.
Some inspections confirmed various complaints but were often limited by tenant anonymity.
The Department of Building Inspection (DBI) commented on the challenges faced when addressing anonymous complaints, which hinder thorough investigations.
While not all SROs are in dire situations, most face mounting pressures due to aging infrastructure.
Spring from SCANPH asserts that even nonprofit operators struggle, saying, “Nonprofit developers bought these buildings in the 1980s as a public service, but they weren’t sufficiently funded for long-term maintenance.”
As the legislation awaits Newsom’s decision, the broader implications for affordable housing and tenant rights in San Francisco remain uncertain, with a delicate balance between maintaining SROs and upgrading their conditions.
image source from：thefrisc
