The landscape of land use in California, particularly in San Francisco, is currently dominated by a trend toward ‘streamlining,’ aimed at expediting housing production by cutting red tape.
However, a new bill introduced by District 11 Supervisor Chyanne Chen takes a different approach, focusing on tenant protection in the face of new development.
This proposed legislation, which has garnered support from Supervisors Jackie Fielder, Shamann Walton, Connie Chan, and Matt Dorsey, seeks to safeguard tenants displaced by the demolition of their homes.
While the bill aims to cover all tenants, there is heightened concern regarding the impact on rent-controlled buildings that are crucial for maintaining affordability in the city.
During a board meeting, Mayor Daniel Lurie indicated his potential support for the bill, noting the importance of preserving rent-controlled housing.
“I agree that preserving our rent control housing stock is essential to maintaining affordability in San Francisco,” Lurie stated, while also mentioning that the demolition of rent-controlled units is quite rare.
The proposed bill requires landlords to provide tenants with six months’ notice before eviction and to communicate their rights in the tenants’ native languages.
Additionally, landlords are mandated to hire ‘relocation specialists’ who assist displaced tenants in finding new homes and pay a relocation fee.
For low-income tenants, the bill includes a right of first refusal, which ensures they are invited to move into the newly constructed housing or back into the original property if there are construction delays, at either their previous rent or an affordable rate, whichever is lower.
Jane Natoli from YIMBY Action voiced her support for the legislation, underscoring the necessity of tenant protections while advocating for increased housing supply.
“The city should protect tenants while building more housing,” she stated. “There’s plenty of opportunity for us to develop new homes for San Franciscans that don’t involve displacement.”
Natoli recognized that this ordinance diverges from the recent trend towards streamlining housing development, an approach she believes that can coexist with protections for existing residents.
“I think that it’s okay to have a little friction when it comes to making sure we’re keeping people in place,” Natoli elaborated.
Under the new ordinance, non-compliance by developers could lead to consequences, including bringing them before the Rent Board and the potential for the city’s Planning Commission to deny demolition permits for a period of up to three years.
Supervisor Chen emphasized the necessity of this legislation, given the increasing ease of building housing despite current economic conditions like elevated interest rates and labor costs affecting construction timelines.
“The impact to existing tenants and residents has been lost in the conversation,” remarked Charlie Sciammas, Chen’s legislative aide. “How are we considering the needs of people who live here now at the same time that we’re putting in place these policies to plan for future generations and for increasing housing production overall?”
This bill emerges after persistent advocacy from organizations such as the San Francisco Anti-Displacement Coalition and Race and Equity in All Planning Coalition, who expressed their concerns before the Planning Commission earlier this year.
Joseph Smooke, working with the Race and Equity coalition, expressed appreciation for the collaborative efforts with Chen’s office and the Planning Department in creating the tenant protection ordinance.
Smooke particularly highlighted the provision requiring landlords to notify tenants of redevelopment while stressing the importance of relocating specialists, drawing inspiration from practices implemented by affordable housing developers.
Despite the positive steps towards tenant protection, Smooke concluded with a note of caution about existing state laws that jeopardize the rent-controlled stock, pointing out the limitations of the current bill.
For example, should a developer decide to demolish a rent-controlled unit for new condominium construction, the original rent-controlled units may not be replaced and tenants could be left without a favorable housing solution.
While the state law does grant former tenants the option to purchase a unit at below-market rates, such properties can shift to market rates once the tenant vacates, which diminishes affordability.
Smooke also raised concerns that if San Francisco moves forward with an upzoning plan—primarily affecting the Westside and allowing taller buildings—the displacement risk may rise as developers seek to acquire land.
Meg Heisler, a policy director at the Anti-Displacement Coalition, echoed the sentiment that although the bill is a step in the right direction, it does not fully address tenant needs.
“I don’t think we’re under any illusion that in its current form it does everything that tenants need,” Heisler stated. “We should be protecting rent-controlled housing from demolition, full stop.”
As the bill moves forward, it highlights the ongoing tension between housing development and the need for tenant protection within San Francisco, signaling that dialogue and advocacy will continue in pursuit of a balanced approach.
image source from：missionlocal
