San Francisco judge upholds city’s ban on evictions during coronavirus pandemic

https://www.sfchronicle.com/bayarea/article/San-Francisco-judge-upholds-city-s-ban-on-15455754.php

Dominic Fracassa Aug. 3, 2020

San Francisco District Five Supervisor Dean Preston, author of the eviction ordinance that was upheld Monday.
San Francisco District Five Supervisor Dean Preston, author of the eviction ordinance that was upheld Monday. Photo: Scott Strazzante / The Chronicle

A San Francisco Superior Court Judge upheld a city ordinance on Monday that prevents landlords from evicting tenants unable to pay rent or penalties during the COVID-19 pandemic.

A coalition of real estate industry and landlord groups — including the San Francisco Apartment Association, the San Francisco Association of Realtors and the Small Property Owners of San Francisco Institute — sued the city in June, claiming that the law was an unconstitutional overreach.

Judge Charles Haines flatly disagreed, ruling that the ordinance, authored by Supervisor Dean Preston, “is a permissible exercise” of the city’s power to regulate evictions “to promote public welfare.” He also ruled that the law did not conflict with state emergency orders, as the landlord and real estate groups contended.

“This is a resounding victory for vulnerable tenants in San Francisco,” Preston said in a statement following the ruling.

“I have said from the start, we will not stand by and watch thousands of San Franciscans become homeless because of a pandemic they cannot control, and I’m proud that our legislation has been upheld and vindicated in court,” he said.

Preston’s ordinance also prohibits landlords from charging late fees, penalties and interest related to delayed rent. It does not, however, prevent rent payments from accruing.

The organizations that sued the city argued in their suit that Preston’s legislation foisted an undue burden on housing providers, particularly landlords of smaller properties, who’ve also been hurt financially by the pandemic’s economic fallout.

The organizations issued a joint statement saying they were “disappointed” in the judge’s decision.