Posts Tagged ‘eviction’

What It Looks Like When SF Rec & Park Evicts You from 24th and Fulton on a Sunday Morning

Wednesday, April 16th, 2014

The Golden Gate Park tent patrol definitely works on weekends:

Click to expand

1049 Market Street Tenants Win a Reprieve in Their Mass Eviction – Presser at City Hall Today at 4:30 PM

Wednesday, February 19th, 2014

Word comes from tommi avicolli mecca:

“FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

1049 Market STREET Tenants Win a Reprieve in Their Mass Eviction

San Francisco – Tenants of 1049 Market, who are facing eviction at the hands of a landlord wanting to turn their live/work apartments into office spaces, will be holding a press conference today at 4:30pm on the steps of City Hall (Polk Street side) to announce that they have won another reprieve in their battle to stay in their homes. Their landlord has withdrawn his appeal of the suspension of THE permit that would have allowed him to demolish their apartments and evict them.

The appeal on that suspension was scheduled to be heard today at the Board of Appeals at 5pm.

Officials of the Department of Building Inspections (DBI) suspended the permit after a walk through of the building. DBI officials DETERMINED that they had discretion in requiring the landlord to install light wells, a very expensive renovation, to fix a major code violation cited in a 2007 Notice of Violation: the lack of natural light in some of the apartments. Other violations are minor and can be easily addressed by the owner.

Tenants received eviction notices last September, but with the help of Housing Rights Committee, legal support from Tenderloin Housing Clinic and the involvement of Supervisor Jane Kim and DBI, they organized to stay in their homes and fight back.

“It’s a clear victory for us tenants,” said 1049 Market resident Marcele Wilson, “This is about evicting working-class tenants and artists so that they can convert our apartments into offices and cash in on the mid-Market tech boom. But these are our homes, we’re not leaving.”

Tenants will be on hand for interviews today at 4:30pm.”

Ellis Act Eviction Essays from the Left and Right Sides of the Aisle, Plus a Detached Observer

Tuesday, January 21st, 2014

If you use the term moderate, then that implies the opposition is immoderate, right?

So, imagine an aisle. Some are on the left of it and some are on the right of it and some have moved from left to right and some have moved from right to left and some camp out in the middle of the aisle blocking the exits.

In San Francisco, the San Francisco Bay Guardian is on the left side of that aisle and San Francisco Magazine is on the right.

Keep that in mind as you peruse:

The Eviction Crisis That Wasn’t – Why carping about the Ellis Act won’t solve San Francisco’s housing problem by Scott Lucas, January 20, 2014

Ellis Act: So There Isn’t an “Eviction Crisis.” So What? by Joe Eskenazi, Mon., Jan. 20 2014

Debunking SF Mag’s Ellis Act apologist article, point by point by Joe Fitzgerald Rodriguez, 01.20.14

A purposefully-distorted version of an already-stylized image, soon coming to an Asian American Studies curriculum near you, no doubt:

OMG, It’s the Great 2014 Haight Ashbury / Richmond District TENANT CONVENTION – January 18th – Eric Mar

Monday, December 16th, 2013

Supervisor Eric Mar is pissed off these days – just look:

“Upcoming Tenant Convention

Please join me and tenant leaders from the Richmond and Haight-Ashbury for a Tenant Convention to be held on Saturday, January 18th at 1:00 p.m., at the Park Branch library (1893 Page St. between Cole and Shrader).

It will build on the momentum that was generated by the Our Richmond/No Eviction event that I convened on December 4, which drew over 70 participants from the Richmond eager to talk about what can be done to stop the eviction crisis that is tearing apart communities in District 1 and throughout the City.  

Come and learn about what you can do if you or your neighbors are being faced with eviction and help us to plan for legislation to fight back.

This gathering is sponsored by the San Francisco Tenants Union, Housing Rights Committee, Causa Justa/Just Cause, Senior and Disability Action and ACCE.”

More for the City Attorney to Investigate – Rick Thurber Crew – “Jack Sween is a Fraud, Community Action Does Not Exist”

Tuesday, September 25th, 2012

The notorious Rick Thurber crew is back threatening people over signs posted about the 415 again. The latest names used are “Community Action” and “Jack Sween.” The latest letters “served” upon people look just like the one posted below.

Here’s what SFGov has to say about posting signs:

And here’s the background from a couple years back:

 

Crazy Rick Thurber‘s legacy is the current group of “small ‘f’ facists” who use the color of authority to go around scaring San Franciscans who have done nothing wrong.

Anyway, here’s what the city and county has to say about you posting signs about garage sales and missing pets and whatnot – it’s not illegal. SFGov goes on to add:

The SF Cleanup Project and Quinn Cooper are not affiliated with the Department of Public Works or the City and County of San Francisco. If you receive a letter from one of these entities about signs you have posted, please submit it to DPW, Director’s Office, City Hall, Room 348, San Francisco, CA 94102 and DPW will deliver it to the City Attorney’s office. For more information, contact DPW’s Bureau of Street Use and Mapping at 554-5810.”

See? The Thurbians accuse you of a crime but, in fact, the City is trying to hunt them down for their transgressions.

(Isn’t ironic, dontcha think?)

These days, frustrated San Franciscans are resorting to posting on the craigslist to get the word out. Thusly:

IT IS NOT ILLEGAL TO POST SIGNS (inner richmond)

Date: 2010-07-18, 3:29PM PDT
Reply to:
sale-u4fyj-1850054366@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]

The person(s) going around threatening people with fines for posting garage sales signs needs to stop. Get their name and ID please. Forward their emails to Eric Mar (Richmond supervisor) and also to craigslist. These people are bullies at best. If they are actually collecting fines, they are committing a crime. Stay legal, but make them stop. Call the police if they approach you in person. Thanks. It has happened before:
http://sfcitizen.com/blog/2010/04/14/nimby-outrage-trickster-uses-color-of-authority-to-threaten-eviction-over-a-garage-sale-sign/
So when you get one of these illegal notices after using a phone pole or whatever to posting a notice about a lost pet, turn it over to the City and let it figure out what to do.
D’accord? D’accord.

 

The gritty nitty from the City:

“The public may post information on some utility poles if the postings follow regulations outlined in the Public Works Code. The law was adopted to ensure that flyers posted on public property do not contribute to litter or blight. Illegal postings may be removed by DPW and are subject to fines from $50 to $500. 

Signs are defined as any card, decoration, poster, campaign sign, or any object containing or bearing writing that is affixed, posted or fastened to a utility or light pole that is permanently attached to the street or sidewalk.  Signs do not include handbills, banners or A-Frame boards. Bulletin boards designed for neighborhood postings are exempt from this regulation. Signs attached to buildings are regulated by Part II Chapter I of the Building Code.

Tips for Legally Posting Signs on Public Property


To legally place a sign on a utility pole, it must:

  • Be less than 11 inches in height
  • No higher than 12 feet from the ground
  • Conform to the shape of the pole
  • Be attached with tape or other non-adhesive material such as twine, string or other non-metal banding material
  • Include a legible posting date in the lower right hand corner
  • Be removed after 10 days, if the sign is promoting a date specific event
  • Be removed within 70 days of the posting date
  • Not be installed on historic street light poles*, traffic signal poles or traffic directional sign poles. 

* Historic street light poles are on these streets:

  • Market Street from 1 Market to 2490 Market
  • Mission Street from 16th Street to 24th Street
  • Grant Avenue from Bush Street to Broadway Street
  • The Embarcadero from King Street to Jefferson Street
  • Lamp Posts on Fisherman’s Wharf from Hyde to Powell
  • Howard Street from 3rd Street to 4th Street
  • Lamp Posts within Union Square
  • Mason Street from Market to Sutter
  • Sutter Street from Mason to Kearny
  • Kearny Street from Bush to Market

Stow Lake is Closed From September 19-23, Per This Sign – A Quiet Time for the Boathouse

Monday, September 19th, 2011

Here’s a tour of the Stow Lake Boathouse area these days.

Looks like you won’t be able to park your car around the lake this week:

Click to expand

They’ll probably let you walk around most of the place most of the time, but the whole area will be getting worked on through the end of September 2011, looks like.

The boats are gone:

 \

And the protest signs as well:

Frank Klein has the keys now:

“Got the keys to Stow Lake Boathouse today! Great feeling beginning to restore this landmark property for the next generations of SF residents”

Mayor Ed Lee’s “City Family” Evicts Stow Lake Boathouse Operator – Rent-Free Blowout Party Sept 10th

Sunday, September 4th, 2011

Well, you probably already know all you want to know about the Stow Lake Boathouse, but here’s the latest.

(Oh, Joan, this vendor lost 5-0. Was that competition rigged, do you think? I don’t know, if you don’t like Rec and Park, you take it out on the Mayor, right?)

The case against the current operator:

Click to expand

IndyBay weighs in:

“The local concessioner is being evicted by SF Rec & Park in retaliation for protesting unfair bidding process.”

Uh no, it’s more like local concessioner refuses to leave after losing competition, legal proceedings. IMO.

Let’s see, I can write maudlin headlines too. How could I spin a different type of possible news:

“Beloved, local 68-year-old rapist apprehended by vacationing, off-duty, out-of-state, evil cop from New Mexico. SaveStowLakeRapist.org”

Or something like that.

Now, realize that the boathouse isn’t going anywhere, IRL, but, anyway here are the last gasps of the most ridiculous grass roots effort I’ve ever seen:

“Yet another treasure lost!”

And Phil Ginsburg Lied, People Died, something like that:

Do the blondie Euro tourists care that the Stow Lake Boathouse will have a new operator?

Not in the least!

The only thing left to do is to have a blowout party on September 10th, since, you know, you’re not paying rent anyway:

It’ll cost $500 each* (or best offer) for the faded paddleboats. Apparently, they went for $3000 when new. Apparently, their faded surfaces will “buff out real good.” (But if you’re 5’8″ or taller, you won’t fit in so hot…)

The KTVU was on hand, for the finale:

Maybe they’ll have something for you to watch, sometime. (Oh, here it is. This report is somewhat more maudlin than expected. Realize that the current operators were given extra points for being local, for being in operation for so long. Even with this kind of affirmative action/legacy/locals-only type of assistance, the current operator lost five votes to zero. Oh well.)

All right, as long as nobody torches the place this month (which would take some doing in this kind of foggy weather), look forward to a revivified Stow Lake Boathouse soon…

*Oh, the old paddle boats “start at $200,” per KTVU-TV. Hey, why not buy one and then put rubber tires underneath? You’d be all set for the Burning Man Playa next year, or a Critical Mass or something. Hey, even better, pilot the thing to La Playa in Nevada next year, why not? That would be quite a road trip…

Rick Thurber’s Legacy: NIMBYs Gone Wild. Yet, “IT IS NOT ILLEGAL TO POST SIGNS” in S.F.

Thursday, July 22nd, 2010

Crazy Rick Thurber‘s legacy is the current group of “small ‘f’ facists” who use the color of authority to go around scaring San Franciscans who have done nothing wrong.

Anyway, here’s what the city and county has to say about you posting signs about garage sales and missing pets and whatnot – it’s not illegal. SFGov goes on to add:

The SF Cleanup Project and Quinn Cooper are not affiliated with the Department of Public Works or the City and County of San Francisco. If you receive a letter from one of these entities about signs you have posted, please submit it to DPW, Director’s Office, City Hall, Room 348, San Francisco, CA 94102 and DPW will deliver it to the City Attorney’s office. For more information, contact DPW’s Bureau of Street Use and Mapping at 554-5810.”

See? The Thurbians accuse you of a crime but, in fact, the City is trying to hunt them down for their transgressions.

(Isn’t ironic, dontcha think?)

These days, frustrated San Franciscans are resorting to posting on the craigslist to get the word out. Thusly:

IT IS NOT ILLEGAL TO POST SIGNS (inner richmond)

Date: 2010-07-18, 3:29PM PDT
Reply to:
sale-u4fyj-1850054366@craigslist.org [Errors when replying to ads?]

The person(s) going around threatening people with fines for posting garage sales signs needs to stop. Get their name and ID please. Forward their emails to Eric Mar (Richmond supervisor) and also to craigslist. These people are bullies at best. If they are actually collecting fines, they are committing a crime. Stay legal, but make them stop. Call the police if they approach you in person. Thanks. It has happened before:
http://sfcitizen.com/blog/2010/04/14/nimby-outrage-trickster-uses-color-of-authority-to-threaten-eviction-over-a-garage-sale-sign/
 
So when you get one of these illegal notices after using a phone pole or whatever to posting a notice about a lost pet, turn it over to the City and let it figure out what to do.
 
D’accord? D’accord.
 

The gritty nitty from the City: 

“The public may post information on some utility poles if the postings follow regulations outlined in the Public Works Code. The law was adopted to ensure that flyers posted on public property do not contribute to litter or blight. Illegal postings may be removed by DPW and are subject to fines from $50 to $500. 

Signs are defined as any card, decoration, poster, campaign sign, or any object containing or bearing writing that is affixed, posted or fastened to a utility or light pole that is permanently attached to the street or sidewalk.  Signs do not include handbills, banners or A-Frame boards. Bulletin boards designed for neighborhood postings are exempt from this regulation. Signs attached to buildings are regulated by Part II Chapter I of the Building Code.

Tips for Legally Posting Signs on Public Property

 
To legally place a sign on a utility pole, it must:

  • Be less than 11 inches in height
  • No higher than 12 feet from the ground
  • Conform to the shape of the pole
  • Be attached with tape or other non-adhesive material such as twine, string or other non-metal banding material
  • Include a legible posting date in the lower right hand corner
  • Be removed after 10 days, if the sign is promoting a date specific event
  • Be removed within 70 days of the posting date
  • Not be installed on historic street light poles*, traffic signal poles or traffic directional sign poles. 

* Historic street light poles are on these streets:

  • Market Street from 1 Market to 2490 Market
  • Mission Street from 16th Street to 24th Street
  • Grant Avenue from Bush Street to Broadway Street
  • The Embarcadero from King Street to Jefferson Street
  • Lamp Posts on Fisherman’s Wharf from Hyde to Powell
  • Howard Street from 3rd Street to 4th Street
  • Lamp Posts within Union Square
  • Mason Street from Market to Sutter
  • Sutter Street from Mason to Kearny
  • Kearny Street from Bush to Market

NIMBY Outrage: Trickster Uses Color of Authority to Threaten Eviction over a Garage Sale Sign

Wednesday, April 14th, 2010

Have you ever heard of an outfit called “Neighbors for Clean Neighborhoods” or something? Well, neither has the Internet. But somebody is using that name to threaten tenants with eviction over things that tenants can’t control.

Like if there’s a sign advertising a garage sale on a traffic signal pole outside of your apartment building, you just might get “served” with a massive missive that discusses how you could get evicted.

The return address is listed as 1 Dr. Carlton B. Goodlett Place San Francisco, CA 94102, which is of course San Francisco City Hall. Somebody named “Bob Williams” is behind this, but who knows who that is. Are you allowed to use City Hall’s address to threaten people with eviction freelance? I don’t think so. 

Anyway, look forward to getting this notice yourself someday. I’ll tell you, tenants were confused by this official-looking notice, some of them thinking that it came from the landlord.

One might think that you’d need an actual backyard before you can go all NIMBY on people, but it looks like Bob Williams has found a loophole. (You real NIMBYs might want to reuse some of the florid language – it’s pure gold.)

Click to expand.

Mostly you can read it. Mostly

Needless to say, I cry foul.

[UPDATE: Turns out that Chuckles Nevius was all over this issue last year.]

Revenge of the Subtenant – Rent Board Requires Master Tenant to Refund $10,800

Thursday, January 14th, 2010

Here’s the thing – if you’re renting a place in San Francisco and you’re paying your monthly rent to your roommate, chances are that you could be considered a subtenant and your roomy the “Master Tenant.”* Particularly when the rent for your unit is way undermarket, due to rent control let’s say, you might end up spending more for your space than the Master pays for the Master’s part of the apartment.

So if you’re paying $900 a month for your half of  a two-bedroom and your Master Tenant in the other room is only kicking in $100 (to pay $1000 total to the landlord for the whole place), then you can take steps to get some of that money back and lower your rent to boot.

“A subtenant who believes he or she is paying more than a proportional share of the total rent may file a Tenant Petition against the master tenant on that basis. If the subtenant prevails, the Administrative Law Judge will adjust the rent to the proportional share and order the master tenant to refund any rent overpayments.”

Is this a perfect system? No, but it’s what you end up with when your city has rent control.

Your San Francisco Rent Board just dealt with a subtenant/Master Tenant proportionality case. The names of the people involved aren’t important, but the situation is noteworthy, IMO. Let’s check it out.

Now, if you don’t like how the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) dealt with your case with your roomie, you can appeal to the board. As here, from the meeting of August 4, 2009:

The subtenant’s petition alleging that he paid a disproportional share of the rent pursuant to Rules ß6.15C(3) was granted and the Master Tenant was found liable to the subtenant in the amount of $10,800.00. On appeal, the Master Tenant alleges that he was unaware of the requirement that the amount of rent paid must be proportional; that the decision will present him with a financial hardship; and that the subtenant is going to be evicted due to his uncooperative behavior. 

MSC: To deny the appeal on substantive grounds but remand the case for a hearing on the Master Tenant’s claim of financial hardship. (Gruber/Crow: 5-0)”

See? The sub won big-time, to the tune of five figures because the rent split determined by the Master Tenant wasn’t proportional according to a judge and the full board.

But the master came back to say the ruling would be a hardship for him. From the meeting of November 17, 2009:

The subtenant’s petition alleging that he paid a disproportionate share of the rent was granted and the Master Tenant was found liable to the subtenant in the amount of $10,800.00.  The Master Tenant’s hardship appeal was granted and remanded for hearing.  In the remand decision, the ALJ finds sufficient hardship to order a repayment plan in the amount of $150.00 per month.  The Master Tenant again appeals, claiming that even the reduced amount will cause him severe hardship and possibly result in both tenants’ eviction from the premises.

MSC: To deny the appeal.  (Mosbrucker/Gruber:  5-0)”

Is this what you might call a Phyric victory? Maybe. It’s probably too early to tell. Oh well.  

Check the San Francisco Rent Board website for deets on the rules, or see you after the jump.

*The County of Los Angeles doesn’t want to buy equipment that has the term “master” written anywhere on it, like on a hard drive, a DVD burner or a brake cylinder. But in San Francisco, we freely label people “Master Tenants.” It’s our thing. 

(more…)