When Jenny Ramirez’s father temporarily lost his job as a chef at a Peruvian restaurant because of the pandemic, she was thankful her family didn’t have to worry about the life-altering, stomach-churning threat of eviction.
That’s because San Francisco banned evictions during the coronavirus public health emergency — and for two months after — to help families just like hers. But, the 18-year-old still worries: What will happen to them when that temporary ban ends?
“We are worried ... the landlord will say, ‘Here is your total,’ and it will be more than we can pay,” said Ramirez, a cosmetology student who lives in the Mission with her parents and two siblings.
As unemployment soars, personal savings dry up and the local economy deteriorates, many like the Ramirez family worry about accumulated back rent and the eventual threat of eviction. In an attempt to calm these fears, Supervisor Dean Preston introduced legislation in April that would permanently bar landlords from evicting tenants if they can’t pay rent due to coronavirus-related issues, like job loss or getting sick from the virus.
The Land Use and Transportation Committee will consider the proposal Monday and will probably move it to the full Board of Supervisors for a vote Tuesday. Oakland has a similar law banning evictions due to financial restraints caused by the pandemic.
Mayor London Breed issued an emergency order in April that not only protects tenants from getting evicted during the pandemic — but also eliminates late fees and interest, and gives them more time to pay their rent. It’s in place until Aug. 30, but can be extended based on how the pandemic progresses.
Preston’s legislation would not cancel rent, or absolve the tenants from ever having to pay it. Instead, it would make San Francisco’s current moratorium permanent by forbidding landlords from ever using the missed payments as a grounds for eviction — regardless of when the public health emergency ends.
While supporters say it’s a compassionate policy that will help people through economic hardship, others say it could put undue strain on landlords who still need to cover their everyday expenses.
“I’m a mom-and-pop business,” said Barbara Dwyer, who owns a three-unit building near Dolores Park and already lowered her tenants’ rent by 10% at the beginning of the health emergency. “If my tenants were to decide to stop paying rent, I still have to pay my property taxes, utilities, insurance and cost of repairs.”
About 97% of residential tenants paid rent in May, according to a survey by the San Francisco Apartment Association of 352 property owners or managers, which encompassed 13,961 San Francisco apartment units. While the survey is the largest of its kind, it represented only about 6% of the city’s total rental stock.
The ability to pay for many was likely due to help from federal stimulus checks, as well as unemployment benefits, which in California can range from $640 to $1,050 a week. Many were also helped by the extra $600 a month in unemployment the federal Cares Act provided, but that assistance is set to expire in July.
Brad Hirn, an organizer with the Housing Rights Committee of San Francisco, said many tenants who lost jobs have either been dipping into savings or borrowing from others to make rent.
“There is a lot of fear and concern about how aggressively the landlords will move to issue three-day eviction notices,” he said. “Lots of people are still paying rent even if they lost work.”
Rent forgiveness has become a hot button issue around the country, as the pandemic has caused an unprecedented strain on the economy. In California, the threat of mass evictions and foreclosures has only compounded its existing housing issues — from a dearth of affordable units to a swelling homeless population.
State lawmakers have introduced rent relief proposals, which include AB828, by Assemblyman Phil Ting, D-San Francisco, which would freeze evictions and allow courts to set up repayment plans for tenants. Another bill, SB1410 by Sen. Lena Gonzalez, D-Long Beach, would create a fund to cover at least 80% of a tenant’s rent that they couldn’t pay due to the pandemic for up to seven months, if the landlord forgives the rest.
Preston, a former tenants right activist, said this legislation is part of a larger housing package that he hopes the board will pass. He wants to create a rent forgiveness fund that would give grants to landlords — particularly small ones — who are unable to pay expenses due to unpaid rent.
He said the money could come from a mix of local, state and federal funding — but it was unclear exactly how. The main funding source, he said, would be from a November ballot measure that he proposed last month to nearly double the city’s transfer tax on commercial real estate deals of $10 million. However, it is unlikely many significant commercial sales will occur in the next few years as the economy recovers.
If the ban on evictions due to coronavirus-related hardships “is not permanent, then thousands of people across the city would be going month to month with the threat of eventual eviction looming over them. If someone does not have the ability to pay, it’s like getting blood from a stone. The money isn’t there.”
Ken Rosen, an economist at UC Berkeley, said a permanent ban on evictions due to coronavirus-related issues is the “wrong thing to do.” The burden of missed rents should not be put on the backs of landlords, he said. Instead, the federal government should help pay missed rent.
While the majority of residential tenants have continued to pay rent, 57% percent of commercial tenants — like restaurants and retailers — did not pay rent in May, according to the apartment association survey.
That has left many landlords struggling to pay their mortgages, taxes, and operating costs, said Janan New, executive director of the San Francisco Apartment Association.
“They are getting hit twice — that’s how my folks feel,” New said. “They are used to getting beat up all the time but since the virus started, they can’t do anything right.”
Meanwhile, as the local, state and federal governments figure out a way to help, the Ramirez family plans to start paying rent again in July.
Jenny Ramirez’s dad recently started working again part-time as the restaurant reopened for takeout. But, despite her father going back to work, the family still owes thousands in back rent and is worried about paying it during the six-month schedule outlined by the city.
Avoiding the threat of eviction would “be a relief for a lot of families out there,” Ramirez said. “I know a lot of of families who have it worse than we do.”
Trisha Thadani and J.K. Dineen are San Francisco Chronicle staff writers. Email: tthadani@sfchronicle.com, jdineen@sfchronicle.com Twitter: @TrishaThadani, @SFjkdineen
"make" - Google News
June 08, 2020 at 08:59PM
https://ift.tt/30hsMTD
Supervisor wants SF to make pandemic eviction protections permanent. Should it? - San Francisco Chronicle
"make" - Google News
https://ift.tt/2WG7dIG
https://ift.tt/2z10xgv
Bagikan Berita Ini
0 Response to "Supervisor wants SF to make pandemic eviction protections permanent. Should it? - San Francisco Chronicle"
Post a Comment