Cut/Paste: Ellis Act getting tougher or easier?

tenantsunion.jpgRegardless of whether you’re the fist, or the man in the top hat, we thought this worthy of a cut/paste from the SFAR Advantage newsletter:

“SB 464 (Kuhl) would amend the Ellis Act (the State law that allows rental property owners to go out of the rental business) by limiting its application to the owner of any residential real property who has owned the property for five years. In addition, SB 464 would allow a public entity to require that if any tenant is at least 62 years of age or disabled, and has lived in his or her accommodations for at least one year prior to the date of delivery to the public entity of the notice of intent to withdraw pursuant to the Act, the date of withdrawal of the accommodations to be extended to one year after the date of delivery of the notice. On Monday of last week, SB 464 was amended and the following language was inserted: “[The bill] shall apply only to owners who acquired ownership of property pursuant to a purchase agreement or contract for exchange entered into on or after March 27, 2007.” ”

SB 464 is set for hearing before the Committee on Appropriations on April 23rd.

Leland Yee [website]
San Francisco Tenant’s Union [website]
the legal part of evictions [Sirkin Paul Associates]
the low down [Senate Judiciary Committe]
Rent vs. Buy, the old debate…in an interactive graph [sfn BLOG]

5 thoughts on “Cut/Paste: Ellis Act getting tougher or easier?

  1. What we gathered from another source, “a new bill is being propsed to amend the Ellis act to make new owners wait 5 years before Ellis acting a building”.

    “If you have a tenant that is 62 years of age, and has been on the property at least one year, it will be very difficult to get them out. In addition, they may be allowed to stay a year after you give them notice.”

    “Only applies to property purchased after 3/27/2007”.

    If you want the full scoop, I would suggest contacting Leland Yee.

  2. We forgot to add…regarding the “5 year”. Think of contractors purchasing buildings to renovate and “flip”. Not going to be so easy for them.

  3. How can this fly, longterm? Surely it will be ruled unlawful at some point. The original purpose of Ellis is to allow landlords to “go out of business.” Would you tell any other business owner that he or she needs to wait five years to go out of business? Like a failing corner store owner?

    “Sorry bud. No foot traffic. No sales? Not our problem. You need to wait five years before you close your bodega.” ?????

Leave a Reply