Feature
by David Wasserman
On May 19, 2004, Mayor Gavin Newsom signed legislation sponsored by Supervisors Chris Daly and Matt Gonzalez, which substantially amended the San Francisco Rent Ordinance with regard to tenant services. Only Supervisor Tony Hall voted against the bill. The Key Amendment, as it is known, now mandates that each adult occupant of a rent-controlled unit is entitled to a minimum of one key or a set of keys for the rental unit, without charge. Thus, if there are four adult occupants, you must now provide four sets of keys. The Key Amendment further accomplishes something that Supervisor Ammiano attempted to legislate, without success, in the late 1990s: that is, upon written request from the tenant(s) for extra keys, including the reason why they are necessary, the landlord must provide additional keys unless, within 14 days, the landlord denies the request in writing as unreasonable.
The stated intent of the Key Amendment is to allow tenants the ability to provide access for their caregivers, delivery persons or houseguests. (Supervisor Tom Ammiano originally touted this kind of law as a means to ensure access for HIV/AIDS caregivers in buildings with keys and access cards incapable of duplication except by the owner.) However, many housing professionals maintain that the Key Amendment provides a means to facilitate unlawful subletting and revolving roommates. In addition, the landlord is straddled with the responsibility and expense of providing the extra keys. Furthermore, this legislation now compels owners to compromise the security and safety of their buildings by handing out building keys to strangers.
An owner may deny a request for extra keys. However, denial shall only be for “good reason,” such as bona fide evidence of unauthorized subletting or violation of material lease covenants. If the owner denies the request within the 14-day period, the tenant may contest the decision by filing a Rent Board petition for a decrease of housing services. Thus, the Rent Board then becomes the arbiter regarding whether or not the denial was justified. If not justified, rent will be reduced for the entire period of the unlawful reduction of services.
The Key Amendment is probably an unconstitutional infringement on property rights. It will take some time before this legislation is ripe for challenge. What this means is that an owner who has denied the request for extra keys must first suffer an adverse decision by the Rent Board. Please contact the San Francisco Apartment Association if you receive a decision from the Rent Board that mandates you to give out extra keys. In the meantime, owners and managers must prepare themselves to cope with this onerous law by implementing internal systems to evaluate requests for additional keys. These systems must ensure that the building remains safe and secure in spite of the fact that delivery persons and house guests will have unfettered access. Owners and managers will also have to step up the service of 6.14 notices and/or three-day notices when they suspect unauthorized subletting/assignment.
The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of the SFAA or the San Francisco Apartment Magazine. The information contained in this article is general in nature. Consult the advice of an attorney for any specific problem. David Wasserman is with Wasserman & Taxman, 415-567-9600. Copyright © 2004 by the San Francisco Apartment Magazine. All Rights Reserved.