|
by Andrew DellaRocca/PoorNewsNetwork Media Intern
I was first introduced to the HOPE legislation when I went to Dolores Park
last Sunday. The San Francisco Mime Troupe was there performing this year's
production Mister Smith Goes to Obscuristanî, a parody on US foreign policy
and the current administrationís version of ìnation-buildingî. I was sent
there by the POOR News Network, to meet with a representative from the San
Francisco tenantís union, and help SFTU to distribute information concerning
their ìHOPE is a Hoaxî campaign. The sun baked the park, and I stood on the
outskirts of the crowd, in an ill-planned outfit that consisted of a black
shirt and long khaki pants. One of SFTUís volunteers was there. She gave
me some flyers, a little background information, and offered me some
sunscreen. I soon learned what HOPE was all about.
HOPE is a current form of legislation, floated by Supervisor Tony Hall, and
backed by the real-estate industry, which seeks to increase the number of
apartment to condominium conversions in San Francisco from 200 per year to
3,500 per year. It is argued that this legislation will help tenants to
purchase their homes, increasing homeownership in San Francisco. But the
so-called benefits to normal San Franciscans, which are promoted deceptively
through the HOPE campaign, are as obscure as Obscuristan. Condominiums,
under California State law, are exempt from rent control. Thus, an increase
in apartment to condo conversions will mean an elimination of rent control
on many units, with subsequent rent increases and tenant displacement.
Signatures have been being collected by the cityís landlords for the past
months, and were submitted last week. Now, the HOPE measure will be an item
in Novemberís ballot box. People on the street were deceived by the
petitioners (perhaps, even, the petitioners were deceived by the
legislation), and told that the measure will result in more tenants becoming
owners of their homes. The truth is, very few condo conversions (less than
10%) are actually purchased by the tenants. The average price of a
condominium in San Francisco is $400,000, a figure that is out of a normal
tenantís reach. Signers of the petition were also told that those tenants
who did not want to purchase the converted apartments would be protected by
a series of tenant protections, such as a lifetime lease and a restriction
on rent increases. These ìtenant protectionsî are illusory, however,
because they are in direct contradiction with, and are therefore invalidated
by, established state laws. The Costa Hawkins State Law, for example,
prohibits rent limitations on condominiums. Likewise, court rulings on the
Ellis Act have consistently prevented any locality from trying to prohibit
certain types of evictions from condominiums. In spite of these blatant
contradictions, designers of the HOPE measure have included the protections
in order to deceive the voters, who are mostly tenants, into supporting the
very same legislation that would make them vulnerable.
In Santa Monica, during the 1990ís, a similar measure was passed. The
measure, however, was soon after repealed when it was discovered that only
8% of the converted apartments were purchased by the tenants. Over 3,000 of
Santa Monicaís apartments were converted, however, and 80% of the tenants in
those buildings were displaced. The San Francisco measure provides even
weaker tenant protections than the Santa Monica measure did, and if it is
passed, San Francisco will be facing a huge tenant displacement crisis.
One of the main concerns about the measure is the undemocratic process by
which a landlord gets approval to convert a building. Only 25% of the
lease-holders will need to sign an approval form with their landlord in
order to convert the entire building into condominiums.
ìThey say the justification is that in order for the wealthy people to be
able to buy homes, they should be able to kick out the less wealthy people,
and they see condo conversions as a great way to do thatî said Ted Gulucson
of the San Francisco Tenantís Union
I took a trip to the San Francisco Tenantís Union on Capp St. to speak with
Ted and find out more about their HOPE is a Hoax campaign. The SFTU has
been in existence since 1971, fighting for tenants rights and affordable
housing. We spoke in his office, the backroom in the bottom apartment of a
Mission Victorian. The apartment unpretentiously announces that it is the
SFTU headquarters, with black and white paper signs taped on the windows.
The walls in Tedís office are covered with placards from previous campaigns.
One of them announces ìHomes: Everybody gets one before anybody gets
two.î We sat down at a wooden table to talk.
Ted tells me that he is the office manager of the Tenantís Union, and that
he performs ìbasic administrative work, and organizing work, everything from
sweeping the floors to going to hearings.î He speaks with a drawl, and
doesnít pronounce his Rís. He refers to HOPEís assurances of lifetime
leases, and the prohibitions on rent increases, as ìbogus tenant protections
put in there as window dressing.î
The fact that condos are now exempt from rent control has created a whole
new demand, on the industry side, to do condo conversions. Because not only
do they get the ability to sell units as condos, and make a lot of money
that way, but they can just remove the units from rent control.î
The HOPE measure is created by the real estate industry, designed to
increase the wealth of the landlords. But in addition to its role in
creating profit, it is an extension of a United Statesí political backlash,
begun in the 1980s, and the overall shift towards neo-conservativism.
ìOne of the very interesting things about these movements is the groups
behind them. Groups like the Small Property Owners of San Francisco, and
similar groups across the country, are part of this emerging, growing
property-rights movement. They have as a sort of larger agenda, simply
getting rid of tenants. They donít want tenants in San Francisco, or
Boston, or Santa Monica. The reason is, they envision a San Francisco with
home owners as being a conservative city thatíll pay attention to issues
like police and low taxes, as opposed to the tenants who are more
progressive and see the city as a city of diversity. And in fact some of
the early HOPE literature has argued that point. If people of San Francisco
pass HOPE, then we will see less progressive legislation passed in SF, we
will not see bonds, we will not see tax increases. Besides the lead of the
Real Estate industry which has this thing moving, we also have this
right-wing property rights fundamentalism that is behind it. And what they
see is a very different San Francisco than what we have today, one much more
like the suburbs than a vibrant city with lots of different people.î
Ted and the San Francisco Tenantís Union have much work to do in the months
before the vote. The organizationís funds do not compete with the
million-dollar budget of the HOPE advocates. There is no money to counter
the ad campaigns on television and in the newspapers. The campaigning is
going to have to be on the grass-roots level, through tabling and outreach.
Volunteers are needed, and you can help by going to www.saverentcontrol.org
or www.sftu.org. You can also call 282-5525 to offer help. The
overwhelming majority of us in San Francisco are tenants. We will all be on
the defensive if the HOPE measure passes. HOPE is a hoax. |
