A hearing was held yesterday to further discuss Supervisor Bevan Dufty’s proposed legislation to change the current condo conversion lottery so that priority is given to those who have been on the list longest. Tenant activists argue that this move will make it easier to convert Tenancies in Common (TICs) to condos and thus make it more desirable for owners to evict current residents. Supervisor Dufty and TIC owners disagreed,claiming that the legislation was only a small technicality which would make the condo selection process more fair.
Ted Gullickson of the San Francisco Tenants Union said that the legislation “makes it easier for TICs to become condos and encourages evictions,” to which those in support of Dufty’s legislation said that the number of conversions that would happen each year would not change – only the way in which those allowed to make the conversions would change. Gullickson went on to call the legislation a “half-measure” which would only “undercut full measures later.” He also made sure to let everybody know that tenant activists would continue to make it as hard as possible for TICs to become condos, no matter what kind of measures are taken, to which Dufty responded, “my intention is not to accelerate anything but to restore some equity.”
Dean Preston of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic urged a continued discussion on the matter, as he was not sure this technical legislation would solve anything. He expressed concern about how the city prioritizes those who receive consent to convert and encouraged an open discussion which deals with “all the issues as they relate to the rest of the city.” “Seniority exists in the lottery. It should be there. Now [it] is being punished, which is in direct contradiction to why we entered the lottery in the first place,” said local resident Scott Hall.
Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval pointed out that although this issue has been talked about frequently, he feels that the different groups involved don’t often take time to “see what the other side is saying.” “It fits into a larger context that I’m not sure is always visible,” continued Sandoval. He did not agree that the matter was closed either, and wondered whether or not the question “are we are doing anything to encourage more conversions?” has been properly addressed.
“It’s still an open conversation,” he said. When it was his turn to speak, Supervisor Dufty pointed out that if his legislation were passed, those who made so-called “bad evictions” would see their chances of being chosen diminish. “If anything, I think this debate has helped to educate people of how long the process [toward conversion] is,” said Dufty, noting that those who purchase property should not do so under the assumption that they can quickly fix it up and make a profit. He further went on the pledge his commitment to stay with the process and not to “bargain with people’s lives.”
“We’re going to see more done in the area of bad evictions, but this [legislation] doesn’t change the number of conversions, all it does is add an element of reality,” said Dufty, finishing with a reminder that a wait for conversion could last up to 16 years. At the end of the hearing, it was agreed that the issue would be send to the full board without recommendation.
