Water costs may trickle down to San Francisco’s tenants
By Brent Begin
Examiner Staff Writer 10/2/08
Plumbing renters’ pockets? The cost of a $4.6 billion bond measure that would rebuild water delivery infrastructure from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir, pictured, may fall on city renters if legislation passes that allows owners to pass on 50 percent of the cost to tenants. AP file photo SAN FRANCISCO – Renters in San Francisco are one step closer to forking out money for utility costs that have increased because of a $4.6 billion bond measure passed in 2002.
The general obligation bond measure provided billions to rebuild infrastructure related to water delivery from the Hetch Hetchy reservoir. Passing on the costs of that bond to renters is necessary, according to Supervisor Sean Elsbernd, who is sponsoring the legislation with Mayor Gavin Newsom, and Supervisors Michela Alioto-Pier and Carmen Chu.
Landlords are now paying higher water rates in order to finance the bonds, and they will be paying more in sewer rates in the future. The legislation would allow landlords to charge their tenants for 50 percent of the cost increases associated with the bond.
But the legislation has been stalled in a Board of Supervisors committee since April with several amendments and continuations.
Only recently, after The City’s “most important” bond measure — an $887.4 billion project to rebuild San Francisco General Hospital — became threatened by a landlord group, did the legislation move forward Wednesday.
Jack Davis, who helped elect Mayors Frank Jordan and Willie Brown, has expressed his opposition to Proposition A with longtime client Coalition for Better Housing, which represents landlords throughout San Francisco. Prop. A campaigners say that threat was only to speed the passage of the legislation.
On Wednesday, the committee sent the legislation to the full board so the committee isn’t seen as “obstructionist,” Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval said.
“I think there is not the support for passage of the measure,” he said.
One major amendment was changing the 70 percent pass-through rate to a 50 percent pass-through. Another amendment would ensure that landlords also have to make a number of efforts to conserve water, such as making sure there are no plumbing leaks in the building and installing water-conservation fixtures in units.
Landlords would also be required to provide written notice of the increases to tenants, and provide an actual bill that proves the added costs.
But several advocates of tenants, which represent about 70 percent of San Francisco, appeared at the hearing to fight any increase to their rent. Randy Shaw, of the Tenderloin Housing Clinic, said the amendments were just a smokescreen for higher rent.
“This is a water-conservation problem?” Shaw said. “All this is, is a way to get money back into landlords’ pockets.”
2 Comments
Reader Comments:
POSTED Oct 2, 2008
bfd: "I don't get it? Why not allow landlords to recover the cost of providing water to tenants? Especially, if landlords are required to provide an actual accounting (i.e., show an actual bill that provides the added cost). Further, tenants use water? Some use it recklessly. All users, should share in this cost, its only fair. What am I missing?"POSTED Oct 2, 2008
Gretchen: "Rent control laws make it difficult for property owners to recover their costs. This isn't about profit - it's about recovering what it costs to own and operate a rental property. If any service that is included in the rent takes a big leap, then the owner needs a way to recoup all or part of that expense. This includes utilities, garbage, water, insurance, maintenance, etc. When costs go up at the same rate as allowed increases for rent, it's a win-win for the tenant. But when costs go up faster than rent prices, then the landlord is losing - not fair. Also, it is proven that when someone pays for something they tend to use it more responsibility. I think every apartment should have individual meters for every utility for every unit, and each tenant should be responsible for his own usage. However, the cost to run separate gas and electric and water meter lines to each unit would be impossible. Passing some cost to tenants is a fair thing to do."