Victor Gomez comes to the Mission Food Hub two to three times every week so he can feed his family. Photo by Juan Carlos Lara.

Victor Gomez lives in a $2,000-a-month studio apartment with his partner, their two kids, and his partner’s brother. He used to work full time doing interior remodeling, until the Covid-19 outbreak made clients more reluctant to have workers in their homes. 

Gomez now owes his landlord more than $10,000 but, without reliable work, he has no idea how much his tab will grow, or how long it will take him to pay it back. 

The landlord has told Gomez they can set up a payment plan once Gomez starts working regularly again, “But even then, I think about the debt a lot… And it just keeps getting worse,” Gomez said.

Thousands of residents are currently in a position similar to Gomez and looking for ways on how to make 10k fast to pay their overdue bills and red notices — working fewer hours than before, or out of work entirely, and sinking further into debt every month. 

Every month from  April to September, between $13.5 million and $33.2 million in residential rents went unpaid in San Francisco, according to an October report by the San Francisco Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office. If those figures remained consistent through December. San Francisco entered 2021 with between $122 million to $294.3 million in residential rent debt alone.

Fred Brousseau, director of policy analysis at the Budget and Legislative Analyst’s Office, said that figure could be low because unpaid rent has likely increased since September.. 

“Initially, more people have personal resources available,” Brousseau said, like personal savings or loans from family members. “It becomes a much more daunting number to look at as time goes on, because you know those resources are going to be depleted.”

Brousseau said that tenants would need lots of time to repay their debt once they can begin paying rent again. Some degree of rent forgiveness is unavoidable, he said. 

“There will probably be a number of arrangements made so it’s partially recovered or paid for over time”  Brousseau said. “But I don’t see how it’s possible that it could all be paid off.” 

In Gomez’s case, even if he got back to working full time today and started paying his landlord an additional $250 every month to pay down his debt (an untenable increase for many residents), it would take him more than three years to eliminate the debt. 

“A shitstorm is the only word I can think of to describe it.”

Scott Weaver

Scott Weaver, a volunteer for the San Francisco Tenants Union and a supervising attorney at the Eviction Defense Collaborative, said many residents in similar positions to Gomez might consider filing for bankruptcy to eliminate their debt. 

“A lot of folks don’t want to look at the bankruptcy option,” Weaver said. “They see the stigma, and not the benefits, of bankruptcy.”

Weaver emphasized that bankruptcy is not a solution for everyone. But residents facing massive debts with no clear plan for repayment might be better off just wiping their debt and waiting seven years for the bankruptcy to disappear from their credit history. 

He also sees it as a way for tenants to remain in place. 

Assembly Bill 3088, which established California’s eviction moratorium, states that landlords can begin suing tenants for unpaid rent on March 1, which might result in a judgement — a court order to repay. 

“The landlord could get a judgement against you, and if you declare bankruptcy the judgement will be wiped out,” Weaver said. 

Weaver also said residents being sued by their landlords might use the threat of bankruptcy as a means of gaining leverage when negotiating repayment plans. And with the current decline in demand for rentals in San Francisco, landlords might be more inclined to accommodate tenants. 

“Rents in the city are going down significantly, so tenants are going to be in a better bargaining position, even if they haven’t been paying,” Weaver said. 

Indeed, a tenant may not even need the threat of bankruptcy. 

Charley Goss, who is in charge of government and community affairs at the San Francisco Apartment Association, said that landlords are trying to keep tenants. 

“What we’ve seen is that people are trying to keep their renters. It’s really tough to fill vacancies in this market… we’re trying to be as lenient as possible,” Goss said. 

And, this too could offer a way out of the crisis. 

Mission Local reported, in a story on residential rents in San Francisco, that tenants were getting discounts from $150 to $300 a month. If a tenant such as Gomez is able to negotiate a new lease at $250 a month less, and repays his debt at $250 a month, he will essentially be paying the same rent. 

The San Francisco Apartment Association, which represents landlords, surveyed 172 of its members, representing 4,741 residential units. The survey showed that 11.8 percent of tenants missed some or all of their rent payment for December. 

In the same survey, 56.9 percent of the landlords said that they had received a temporary or permanent rent reduction request and 54.4 percent had granted such requests. By comparison, only 4.4 percent of landlords received some type of payment deferment from their lenders. 

If landlords are unable to recover debts from tenants, and banks are unwilling to work with the landlords they’ve loaned to, Weaver and Goss both speculated that landlords who oversee fewer apartments might be put out of business. 

“There will be some landlords who won’t be able to stay in business,” Weaver said, “and larger interests will control more and more of the housing stock.” 

“We think that an owner who is local, who is invested, who has a relationship with the tenants is a better owner for the tenants than a real estate investment trust like Blackstone,” Goss said.

Brousseau, Goss and Weaver all pointed to another  solution to the growing problem: rent relief, preferably from state and federal funds. 

In San Francisco, the Mayor’s Office of Housing and Community Development’s Give2SF Housing Stabilization program has allocated nearly $6.5 million for rental assistance, disbursed through five community organizations, with an average payment of $4,500 per household, according to Brousseau’s report. However, the demand was huge; some 9,000 applications came in. 

“1,443 prioritized applications are in the process of receiving up to a combined $5.8 million in assistance,” reads an update report of the program published by the San Francisco Controller’s office on Jan. 8. 

But these numbers have not changed since the last update published on Nov. 4, meaning no new applicants have been selected for assistance in two months. Some members of the community also objected to the requirements for receiving assistance.

Even if the funds were disbursed expediently, the $6.5 million available is only a fraction of the $42 million in requests the program received, and an even smaller fraction of the hundreds of millions owed.  

On the state level, Assemblyman David Chiu, D-San Francisco, introduced Assembly Bill 16 in December, 2020, which would establish a rental assistance program in California called the Tenant, Small Landlord, and Affordable Housing Provider Stabilization Program. But the bill holds few specifics, so far. 

The federal relief bill passed in December, 2020, included $25 billion in rental assistance, and documents from the Department of the Treasury show California could get up to $2.6 billion, but it is unclear how much will come to San Francisco. And if the money is disbursed through the Housing Stabilization Program, it is unclear how long it will take for the money to get into the hands of residents. 

“A shitstorm is the only word I can think of to describe it,” Weaver said.

Related content

Follow Us

Juan Carlos Lara covers business and development in the Mission. Juan Carlos, a San Francisco State alum, is as much a photographer as he is a writer and previously worked as the campus news editor at Golden Gate Xpress, SF State’s student paper.

Tips can be sent to
Tweets can be found at @jcl_scoop

Join the Conversation


Please keep your comments short and civil. We will zap comments that fail to adhere to these short and very easy-to-follow rules.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Everyone is always trying to say there will be an eviction cliff. Well because of the forever extending moratorium there will definitely be one now. Instead of letting eviction cases be heard, they continue to push it back. Backlogging cases from even before the pandemic and stopping evictions based on nuisances and lease violations. When the courts do end up opening, there will be an increase in homelessness all at once. I feel like they pushed the issue down the road too far. Landlords will probably never get their back rent. Tenants will be evicted. And I agree, landlords will probably have to bare the cost because tenants always drag out through the court system and end up “settling” right before trial.

  2. Unfortunately these laws are heavily favored towards tenants. Many articles are saying ask landlords for rent reduction and if landlords are unwilling to work with tenants, it paints them negatively. Well reality is a lot of small landlords who saved up to buy a rental have mortgages on it still. Banks might have a forbearance, but then the balance will be due all at once. Some landlords are struggling as well and can’t even use them court system to evict tenants taking advantage of the system.

    The tenants in reality will never catch up with rent. Unfortunately many cases with non payment end up “settling” after months of no rent, because landlords have to bear the cost of a jury trial and would rather cut their losses short. And saying that landlords can sue in civil court after the eviction moratorium is also stop-gap measure. Debt collectors also cost money and civil trials take months. Sounds good, but doesn’t work for many small landlords.

  3. Gomez will never pay his landlord back. The landlord is S.O.L. Meanwhile all these moratoriums are an unconstitutional taking of property without just compensation and deprive housing providers of their due process – a direct violation of the 5th Amendment to the U.S. Constitution. Furthermore, a worthless i.o.u. by Gomez is NOT just compensation. The Supreme Court and judges everywhere need to wake up and smell the communism, bankruptcy, foreclosure soon before it is too late.

  4. I believe this should be done on a case by case. Landlords and renters may be victims. Some tenants need protection from Landlords, and then there are landlords that need protection from the tenants.
    There may be other reasons tenants may not be paying rent. If a person(some), was making under $22.00 an hour and working 30 hours a week, with Unemployment and Federal relief, they probably have been receiving more than their regular salary.

  5. Who we kidding.
    Those landlords will never get their money. some of those small landlords will go bankrupt and lose everything. And going to court and getting a judgment? In a shithole state like California that is so liberal? Good luck. Maybe Pennies on the dollar.

  6. California is going to the dogs with all the rich moving out, how are these poor people needing assistance, going to get more handouts. They won’t, because you can’t tax the poor so it’s going to be vicious and ugly. Americans first.

  7. Seems like with CA’s budget $15,000 M surplus this year (said not expected to be repeated in subsequent yrs); that instead of investing in new programs like Undocumented Healthcare (which will then need continual funding), that the state use those extra/excess funds for an outlier problem like Rent-relief.

  8. So appreciate this excellent report that provides detail about some rent relief programs and negotiation scenarios for tenants and landlords facing debt and loss. But what is the status of the Prop I fund that was expected to help – Dean Preston’s Rent Resolution and Relief Fund?

    1. My question it this,
      If the city and state, (the people), are basically going to seize private property, why are they not paying landlords for rentals, as they are hotels? What is being done to landlords is unacceptable. Yes, larger corporations can write it off, however for some smaller landlords it’s their bread and water, not their butter. Let the city and state (the people), bare the burden of the rent. We are destroying innocence victims knowingly, while we bask in our higher glory of how much we care.