Supervisor Myrna Melgar is introducing legislation Tuesday that would protect tenants who are unfairly portrayed as troubled by landlords seeking their evictions.
The ordinance would amend the San Francisco city code to create a clearer definition of what constitutes a “nuisance” for the purposes of eviction.
Melgar said the city code’s current language is too vague and invites abuse.
She drew inspiration for the ordinance after six households, including five seniors, who live at a building at 1120 Jackson St. in Chinatown received nuisance eviction notices for allegedly having too many belongings in their apartments, as reported by the San Francisco Standard, allegedly dangerously cluttering the units.
“When I read about Sue Yeng, I cried in the office,” Melgar said.
Nuisance evictions have filed against tenants accused of stealing a neighbor’s package, using appliances in an in-law unit, or cooking late at night.
Melgar’s proposed amendments raise the bar by requiring an offense to be of a severe nature, like subletting or transferring the unit when that has been prohibited by the landlord; seriously damaging the property; letting others damage the property; or using the property for something illegal.
The law would also only count instances that are “severe” or both “recurring” and “continuing.” Under the current code, severe, recurring or continuing alone is enough.
The law would also change a portion of the code that defines a nuisance as “creating a substantial interference with the comfort, safety or enjoyment of the landlord or tenants in the building” to remove reference to the landlord. The new language would read count nuisance as ‘so disorderly as to destroy the peace and quiet of other occupants.”
Finally, the law would bar evictions over property damage if a landlord has already accepted payment for the damages.
The legislation comes as rents are sky-high, driven by the AI boom, and evictions on the rise.
“I am introducing this legislation to tighten up the definition of nuisance, so people can’t scam it,” Melgar said in front of nearly 50 people at a press conference on Monday outside of 907 Valencia St. in the Mission District, where tenants organized and started a rent strike against Mosser Living, citing poor living conditions after a fire earlier last year.
Melgar made the announcement standing beside District 9 Supervisor Jackie Fielder, who is co-sponsoring the legislation and has her own targeting evictions: She introduced legislation co-sponsored by Melgar seeking to bar evictions for less than a month’s rent.
In a rental market where the price of a one-bedroom apartment averages $3,915, landlords are using all the tools at their disposal to evict tenants and re-rent units, said Molly Goldberg, director of the Anti-Displacement Coalition.
“If you can just empty out a unit of someone who’s been living in there for 30, 40, 50 years and suddenly jack up the rent to whatever you think you can get away with, suddenly landlords are looking for things that they can call a nuisance,” Goldberg said.
Nuisance eviction notices totaled 423 in the fiscal year 2025-2026, a 31% increase from the 323 recorded in 2024-2025, and a 47% increase from the 288 recorded in 2023-2024.
Following closely were evictions for breach of lease, with 397 in the fiscal year 2025-2026. Such notices are another tool for landlords seeking to evict longtime tenants, Goldberg said.
She recalled that, during the last tech boom, her group heard of cases in which landlords argued that tenants were in breach of lease for hanging their clothes out to dry on a cable, for example, or for using the backyard when they were not allowed to.
“That’s a combination of harassment, often, and looking for excuses to circumvent rent control and just-cause eviction protections,” she said.
Last year, San Francisco recorded its highest number of eviction notices post-pandemic, with 1,495, a 62 percent increase from the 921 recorded in 2024.
The number is likely higher: Landlords are not required to report a non-payment eviction.
The Mission District recorded its highest number of eviction notices last year since 2016, at 170. It was also the sixth highest year recorded since 2007.
Accountability matters, and tenants deserve protection from harassment and unsafe conditions caused by other renters. One of the best ways to address issues is to talk to your neighbors and form a tenant association! A tenant union in your building can help neighbors address problems together and hold both tenants (and landlords) accountable.
As Supervisor Melgar pointed out- a 40% increase in nuisance evictions doesn’t mean our neighborhoods have suddenly become 40% more annoying. These evictions are tools to get rid of the people that made this city what it is, in the name of getting tenants in who can pay the new astronomical median rent in this city $4000/mo for a 1 BR.
The owner of the cafe next to my office went and raised the prices of all the coffee drinks and food last month. I assumed his costs were going up due to diesel prices and deliver, etc… and asked him about it. Nope, he said he went around the neighborhood and everyone else’s prices were higher and he just was keeping his prices inline. My inlaws with lots of property are exactly the same. They will price to market rate. Period. I’ve asked them if they feel bad about raising John Doe’s rent by 30% after his lease ended and they just say, “that’s the price. You might as well ask me to give them $1000 every month. This isn’t a charity, it’s business.”. On the other hand, I cashed in my pension and bought a rental property in the city a while back. It’s rent controlled. A nice 2 bedroom for ~$2100/month. Tenants are nice, they like me. I keep everything nice. Even brought them some soup just yesterday when she had a cold. But that’s rent-control. Everyone knows what the rent is going to be and it’s going to go up some small percent every year and everyone agrees it’s ok. Now, THAT, I believe is more humane than my inlaws kicking out families because they want to make a fat profit while AI is hoppin’. HOWEVER – my other relatives who are “yimby” gave me a long explainantion about how rent control is evil and hurting everyone in the long run and supply side markets, etc… etc.. etc.. “Rent control does not make housing more affordable; it just slows the rate at which housing becomes less affordable” (straight off CAyimby website).
I don’t think I have any ability to change things for real. A bunch of rich people make decisions in SF now. But I’m pretty disturbed by how many people are willing to let landlords jack up the rent like crazy so they can make a quick profit, or exercize every possible way to evict people so they can make a profit – and try to convince me it’s all going to pay off in the end, like trickle down economics. I care about the people in reality first and we should be able to have affordable housing in the future AND not be horrible, awful, inhumane people in the present.
You got a good one. Not everyone is a good tenant.
LANDLORDS DON’T RAISE THE RENT. Other people wanting to rent do. What makes you more special than any other renters ? You rent, YOU DON’T OWN ! Everyone has the right to a rental at market rent. You do not have a god given right to cheap rent other people do not have. Your rental discount, makes it harder on other renters … you grifters !
Last year’s apartment fire in SF’s Cow Hollow neighborhood sheds light on hoarding disorder. The fire was at 1550 Filbert Street and Van Ness Avenue. It displaced all of the residents and one person was killed.
The fire started in the kitchen, where, according to investigators, it quickly spread. Neighbors told us the victim had a severe hoarding disorder. Despite years of complaints to the city and the landlord, nothing was ever done.
I haven’t always seen eye to eye with Myrna Melgar, but I really appreciate her for writing this legislation, as well as for supporting Jackie Fielder’s legislation to ban evictions for owing less than one month’s fair market rent. We do need to build housing, particularly permanently affordable housing, but along the way we also need to be closing these loopholes landlords use to displace the people who make San Francisco go.
I am myself someone who originally moved here for a tech job, but, with no offense to my fellow techies, we can’t have a healthy city with *only* AI engineers. Closing these loopholes and stopping displacement is more important than ever. Brava to Supervisors Melgar and Fielder for their hard work!
“ I cried in the office” … just ignorant emotional outbursts, rather than rational practically, from leftist lunatics that have ruined San Francisco for all but grifters who want special privileges and a lower bar of entry and effort than the average person has to mount. San Francisco is truly the destination city for losers and grifters.
Totally agree! Looks like a great idea! Tenants should be entitled to make their neighbors life as miserable as they can. They also should be entitled to cause property damages, as long as they make a maximum payment of a $1 to their landlord for the loss. Let’s change the current law!
Landlords should be held liable for committing hostile sarcasm. (Did you even read the whole article?)
SF has a long history of landlords’ abusing their tenants (Mosser, Skyline/Lembi, Veritas/GreenTree/PCCP) , as well as abusing Costa-Hawkins, owner move-in evictions and now AI software like RealPage. If you’re an upstanding property owner, then Melgar’s sensible legislation shouldn’t phase you one bit.
And a long history of tenants abusing landlords. In my building, we have a pot grower who pollutes the quality of life for everyone else in the building. But because they are in the unit through Section 8, they get free legal services and protection from eviction. The cost for the owner to evict is ridiculously high. So they stay, and we all get to suffer.