San Francisco Bill Would Narrow 'Nuisance' Evictions

Two San Francisco supervisors have put forward legislation that would sharply narrow when a landlord can evict a tenant for being a "nuisance." The proposal, from Supervisors Myrna Melgar and Jackie Fielder, was slated to be unveiled at the Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday, October 6. It is a proposal, not law, and no hearing or vote date has been reported.

What the bill would do

Under the current law as described by SFist, any one of several factors can support a nuisance claim, including conduct that interferes with a landlord's comfort, safety or enjoyment. The bill would tighten that. According to SFist, an offense would have to be serious, such as unlawfully subletting, seriously damaging the property, letting others damage it or using it for an illegal purpose. The conduct would have to be severe, or both recurring and continuing, and so disorderly that it destroys other occupants' peace and quiet.

The Standard reported that the bill would remove the word "nuisance" from the code, allow evictions only where a tenant disturbs other occupants or causes substantial damage, and let tenants who caused damage by honest mistake avoid a claim by paying reasonable repair costs or stopping the activity. SFist adds that landlords could not evict over damage if they had already accepted payment for it. The measure is modeled on laws in Berkeley and Oakland and was drafted with the Asian Law Caucus, with input from other tenant advocates.

The case behind it

Melgar has pointed to 1120 Jackson Street, a rent-controlled building between Chinatown and Nob Hill. The Standard reported that the building was bought by Nabob Hill LLC last year and that in March, eviction notices over alleged dangerous clutter went to Sue Yeng Yan, 92, who has lived there since 1982, and four other tenants. After a rally and press coverage, the landlord wrote in June that Yan had "cured" the conditions but that future inspections might occur. The Standard said the landlord did not respond to its request for comment.

Tenants and advocates say the notices were meant to clear units for higher rents, a motive the landlord has not been reported to have addressed. An attorney for tenants told The Standard the other cases could restart at any time.

Where sources differ

The reports differ on some figures. SFist described six seniors receiving nuisance notices; The Standard described Yan and four others. On nuisance notices overall, SFist cited 423 in fiscal 2025-26, up 31% from 323, while The Standard cited a Rent Board report of 405, up 41% from 288 in the prior year. Both agree nuisance notices are rising and that more than 1,000 evictions have been filed in San Francisco this year.

Reaction

Mayor Daniel Lurie has declared a "rent emergency" and backs a separate Fielder proposal to bar evictions over less than one month's back rent. Landlord attorney Dave Wasserman, of the Coalition for Better Housing, told The Standard he had not read the bill but supports limiting nuisance evictions to intentional, malicious or reckless conduct left unfixed after clear written warnings.

What this means for renters

• Don't ignore a notice. Nuisance and "cure" notices carry deadlines. Contact a tenant attorney or a San Francisco legal aid group promptly.
• Document the fix. If you are told to clean or repair something, photograph the results and keep any letter confirming it was cured.
• Nothing changes yet. Until the Board passes a law and it takes effect, current rules apply.