Findings. | |
Definition: Housing Accommodation. | |
Prohibited Activity. | |
Occupancy Standards. | |
Tenant Age Policy Not Prohibited. | |
Requirements of Financial Obligations Not Prohibited. | |
Penalty. | |
Civil Action. | |
Liability. | |
Injunctive Relief. | |
Administrative Remedies. | |
Limitation on Actions. | |
Bar. | |
Severance Clause. | |
After public hearings with the reception of testimony and documentary evidence, we find that discrimination against families with minor children in the leasing or renting of housing accommodations exists within the City and County of San Francisco. We further find that the existence of such discrimination poses a substantial threat to the health and welfare of a sizable segment of the community, namely families with minor children.
We find that a shortage of housing suitable for families with minor children exists within the City and County. We further find that a low vacancy rate exists in all rental housing throughout San Francisco. The addition of discrimination against families with minor children to the above two factors creates an untenable situation for the children of San Francisco.
We find that existing state and local laws prohibiting housing discrimination against families with children have not stopped acts of discrimination. Some landlords have attempted to circumvent these laws by engaging in subtle forms of discrimination that do not overtly exclude families with children but that nonetheless limit their opportunities to rent. Some landlords use overly restrictive occupancy standards to limit the number of persons who can reside in a rental unit. These standards have an adverse effect on the ability of families with children to rent because families with children tend to have a larger number of persons per household than childless households. Other forms of subtle discrimination include rent surcharges for additional occupants of a unit and unreasonable rules governing children's conduct in and around the rental unit.
The overall effect of such discrimination is to encourage the flight of families from the City and to further diminish family-oriented neighborhoods. It has an overall detrimental effect on the composition of the City, the stability of neighborhoods, the preservation of family life within the City, the living conditions of our children, the quality of our schools, and the viability of children's activities and organizations.
This discrimination cuts across all racial, ethnic and economic levels but has a disproportionate and adverse effect on racial and ethnic minority families.
(Added by Ord. 320-75, App. 7/14/75; amended by Ord. 399-87, App. 9/25/87)
It shall be unlawful for the owner, lessor, lessee, sublessee, real estate broker, assignee, or other person having the rights of ownership, the right of possession, or the right to rent or lease any housing accommodations, or any agent or employee of such person to:
(a) Refuse to rent or lease, or otherwise deny to or withhold from any person such accommodations because such person has a minor child or children who shall occupy the leased or rented premises with such person;
(b) Represent to any person because of the potential tenancy of a minor child or children that housing accommodations are not available for inspection or rental when such dwelling is in fact so available;
(c) Make, print, or publish, or cause to be made, printed or published any notice, statement, or advertisement, with respect to the rental of housing accommodations that indicates any preference, limitation, or discrimination based on the potential tenancy of a minor child or children;
(d) Discriminate against any person in the terms, conditions or privileges of the rental of housing accommodations or in the provision of services or facilities in connection therewith, because of the potential tenancy of a minor child or children;
(e) Refuse to rent after the making of a bona fide offer, or to refuse to negotiate for the rental of, or otherwise make unavailable or deny, housing accommodations to any person because of the potential tenancy of a minor child or children;
(f) Include in any lease or rental agreement of housing accommodations a clause providing that as a condition of continued tenancy the tenants shall remain childless or shall not bear children;
(g) Charge additional rent, deposits, fees, or surcharges on the basis of actual or potential number or age of persons living in the housing accommodations;
(h) Establish unreasonable rules for, or conditions of, occupancy of housing accommodations which have the effect of excluding or discriminating against persons with children. Examples of unreasonable rules include, but are not limited to, the following:
(1) Restricting the hours during which minor children but not adults may use recreational facilities on the property;
(2) Requiring that minor children who are six years of age or older be accompanied by a parent or other adult when using common areas which are accessible to all tenants and which do not present any unusual hazards;
(3) Limiting the occupancy of persons with children to certain units, floors or areas of an apartment building; and
(4) Prohibiting children of the opposite sex from sharing the same bedroom.
Nothing in this subsection shall preclude a property owner or other person having the right to rent or lease any housing accommodations from adopting reasonable policies or practices regulating the use of the accommodations or its common areas, facilities, and services even though those policies and practices have the effect of excluding persons with children. A policy or practice is reasonable, under this subsection, if it fulfills a business necessity. Business necessity is demonstrated by independent and objective evidence that the policy or practice in question serves a legitimate and nondiscriminatory business purpose and is essential to the safe and continued operation of the business.
(Added by Ord. 320-75, App. 7/14/75; amended by Ord. 399-87, App. 9/25/87; Ord. 123-93, App. 4/29/93)
Loading...