San Francisco eviction limits advanced October 20 when supervisors unanimously supported a proposed minimum debt requirement for nonpayment evictions. The rule could change when landlords may pursue eviction over unpaid rent, but it is not yet law. Federal housing figures, outstanding rent obligations and a California Supreme Court case explain what is at stake.
Key Takeaways
- San Francisco supervisors unanimously advanced the eviction proposal on October 20, but final approval remains pending
- The proposed thresholds would use federal fair market rents based on apartment size
- Current federal benchmarks are $2,574 for studios, $3,003 for one-bedroom units and $3,697 for two-bedroom units
- Unpaid rent would remain collectible even when the proposed eviction threshold is not met
- A pending California Supreme Court case could affect the legal standing of similar local eviction rules
The San Francisco Board of Supervisors unanimously approved the proposal at its first reading on October 20, 2026. The ordinance would prevent landlords from pursuing nonpayment evictions when tenants owe less than the federal fair market rent benchmark for a comparable apartment.
Introduced by Supervisor Jackie Fielder, the measure still requires final passage and formal enactment. The city’s legislative record lists it as unfinished business, meaning existing eviction rules remain in place.
San Francisco Eviction Limits Would Change When Landlords Can File
Under San Francisco’s existing Rent Ordinance, nonpayment can be grounds for eviction regardless of the outstanding amount. The proposed amendment would establish a minimum unpaid-rent threshold based on the size of the rental unit.
Landlords seeking eviction for nonpayment would need to establish that the outstanding balance exceeds the applicable federal benchmark. Eviction notices would also need to identify the number of bedrooms in the apartment.
The change is intended to address cases involving relatively small outstanding balances rather than eliminate landlords’ ability to recover unpaid rent.
Fielder told Mission Local in September that the proposal is “not going to erase a tenant’s debt to a landlord.” The legislation expressly preserves landlords’ ability to recover unpaid amounts through other lawful methods.
The measure was introduced September 1 and recommended by the Board’s Land Use and Transportation Committee on October 5. Its October 20 approval marked the first full-board vote, not final enactment.
If ultimately enacted, the ordinance specifies that it would take effect 31 days later. No effective date has been established.
The decision comes amid broader Bay Area housing affordability concerns, although the proposed ordinance addresses eviction procedures rather than rental prices or housing supply.
Updated Federal Rent Figures Show the Proposed Eviction Thresholds
The proposed rule would use fair market rents published annually by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, rather than the monthly rent specified in individual leases.
HUD’s fiscal 2027 schedule, effective October 1, 2026, establishes the following monthly benchmarks for the San Francisco metropolitan fair market rent area:
- Studio apartment: $2,574
- One-bedroom apartment: $3,003
- Two-bedroom apartment: $3,697
- Three-bedroom apartment: $4,832
Those amounts are higher than the fiscal 2026 figures cited when the ordinance was introduced. Earlier benchmarks included $2,485 for studios, $2,977 for one-bedroom units and $3,604 for two-bedroom apartments.
HUD received a request to reevaluate San Francisco’s fiscal 2027 figures. However, the agency’s published notice confirms that the updated amounts remain effective during the review.
Under the proposed ordinance, an outstanding balance below the applicable benchmark would not independently qualify as grounds for a nonpayment eviction under the amended local rule.
The threshold would depend on apartment size rather than the actual rent charged by a particular landlord. A tenant paying above the federal benchmark could therefore reach the threshold without owing an entire contractual month’s rent.
Federal fair market rents are not limits on what landlords may charge. HUD uses them primarily as benchmarks for housing assistance programs.
Unlike California housing affordability reforms addressing development financing and housing production, San Francisco’s measure focuses on the legal consequences of unpaid rent in existing tenancies.
Rising Eviction Notices and a Court Case Complicate the Measure
San Francisco’s proposal follows an increase in eviction notices reported by the city’s Rent Board.
Its fiscal 2024-25 annual statistical report recorded 1,347 eviction notices filed with the agency, compared with 695 during the previous fiscal year. That represents a 94% increase in recorded notices.
The figures do not represent completed evictions, and not all nonpayment notices must be filed with the Rent Board. The data also do not establish how many cases involved debts below the proposed threshold.
Tuesday Rose Thornton, an attorney with the Eviction Defense Collaborative, told Mission Local that approximately one-quarter of cases in a sample reviewed by the organization involved unpaid balances below the federal fair market rent benchmark.
That finding reflects the organization’s sample rather than a verified citywide percentage.
Landlord representatives have raised a separate concern about the proposal’s compatibility with California law.
In August 2026, the California Supreme Court agreed to review a case involving Los Angeles’ similar minimum-rent-debt ordinance. The case, Apartment Association of Los Angeles County v. City of Los Angeles, concerns whether California’s unlawful detainer statutes preempt local requirements establishing a monetary threshold before an eviction lawsuit can begin.
The San Francisco Apartment Association has warned that adopting the measure before the state court resolves the question could expose the city to litigation.
The Supreme Court has not issued a final ruling on that question as of October 21, 2026.
Meanwhile, San Francisco’s proposed protections would not eliminate existing rent obligations or prohibit evictions for other legally recognized grounds.
For tenants and property owners, the immediate distinction remains the ordinance’s legislative status. San Francisco eviction limits have advanced through an initial vote, but the proposed minimum-debt requirement is not yet enforceable.
Frequently Asked Questions
Are the new San Francisco eviction limits already in effect?
No. San Francisco eviction limits received unanimous approval at the Board of Supervisors’ October 20, 2026, first reading, but final passage and enactment remain pending. Existing eviction requirements continue to apply.
How much unpaid rent would be required for an eviction?
The proposal would use HUD’s federal fair market rent benchmark for an apartment of equivalent size. Under the current fiscal 2027 schedule, that amount is $3,003 for a one-bedroom apartment and $3,697 for a two-bedroom unit.
Would tenants still have to pay overdue rent?
Yes. The ordinance would not forgive outstanding rent or eliminate landlords’ rights to collect legally owed payments. It would establish an additional restriction on using smaller unpaid balances as grounds for eviction.
Why does the California Supreme Court case matter?
The court is reviewing whether state eviction law permits cities to establish minimum unpaid-rent thresholds. Its ruling could influence the legal treatment of San Francisco’s proposed ordinance and similar local requirements.
