BOMA | Building Owners and Managers Association of San Francisco
Advocate: An Update on Legislative, Regulatory, and Political Issues Affecting Commercial Real Estate
June 28, 2019
Stricter Vacant Storefront Registry Requirements
Operative as of April 22, 2019
Please note this ordinance is now operative as of April 22, 2019. Click here to read a recent article on the subject in the San Francisco Chronicle.

From our partners at the San Francisco Department of Building Inspection (SFDBI): 

If you’re a property owner and your commercial storefront is vacant or abandoned, you are required to register by completing an application and submitting annual registration fees to the Department of Building Inspection pursuant to Ordinance 52-19. This applies even if other units in the building are currently occupied. In addition, you need to maintain and secure your property, even if partially unoccupied, to prevent blight and public safety hazards in compliance with Chapter 80 of the San Francisco Administrative Code, the California Environmental Quality Act, and all other applicable building, health, fire, and safety codes.


In March 2019, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to amend this law through Ordinance 52-19, which took effect on April 22nd. Important changes were made, including:

  • Registration of vacant storefront is required within 30-days of the commercial storefront becoming vacant, even if it is actively being offered for rent or lease;
  • Annual registration fee payment of $711 is now required at the time of registration;
  • Property owners are now required to pay a penalty of four times (4x) the annual registration fee ($2,844) for failure to register a vacant storefront within 30 days of the property being noticed by DBI; and
  • An annual safety inspection report is now required from a licensed professional, which is engaged and paid for by the property owner, confirming the storefront’s interior and exterior remains up to code. This annual report is due when the owner renews and pays the storefront’s annual registration.

Questions? Please email


UPDATE - March 27, 2019

Recently, the Board of Supervisors voted unanimously to amend this law. Important changes were made, which include the following:

  • Registration of vacant storefront is required: 1) within 30-days of the commercial storefront becoming vacant or 2) even if it is actively being offered for rent or lease;
  • Annual registration fee payment of $711 required at the time of registration; 
  • Property owner is required to pay a penalty of four times (4x) the annual registration fee ($711) for failure to register a vacant storefront within 30 days of the property being noticed by DBI; and 
  • Annual report required from a licensed professional, which is engaged and paid for by the property owner, confirming the storefront's interior and exterior are maintained up to code. This annual report is due when the owner renews and pays the storefront's annual registration. 

The San Francisco Department of Building Inspection plans to offer a workshop on Vacant Storefronts at this year's Earthquake Safety Fair in June. To be notified of workshop details and how to register, sign up here.


UPDATE - May 8, 2014

BOMA San Francisco Members:

Supervisor Katy Tang has introduced amendments to the 2009 San Francisco Vacant or Abandoned Buildings (VABO) law, summarized below.

If you are a BOMA member that owns or manages a portfolio of smaller buildings in San Francisco's commercial corridors, or if you feel that the new amendments may impact your downtown high-rise commercial/mixed-use properties, please email with your comments.

Existing Law (2009) 

Building Code Section 103A.4 et. seq., the VABO, requires that owners of vacant or abandoned buildings in San Francisco register their properties as such, pay registration fees, secure their properties to deny access to would-be trespassers, and provide proof of liability insurance coverage for the properties. VABO, as it currently reads, applies to some vacant commercial storefronts in San Francisco.

However, a building containing a vacant commercial storefront but an occupied second floor unit is technically not a vacant or abandoned building, as defined by VABO. As such, the City and County of San Francisco feels that many vacant commercial storefronts in San Francisco evade VABO regulations via this loophole.

Proposed Amendments to Current Law (2014) - Click Here to Review the Ordinance

By amending the Building Code to apply requirements similar to those specified in VABO to properties containing vacant or abandoned commercial storefronts, owners of properties in commercial corridors will have extra incentive to seek suitable tenants to fill their vacant or abandoned commercial storefronts. To provide owners of vacant or abandoned commercial storefronts with ample time to find suitable tenants, the proposed amendment to the Building Code would mandate owners of vacant or abandoned commercial storefronts to do the following within 30 days of issuance of a Notice of Violation:

  • Register their commercial storefronts with the Department of Building Inspection (DBI);
  • Secure their commercial storefronts to prevent trespassers from gaining access to the premises;
  • Remove graffiti, refuse, and debris from in and around their commercial storefronts; and 
  • Maintain fire and/or liability insurance coverage for their commercial storefronts as DBI determines necessary. 

Additionally, owners of vacant or abandoned commercial storefronts would be required to do either of the following within 270 days of their commercial storefronts becoming vacant or abandoned:

  • Rent their commercial storefronts to tenants who occupy the premises in a manner that complies with all state and local laws; or 
  • Pay a fee of $765.00 to include their commercial storefronts in the Registry of Vacant or Abandoned Commercial Storefronts. This fee shall be assessed on an annual basis for each year that a commercial storefront remains vacant or abandoned. 

Finally, the proposed amendment carves out an exemption for owners of commercial storefronts who demonstrate a good faith effort to rent, lease, or sell their commercial storefronts, or obtain permits to bring their commercial storefronts into compliance with the law.


Original Post - June 15, 2009

Your BOMA Advocacy Team attended the special meeting of the Building Inspection Commission (BIC) and the Department of Building Inspection (DBI) recently where the Registration of Vacant/Abandoned Buildings Ordinance was discussed (you can view a copy of the Ordinance, here). The discussion surrounding the measure was an interesting one; here are the highlights:

What's the origin/intent of the Ordinance?

  • The measure was introduced on May 5, 2009 by Board of Supervisors President David Chiu and Supervisor Bevan Dufty.
  • Many cities have this type of ordinance (under the 'public nuisance' ordinance of the code).
  • At its core, the measure attempts to mitigate the deterioration of a building.

What's the status of the Ordinance?

  • On June 3, 2009, the San Francisco Planning Department: Historic Preservation Commissionconducted a public hearing to consider the measure. The Commission approved the Ordinance, with modifications. You can view the Commission's recommendation and documents related to their action, here.
  • On June 10, 2009, the measure was heard before the Code Advisory Committee (CAC) where they recommended "non-support of [the] ordinance as written, and in lieu recommen[ed] that the Department of Building Inspection develop administrative procedures to enforce existing requirements." You can read the CAC's letter to the BIC, here.
  • On June 12, 2009, DBI Director Vivian Day responded to the Planning Department's recommendation of the Ordinance that can be viewed here. In short, the measure is not enforceable by DBI.
  • On June 12, 2009, the BIC approved a motion to notify the Board of Supervisors that it does not support the Ordinance.

The need for the Ordinance warrants further discussion:

  • Do we need another ordinance? There are already City ordinances that cover blight.
  • What about buildings slated for demolition, or those waiting for rehabilitation? There needs to be a consensus review of this issue.
  • Finding insurance on a vacant building can be difficult. How can this be addressed?
  • What is the definition of a blighted building?
  • The City doesn't know how many blighted buildings it has.
  • This is a big brother issue: The City should help building owners improve their buildings, NOT impose another City mandate.

A full transcript/video of the meeting can be found here.

Your BOMA Advocacy Team will continue to monitor the Registration of Vacant/Abandoned Buildings Ordinance and report any new developments on this blog.

Previous Article  Previous Article Next Article  Next Article
Share this article: Twitter Facebook LinkedIn
In This Issue
IMPORTANT - PG&E's Public Safety Power Shutoff Program
•  Part of the Utility's Community Wildfire Safety Program
San Francisco's Refuse Separation Ordinance Effective on July 1, 2019
•  Large Generators and Zero Waste Facilitators
Stricter Vacant Storefront Registry Requirements
•  Operative as of April 22, 2019
UPDATE: Building Facade Inspection and Maintenance Ordinance
The Impact the New Prop 65 Warning Regulations
•  On Multi-Family Apartments and Other Prop 65 Updates
BOMA International's Political Action Committee (BOMAPAC) Needs Your Support
•  Thank you Jim Collins with Shorenstein for Leading This Effort
Get Involved With BOMA San Francisco's Advocacy Program
•  BOMA Needs YOU!
San Francisco Planning Department Debuts Business Zoning Check Service
•  Interactive Feature Streamlines Business Permit Requirement Research

Buchalter is a full-service business law firm that has been teaming with clients for eight decades, providing legal counsel at all stages of their growth and evolution, and helping them meet the many legal challenges and decisions they face. Our clients are engaged in a diverse global economy governed by complex laws and regulations, and they trust us as advisers and business partners because we are involved in their world. They rely on our forward-thinking to help them resolve problems before they arise.

At Buchalter, we practice in that spirit.

Our founding principle—providing our clients with the best business solutions—continues to lead us. We value each client relationship, recognizing that their success is our success. Our overarching goal—getting the best results for the client in a timely manner with sensitivity to cost—has engendered client loyalty, and the firm has grown from that loyalty.

Our lawyers are accessible, resourceful, skillful and adept at responding to change. Our technological capabilities keep case law and rule changes at our fingertips and client communications current, enabling us to create efficient, superior outcomes.

We strongly believe that technology is a tool that furthers the practice of law and have used that belief to develop a cutting edge platform for our firm. We use a meshed (NVPN) network to facilitate work among offices, Cisco VoIP telephony and Video-over-IP conferencing. Sharing documents is seamless through FileSite, which is also utilized to create our Client Extranets. To support our litigation matters, we use Concordance and Opticon, as well as LiveNote and Sanction. Unlike many firms, we have the capacity to process e-Discovery in-house, reducing client costs.

Buchalter lawyers are also active members of the communities in which they live and work. Leadership is a value the founding partners practiced and passed on to the current generation of attorneys. Our lawyers sit on the boards of prominent organizations, teach and lecture frequently. We actively participate in many associations and groups including the Public Law Center, San Francisco Legal Aid Society, Practicing Law Institute, California State Bar Association, the Los Angeles County Bar Association and the LACBA Domestic Violence Project, the Sojourner Center, the Boys and Girls Club of Greater Phoenix and many others.

Buchalter is consistently ranked among the leading law firms in California by Chambers and Partners, Best Lawyers, The Daily Journal and the Los Angeles Business Journal. It is also ranked among the leading firms nationally by American Legal Media and the National Law Journal.

Buchalter’s commitment to reflecting and enhancing the rich diversity of the clients and communities in which we practice is more than eight decades strong. The firm’s diversity of attorneys and staff provides clients with a greater array of creative talent and alternative thinking, benefiting all.


Codes and Regulations Committee 
TBA in July 2019
12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.
201 California Street, 2nd Floor Conference Room, San Francisco, CA
Please click here for more information.
•  Government Affairs Policy Advisory Committee (GAPAC) Meeting
July 10, 2019
12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.
235 Montgomery Street (Russ Building), 7th Floor, San Francisco, CA
Please click here for more information.
•  Energy & Environment Committee
August 6, 2019
11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m.
Location: The Ferry Building, Second Floor, Port Commission Hearing Room, San Francisco, CA 
Emergency Preparedness Committee (EPC)
August 13, 2019
12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m.
225 Bush Street, Suite 1810, San Francisco, CA 
Please click here for more information.
Print-Friendly Version
Search Back Issues
Forward this Issue
Email the Editor
BOMA SF Home Page
BOMA SF Advocacy Page
BOMA California
BOMA International
© BOMA San Francisco. All Rights Reserved.
233 Sansome Street, 8th Floor  |  San Francisco, CA 94104
Advertise in BOMA SanFrancisco Advocate

Advocacy  |  Education & Training  |  Networking
Membership  |  BOMASF Govít Affairs & Industry News Blog  |  Home

To ensure delivery, please add '' to your email address book or Safe Sender List.
If you are still having problems receiving our communications, see our white-listing page for more details.