SR-8-D (5)
t ~- So . \ \ DO .-00 u\, . P-j)
t
DEe 1 0 19M
CA:RMM:rmd095/hpca California
City Council Meeting 12-10-85 Santa Monica,
STAFF REPORT
TO:
Mayor and City Council
FROM:
city Attorney
SUBJECT:
Ordinance Amending sections 2604, 2605, 2606,
2607, and 2608 of the Municipal Code and Adding
section 2608A to the Municipal Code Relating to
Subpoenas
INTRODUCTION
At its meeting on March 12, 1985, the City Council
introduced for first reading an ordinance amending Sections 2604,
2605, 2606, 2607, and 2608 of the Municipal Code and adding
Section 2608A to the Municipal Code relating to subpoenas. At
its meeting on March 26, 1985, the City Council directed the City
Attorney to respond to concerns raised during the meeting and
requested that the Rent Control Board provide additional
information. The Rent Control Board recently notified the city
Attorney that it had issued subpoena regulations and requested
that the ordinance be returned to the city Council.
BACKGROUND
Municipal
code Section
2605
authorizes boards
and
commissions enumerated in Article X of the city Charter or
created by City Council ordinance to compel production of
r-J>
DEe 1 0 \985
- 1 -
'"
-:
.
.
witnesses and evidence and provides that non-compliance with such
a subpoena is punishable as a misdemeanor.
The Rent Control Board has authori ty under city Charter
Section 1803 (f) (11) to administer oaths and to subpoena
wi tnesses. However, the Rent Control Law is silent on the
authority of the Board to compel compliance with a subpoena that
is disregarded. The Board has had a continuing problem with
parties ignoring subpoenas. without specific authority to seek
judicial enforcement of subpoenas, this problem will continue.
See 18 Ops. Cal. Atty. Gen. 236 (1951) (administrative agencies
have no inherent authority to require attendance of witnesses);
Marcus V. Workmen's Compensation Appeals Board, 35 Cal. App. 3d
598, III Cal. Rptr. 101 (1979) (non-judicial agency has no power
to punish for contempt for disregarding subpoena).
Administrative agencies are typically authorized by statute
to apply to a court for an order compelling a witness to comply
with an administrative subpoena. Hill v. Brisbane, 66 Cal. App.
2d 15, 15l P.2d 387 (1944). Under statutes such as Santa Monica
Municipal Code Section 2608 and California Government Code
Section 11525, the agency may also apply to the court for
immediate sanctions or penalties for failure to comply with an
administrative subpoena.
The accompanying ordinance proposes that a new Section
2608A be added to the Municipal Code to specify that disobedience
of a subpoena of the Rent Control Board is punishable as a
- 2 -
.,.
~
.
.
misdemeanor and that the Board may seek a court order to enforce
its subpoenas.
Existing sections of the Municipal Code relating to
subpoenas are also amended. section 2605 would be changed to
limit the power to issue subpoenas without prior city Council
approval to the Hearing Examiner, Planning Commission, Personnel
Board, and Architectural Review Board. other boards and
commissions could issue subpoenas only upon specific city Council
authorization.
Section 2607 would be changed to bring witness fees and
mileage reimbursement in line with fees charged by courts
pursuant to California Government Code section 68093. witness
fees of $4.50 per hour of actual attendance are authorized, up to
a maximum of $35.00 per day. This is equivalent to the $35.00
per day fee for court attendance. Payment of twenty cents per
mile actually travelled, both ways, is also provided. This is
the same rate provided under state law.
Minor technical and clerical changes have been made to
sections 2604, 2606, and 2608.
RENT CONTROL BOARD REGULATIONS
By memorandum dated October 16, 1985, the Rent Control
Board notified the city Attorney that the Board had adopted
administrative regulations on the subject of subpoenas. The
Board requested that the City council again consider the
Municipal Code amendments in light of the standards and
- 3 -
'l'
-t
.
.
protections provided by the Rent Control Board's regulations. A
copy of this memorandum and the Rent Control Board regulations
are contained in Appendix A to this staff Report.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
At its meeting on March 26, 1985, the city council
requested the city Attorney to respond to comments submitted by
Mr. Tom Nitti. His concerns and the city Attorney's responses
are as follows:
1. Why was the problem with parties ignoring subpoenas not
addressed when the Charter was amended in the Fall of 19847
It apparently was an oversight given the other complex
issues being addressed under tight time deadlines.
2. Has there been any study done of how many subpoenas the
Rent Board has issued since its inception, or on an annual basis,
how many subpoenas are ignored?
The Rent Control Board's response to this question is
contained in Appendix B.
3. Has the Rent Board supplied any profile of the typical
types of subpoenas issued, and the reason for issuing them?
The Rent Control Board's response to this question is
contained in Appendix B.
4. Section 1802 of the Charter states that the Rent Board
"shall exercise its powers and duties under this Article
- 4 -
'"
"
.
.
independent or without interference from the City Council, City
Manager and City Attorney.1I Is not the cooperation of the City
council and city Attorney regarding subpoenas a violation of the
independence of the Rent Board mandated in the Charter?
The proposed ordinance providing for enforcement of
subpoenas by the Rent Control Board does not interfere with the
exercise of its powers.
5. Criminal sanctions already exist in the Rent Control
Charter Amendment, section 1810, which provides that "any
landlord violating this Article shall be guil ty of a
misdemeanor." Why is there a need for the city Council to create
an additional misdemeanor sanction?
The Rent Control Board has indicated that ambiguity has
created uncertainty which can be clari f ied by ordinance. The
assertion that the City Charter already provides criminal
penal ties is not a compelling argument against adoption of the
ordinance. other provisions of the Municipal Code clarify or
restate City Charter provisions.
6. The Board already has power to seek relief from court
regarding a subpoena. Section 1811 provides that lithe Board may
seek relief from the appropriate court; to enforce any provision
of this Article or its implementing regulations. . . .11
Once again, this is not an argument against adoption of the
ordinance. The remedy provided by the ordinance is likely to be
less costly and time-consuming to evoke.
- 5 -
~
"
.
'.
7. The Rent Board is approaching the City Council
requesting an ordinance. There are no standards set forth under
which the Rent Board will exercise the power it is requesting of
the city Council. The circumstances under which subpoenas may be
issued are not enumerated. It would seem that the City Council
should request standards if it plans to give this power to the
Rent Board.
The Rent Control Board regulation contained in Appendix A
responded to this concern.
8. The civil liability of the city for abuse of the
subpoena power by the Rent Control Board is not addressed.
The City Attorney does not believe that any liability
concerns need be addressed in the ordinance. In six years of
operation, no monetary judgment has been entered against the City
for damages from Rent Control Board operations.
9. The necessity for any city agency to have subpoena
power other than the City Council is not adequately addressed.
This concern reflects a lack of understanding of city
administrative practice and its obligation to meet minimal due
process standards. Subpoena power has been 1 imi ted to those
tribunals in which constitutional requirements may necessitate
subpoenas being issued at the request of a party to the
proceeding.
- 6 -
~
f
.
.
RECOMMENDATION
It is respectfully recommended that the accompanying
ordinance be introduced for first reading.
PREPARED BY: Robert M. Myers, City Attorney
- 7 -
.....
~
.
.
CA:RMM:rmo096/hpca
City Council Meeting 12-10-85
Santa Monica, California
ORDINANCE NUMBER
(city council Series)
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF SANTA MONICA AMENDING SECTIONS
2604, 2605, 2606, 2607 AND 2608 OF THE
SANTA MONICA MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING
SECTION 2608A TO THE SANTA MONICA
MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO SUBPOENAS
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA DOES HEREBY
ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. section 2604 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code
is amended to read as follows:
SECTION 2604.
Form of Subpoena. The
form of Subpoena to be issued by the city
council under section 614 of the City
Charter
substantially
as
shall
be
follows:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES
CITY OF SANTA MONICA
SUBPOENA
)
) S5
)
IN THE MATTER OF
THE CITY OF SANTA MONICA SENDS GREETINGS TO:
- 1 -
..
.
.
You are hereby commanded to appear before the city Council
of the City of Santa Monica, in the Council Chamber in the City
Hall of said City, on the day of 198 , at the
hour of o'clock ____M., to testify in a matter now pending
before said City Council concerning
and to bring with you and to produce before said City Council the
following:
to be used as evidence.
Disobedience of this subpoena or the refusal to testify
(except upon constitutional grounds) shall constitute a
misdemeanor and shall be punishable by the penalties provided for
in Section 1200 of the Municipal Code of the City of Santa
Monica.
In Witness Whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed
the seal of said City of Santa Monica this day of
, 19
City Clerk.
SECTION 2. Section 2605 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code
is amended to read as follows:
section 2605. Use
Hearinq Examiner
Commissions. The
of subpoena by
and Boards and
Hearing Examiner,
- 2 -
...
.
.
Architectural Review Board, Personnel
Board, Planning Commission, or upon
specific authorization by the city
Council, any other board or commission
enumerated in Article X of the City
Charter or created by ordinance of the
City council are empowered to compel the
attendance of witnesses, to examine them
under oath, and to compel them to produce
all evidence before it. Subpoenas may be
issued in the name of the city pursuant
to the order of the Hearing Examiner or
any such board or commission and be
attested by the city Clerk. Such
subpoenas shall be in substantially the
same form as herein provided for
subpoenas to be issued by the order of
the ci ty Council. Disobedience of any
subpoena issued in the manner herein
provided or the refusal to testify
(except upon constitutional grounds)
shall constitute a misdemeanor and shall
be punishable by the penalties provided
for in Section 1200 hereof.
SECTION 3. Section 2606 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code
is amended to read as follows:
- 3 -
..
.
.
SECTION 2606. Service. Subpoenas issued
by the order of the City Councilor by any
board or commission under Section 2605
shall be served by a police officer or
other person by delivering a true copy
thereof to the witness and by exhibiting
the original subpoena to such witness, and
such police officer or other person making
such service shall make due return thereof
in writing, showing such service and the
time, date and place thereof.
SECTION 4. section 2607 of the Santa Monica Municipal code
is amended to read as follows:
SECTION 2607. Witness Fees and
Mileaqe. A witness appearing pursuant to
a subpoena of the city Councilor pursuant
to Section 2605 shall be entitled to
receive the sum of four dollars and fifty
cents ($4.50) for each hour that he or she
is actually in attendance, not to exceed
the sum of thirty-five dollars ($35.00)
per day, and in addition thereto, for
mileage actually travelled, both ways,
twenty cents ($0.20) a mile. Such witness
shall not be entitled to demand payment of
fees and mileage in advance. Such fees
and mileage shall constitute a demand
- 4 -
.. -..
.
.
against the City to be paid in like manner
as other demands.
SECTION 5. Section 2608 of the Santa Monica Municipal Code
is amended to read as follows:
SECTION 2608. Complaint for
Disobedience. Should any person fail to
obey any such subpoena, or refuse to
testify (except upon constitutional
grounds) the city Council, board or
commission, pursuant to whose order such
subpoena is issued, shall thereupon adopt
a resolution embodying the facts of such
disobedience or refusal to testify and
directing the presiding officer of such
body to make complaint in the Municipal
Court for the Santa Monica Judicial
District against such person.
SECTION 6. Section 2608A is added to the Santa Monica
Municipal Code to read as follows:
SECTION 2608A. Enforcement of Rent
Control Board Subpoenas. Disobedience of
any subpoena issued by or on behalf of
the Rent control Board pursuant to the
provisions of Article XVIII of the City
Charter or the refusal to testify before
the Rent Control Board or one of its
- 5 -
.. ...... ,
.
.
hearing officers (except upon
constitutional grounds) shall constitute
a misdemeanor and shall be punishable by
the penalties provided for in section
1200 hereof. Should any person fail to
obey such subpoena or refuse to testify
(except upon constitutional grounds), the
Rent control Board shall thereupon adopt
a resolution embodying the facts of such
disobedience or refusal to testify and
directing the Chairperson of the Rent
Control Board to make complaint in the
Municipal Court for the Santa Monica
Judicial District against such person.
SECTION 7. Any provision of the Santa Monica Municipal
Code or appendices thereto inconsistent with the provisions of
this ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no
further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary
to affect the provisions of this ordinance.
SECTION 8. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause,
or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid
or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of competent
jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portions of the ordinance. The Ci ty Council hereby
declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each and
every section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase not
declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether
- 6 -
~ .L
.
.
any portion of the ordinance would be subsequently declared
invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 9. The Mayor shall sign and the city Clerk shall
attest to the passage of this ordinance. The city Clerk shall
cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper
within 15 days after its adoption. The ordinance shall become
effective after 30 days from its adoption.
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
,..... ~ _ _.A. \..... _ \_~~
14 ~\~, ~ __
ROBERT M. MYERS \J
City Attorney
- 7 -
--.,_ .J....
.
.
APPENDIX A
. "
.
.
SANTA MONICA RENT CONTROL BOARD - MEMO
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
Robert Myers, CIty Attorney ~
Joel M. Levy, General counse~ ~
October l6, 1985
RE:
Subpoena Regulations
Attached is a copy of the Board regulations concernIng
the Issuance and enforcement of subpoenas. They were adopted
on May 16, 1985, and became effective on June 2, 1985. They
are intended to address the ObjectIons expressed by the public
and the City Council members In connection wIth the proposed
MunIcIpal Code amendment WhICh would add the Rent Control Board
to the list of boards and commlSSlons whose subpoenas may be
enforced through mIsdemeanor complaInts.
The principal opponents of the ordInance, represented
by James Baker, expressed the1r satisfaction w1th the terms of
these regulations, though they did not formally wIthdraw theIr
opposItion to the concept of enforcement through mIsdemeanor
complaints. We believe that the regulations are responsive to
the concerns of the opponents of the proposed ordInance.
It should now be possible for the City Council to
again consider the Municipal Code amendment, this time in the
11ght of the standards and protections provided by the Board's
subpoena regulations. We therefore request that the proposed
amendment be placed before the CouncIl for consIderatIon.
If, in your judgment, any comment from this office
concerning the MunIcipal Code amendment or the regulatIons
would be helpful, or if we can assist in any other way, please
let me know.
cc: Howell TumlIn
4819L
... ~.
.
.
CHAPTER IS: HEARING PROCEDURES
SUBCHAPTER A.
[Reserved]
SUBCHAPTER B
[Reserved]
SUBCHAPTER C: SUBPOENAS
15030. Statement of Purpose
Thi s subchapter contains Implement Ing regulatIons for Charter
Amendment Section 1803(0 (11). Subpoenas are often
Indispensable in Rent Control Board hearIngs SInce relIable
informatIon relevant to the determInatIon of lawful rent levels
may be otherwise unobtaInable. Persons seekIng the Issuance of
subpoenas and witnesses subJect to those subpoenas are entItled
to know their legal rIghts and obligatIons.
The purposes of this subchapter aret therefore, twofold;
(1) to provide tenants and landlords, as well as the Board and
Its hearing examiners, wi th the means to compe 1 attendance of
materIal wItnesses and productIon of relevant documents or
other physIcal evidence at admInIstrative hearIngs conducted by
the Rent Control Board or its hearing examiners; and (2) to
establIsh standards and procedures for the administratIon of
the subpoena power which wIll prevent abuse by any party.
15031. S~bpoena Forms
Any person seeking Issuance of a subpoena under thIS subchapter
must do so on an applIcation form approved by the Board.
Subpoena forms adopted by the Board shall contain a clear
statement of tne rIghts and oblIgations of both the party on
whose behalf the subpoena IS issued and those of the subpoenaed
wItness. This statement shall, at a minimum, advIse the
subpoenaed WI tness of the rIght to contest the suffIciency of
the perIod of notIce to appear which he or she has recei ved t
the right to contest the relevancy of the documents or other
physlcal eVIdence which have been demanded, and the rIght to
receive attendance and mIleage fees In specIfIed amounts.
15032. Procedure for Obtalnlng Subpoena or Subpoena Duces Tecum
Any landlord or tenant who IS a party to a hearIng may request
Issuance of a subpoena prIor to commencement of the hearIng by
4556L
-1-
10/1/85
,~ ~.... ..
.
.
following the procedures set forth in subsectIons (a) through
Cd). Upon signIng a declaratIon stating that he or she is
authorized to act on behalf of a party to a hearing, an
attorney or authorized representatIve may request issuance of a
subpoena.
(a) Application for Subpoena
A party seeking Issuance of a subpoena by the Board must
complete an applicatIon form by fIlling in all requIred
Information, and must declare that he or she is a party to a
particular admInIstrati ve proceeding pending before the Board
or one of its hearIng examiners. If a subpoena duces tecum (a
request for production of documents or other physical eVIdence)
IS requested, the applicant must complete the declaration
portIon of the application, statIng under penal ty of perjury
that good cause eXists for reqUIrIng the production of the
matters and thIngs described In such subpoena, specIfying the
exact ma tters or thIngs desired to be produced, setting forth
in full detaIl the materiall ty thereof to the issues involved
in the case, and stating that the wItness has the desired
matters or things In his possessIon or under hIS control.
(b) Subpoena Issuance; Review and Signature
The form must then be submitted for reView and sIgnature by the
AdmInIstrator, General Counsel, or Hearings SuperVIsor. The
subpoena shall be revIewed for completeness prIor to issuance.
The relevancy or appropriateness of a subpoena may be contested
at the hearIng, as set forth in SectIons 15035 and 15036 below.
(c) Se,rvice of Subpoena
A wItness shall be afforded reasonable notIce of the hearIng at
WhICh attendance or product Ion of documents or othe r phys lca I
evidence is compelled. A subpoena must be served upon the
witness at least five days prior to the date of hearlng.
Service may be made by any person over eighteen years of age
who IS not a party to the hearing.
(d) Witness Fee~ ,and Mileage
Wi tnesses subject to subpoenas issued by the Board shall be
entitled to attendance and mIleage fees payable In the manner
and in the amounts spec if led by the Calif orni a Code of Ci VII
Procedure.
15033. Use of _~ubpoena by Rent Control Board or HearIna
Exami ne r
The Board or Its hearing examiners may compel the attendance of
WI tnesses in order to examine them under oath or to compe I
produc t Ion of document s or othe r physi cal evidence. In such
cases, the reqUIrements set forth in subsectIons 15032(b)
through lS032(d) shall apply.
4556L
-2-
10/1/85
~.A 'I! or:
.
.
15034. Geograph1cal Reach of Subpoenas
A witness 1S not obliged to attend as a wItness outsIde of the
county In which he or she resides. unless the distance from the
principal place of residence of the witness to the hearIng
locatIon is less than one hundred fifty m1les.
15035. Motion to Quash Subpoena
A wi tness may contest a subpoena by attending the hearIng and
makIng a mot Ion to quas h the suboena if 1 tIS unreasonab lea r
oppress1ve. ThIS sectIon ne1ther adds to nor detracts from the
rIght of a WItness to Institute a court proceedIng to quash a
subpoena.
15036. Protection of Witnesses; Modification of Subpoenas
Notwithstanding issuance of a subpoena pursuant to Section
15032 or 15033. the Board and Its hearIng examIners shall make
any remedIal orders necessary. IncludIng but not l1mited to the
follOWing examples. In the event that a WItness disobeys a
subpoena after haVIng receIved untimely notIce to appear, a
contInuance may be granted upon a ShOWIng of good cause by the
party seekIng the testimony of the absent wi tness. The scope
of a subpoena duces tecum may be llml ted If 1 t appears tha t
Items of eVidence not relevant to the proceedIng have been
Included or that the subpoena does not suffIciently specify the
eVIdence to be produced. RemedIal orders may be made on the
motIon of the Board or hearing examIner, or upon motion by the
WItness.
15037. Enforcement of Subpoena~
In the event that no motion to quash has been granted pursuant
to subsectIon 15035 nor remedial order issued pursuant to
subsectIon 15036. where a WItness falls to obey a subpoena
issued by the Rent Con tro I Boa rd (except upon cons ti tut lona 1
grounds), the Board may adopt a resolution embodying the facts
of such disobedlence or refusal to testIfy and dIrecting the
Chairperson of the Rent Control Board to make complaint in the
Municipal Court for the Santa MonIca Judicial District agaInst
such person pursuant to the Santa Monica Municipal Code. If
the WItness cures such disobedIence within fIve days after
adoption of such a resolutIon, the Board shall wi thdra\rl that
re so lut Ion. In no event shall such a re solut i on be adopted
where the subpoena was not served upon the WI tness at least
flve days prIor to the hearing date, as set forth In subsection
lS032(c) above.
[Chapter 15 Adopted 5/16/85; EffectIve 6/2/85]
4556L
-3-
10/1/85
"'- ". <<
.
.
APPENDIX B
~... . L ..
.
.
SANTA MONICA RENT CONTROL BOARD - MEMO
TO:
Robert Myers, City
DATE:
November 26, 1985
Attorney
couns~
CL~~~
~
FROM:
Joel Levy, General
RE: Public Inquiry Regardlng Rent Board Subpena ExperIence
You have requested that Rent Control Board staff pro-
vide you with answers to two questions regarding Board subpenas;
1. Has there been a study of the number of subpenas
issued by the Board, includIng the number issued annually and
the number which have been disobeyed?
2. Does the Board have a prof lIe of the typlcal
types of subpenas issued and the reasons for IssuIng them?
Number of Subpenas Issued.
Although the Rent Control Board has never completed a
formal study of the numbers and types of subpenas Issued, staff
has reviewed records maintaIned by the Agency since November,
1980. In the three years between November, 1980 and October,
1983, a total of 159 subpenas or an average of 53 subpenas per
year were issued. The total number of subpenas for the appear-
ance of a person was 95; the total for production of documents
was 64. The yearly average for subpenas of the person was 32;
the yearly average for subpenas duces tecum was 21.
In the last two years,
records of subpenas requested,
based upon an Informal survey,
mate1y 30 subpenas per year have
the Agency has not maintained
issued, or served. However,
staff estImates that approxi-
been Issued during that perIod.
The recent declIne In subpena Issuance is due to the
the Board's loss of jurisdIctIon in excess rent cases and most
decrease cases and the Board's use of prehearlng notIces to
produce rather than subpenas to obtaln documentation of income
and expenses claimed in rent increase cases.
Unfortunately, staff has no record of the numbers of
subpenas issued from 1980 through 1984 which were disobeyed,
and only a survey of hundreds of Indi vidual case flIes would
yield that informatIon.
5300L
,_ .2 I.. "
.
.
Memo to: Robert Myers, CIty Attorney
November 26, 1985
Page 2
We are aware of three instances of noncomplIance dur-
Ing the 1 as t twe 1 ve months. Two involved outright refusals to
comply with the subpena and the thIrd Involved procedural ob-
jections to service. Two base rent cases have been delayed due
to the refusal s of the key WI tnes ses to obey subpenas. The
third case was decIded without the subpenaed evidence. In base
rent cases (see dIScussIon below) a decIsion may be ImpossIble
In the absence of direct eVIdence of the April 10, 1978 rent
levels.
Increased Issuance Anticipated.
In late 1983, the Board adopted Regulations regardIng
determInatIon of base rents. RegulatIon 13004(d) imposes an
aff i rma ti ve duty upon the hear ing examIner to "seek and intro-
duce Into the record all avaIlable eVIdence regardIng the con-
tested rents or amenI ti es. tI The Board 1 s staff has Ident if ied
hundreds of Instances in which there IS doubt as to the correct
registered rents or housing services. Thus, in additIon to the
many base rent peti tions flIed by landlords and tenants, the
Board wIll file about 350 such petItIons in the next year.
The hearIngs department manager estimates that hearIng
examiners may request issuance of approxImately 70 subpenas
during the next year In an effort to create complete records In
base rent cases. Some growth in subpena 1 s suance IS al so ex-
pected due to the hearing of a greater number of rent decrease
petitIons as a result of the successful conclusIon of the
Sterling case.
ProfIle of Subpena Types.
From 1980 through 1983, a majority of the subpenas re-
quested involved claims of excess rent, and were subpenas seek-
ing attendance of owners, former owners or former tenants. As
you know, the Board has not consIdered excess rent cases SInce
issuance of the Injunction in the McHugh case. Base rent peti-
tions are now the most important reason for issuance of Board
subpenas.
Our Informal survey indIcates that durIng the last two
years the ratIo of subpenas of the person to subpenas of docu-
ments has continued to be approximately two to one. The empha-
sis now is upon WItnesses such as the owners, former owners or
former tenants who might have dIrect knowledge of the AprIl 10,
1978 rent levels or hOUSIng serVIces so as to establIsh the
correct base rents and amenIties.
5300L
..... ~~ ..&
.
.
Memo to: Robert Myers, City Attorney
November 26, 1985
Page 3
The documents sought, continue to be prImarily rent
records, ledgers, canceled checks, escrow statements, bank de-
pOSIt statements, utility bIlls and notices of rent Increase.
Agaln, the main purpose is to enable the Board and the parties
to have reliable evidence of the actual base rent levels, and
so to give all concerned confldence in the correctness of the
base rents upon WhICh rent control relies entlrely.
In decrease cases, subpenas are most often Issued in
order to es tabll sh the ex i s tence of a part icul ar housIng ser-
vice as of the base rent date. In other words, as in base rent
cases, landlords and tenants often need to compel the at ten-
dance of wItnesses WIth knowledge of the situation of the prop-
erty on April 10, 1978.
cc: Rent Control CommIssioners
Howell Tumlin
Brenda McKInsey
5300L