When heavy rains flooded Cleto Gonzalez’s Mission District upholstery business three years ago, an investigator from the San Francisco City Attorney’s Office quickly assessed the damage and helped fund tens of thousands of repair dollars.
But on Tuesday, the same investigator told Gonzalez the city would no longer foot the bill for damages to the Folsom Street business, even those caused by the city’s sewer capacity limitations.
“The city will no longer be responsible for helping you,” Gonzalez recalled, the investigator telling him earlier this week, after waves of sewage flooded his upholstery shop, flooding rolls of fabric.
For years, San Francisco home and business owners like Gonzalez have received compensation after suffering flood-related damage linked to the city’s sewer system. On numerous occasions, residents have successfully filed claims with the city attorney’s office. In rarer cases, when these claims are denied, residents have sued and then settled with the city, sometimes for substantial payments.
But a little-known local ordinance passed three years ago could drastically limit such settlements, with city officials now warning residents of vulnerable areas that they should no longer expect compensation for flood damage. by its overwhelmed infrastructure.
Balthazar Perez (left) and Javier Romero help build a makeshift barrier outside Hilde Brand Furniture in the Mission District on Tuesday.
Salgu Wissmath / The ChronicleThe city attorney’s office did not directly respond to questions about whether its approach to compensation changed as a result of the 2019 order, but said in a statement it was evaluating claims for property damage “on a case-by-case basis” without applying an “overarching strategy other than…to save the city’s money.
City Attorney spokeswoman Jen Kwart added that “just because the city’s infrastructure is pushed beyond its capacity by an extreme weather event does not mean the city is liable for damages. resulting from this meteorological event”.
Affected residents and business owners disagree — and they have legal precedent on their side, said Mark W. Epstein, an attorney at San Francisco law firm Seiler Epstein, who has represented more than 50 owners seeking damages from the city.
“There is a well-documented history of the city acknowledging that its sewage system cannot handle the volume of water during major storms,” Epstein said. “It’s expensive to fix the system, but it’s the City’s obligation. Either fix it or compensate flood victims, as the California constitution requires you to do.
Epstein said more than three dozen people had sought his legal advice over the past week after city officials announced they would no longer carry out deep cleanups and may not compensate flood victims, as has happened following previous sewage system failures.
“The city is failing in its responsibility to prevent citizens from bearing this unreasonable burden,” Epstein said. “This is shocking and untrue.”
The apparent policy reversal comes amid widespread damage to low-lying areas of the city following destructive storms this week – the first major test of the sewer system since 2019, when authorities stepped up efforts to encourage proactive measures to prevent flooding and to notify residents of severe flooding. risks.
The efforts were part of an aggressive push by the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission to shift greater responsibility to those who live or operate businesses in flood-prone areas — potentially shielding the city from liability in the process.
The agency has been quick to roll out its program in recent years: In 2017, it expanded grant programs to reimburse flood victims for improvements such as door seals, valves or plumbing upgrades. to reduce future damage from torrential rains. The following year he sent letters to 4,000 landlords telling them their plots were in flood-prone areas and successfully lobbied for the 2019 ordinance that required all landlords to warn tenants of the dangers of living in flood prone areas.
Homeowners are eligible for up to $100,000 to improve their properties’ flood resistance under the 2017 grant program expansion, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission spokesman Joseph Sweiss said Friday. . The city is also providing residents with flood insurance information to help cover cleanup costs, Sweiss said.
The spokesperson denied that these grants and resources were intended to shield the city from legal culpability. Instead, the agency’s years-long effort to prepare for storms was aimed at making it clear to owners and buyers that their properties were at risk, Sweiss said, hoping to encourage them to prepare for ” historically extreme storms”.
But the measures may have had the less obvious consequence of shifting responsibility for rain preparedness to residents, whom the city now considers knowledgeable about potential flood risks.
Altogether, the agency’s efforts represented a shift to a more aggressive stance on property damage lawsuits for flooding, with public utilities commission officials saying in recent years that the city has done its part to let people know. when they are in flood-prone areas and made resources available to assist you.
On Tuesday, Alejandro Cortez adds sandbags to a makeshift barrier outside Hilde Brand Furniture in the Mission District.
Salgu Wissmath / The ChronicleHomeowners who sued the city for flood damages have had mixed success.
In a single case filed in 2015, the city paid more than $1 million in settlements to residents of various neighborhoods who suffered property damage from flooding. But others weren’t so lucky. In 2004, the city dismissed 125 claims from residents seeking compensation, with officials calling the rainstorm in question a “once in a lifetime event.”
As climate change intensifies, some residents see the city’s flooding policies as woefully out of step with the increase in extreme weather cases.
“If it’s a ‘once in 100 year’ storm, I must be 500,” said Gonzalez, who estimated his family’s Mission upholstery business, Hilde-Brand Furniture, received three by-laws for flood damage. over the past three decades.
Statistically, there is supposed to be a 1% chance of a 100-year storm occurring in any given year. But San Francisco has seen four such storms since 2000.
In recent decades, these severe floods have inundated the city’s valleys, which were once the site of creeks and marshes that naturally absorbed runoff. Unlike other coastal cities, San Francisco treats sewage and runoff through the same pipes, a structural limitation that means sewers fill up quickly during the strongest storms.
Increasing capacity would potentially require billions in infrastructure investment for which there is little public or political will. The Public Utilities Commission has planned several major infrastructure upgrades, but these are not expected to be completed for at least a decade.
Owner Cleto Gonzalez rolls sandbags to add to a makeshift barrier built with the help of his employees outside Hilde Brand Furniture in the Mission District on Tuesday.
Salgu Wissmath / The ChronicleIt’s unclear that such infrastructure improvements would prevent storm damage to low-lying businesses, even if the city was the city embarking on the costly process of overhauling its stormwater drainage systems. said Supervisor Hillary Ronen, whose district includes the Mission District’s Folsom Street. corridor which is among the hardest hit during heavy rains.
Given the “unfortunate” geographic placement of older buildings in flood-prone areas, the Public Utilities Commission “is in a conundrum because there is no easy – or even difficult – solution to the situation”, said Ronen said in an interview Thursday.
Because of the significant resources the public utilities commission has invested in proactive flood mitigation initiatives in recent years, Ronen said the agency likely views its efforts as sufficient. Residents and business owners who haven’t taken advantage of city grants to fund property modifications to minimize flood risk could find themselves out of luck in the future, she said.
“My understanding,” Ronen said, “is that the agency feels they’ve done everything they’re legally required to do.”
Nora Mishanec is a staff writer for the San Francisco Chronicle. Email: nora.mishanec@sfchronicle.com