Proposition 10 (2018)

Proposition 10 (2018) was a California ballot initiative in the November 6, 2018, election that sought to repeal provisions of the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act to allow localities such as Los Angeles, San Francisco, Oakland, and Sacramento to adopt expanded rent control measures. The measure catalyzed campaigns involving actors such as Gavin Newsom, organizations like the California Apartment Association and labor unions including the Service Employees International Union, and drew interest from policy researchers at institutions like the Brookings Institution and the Urban Institute.

Background

The initiative arose amid statewide debates over housing affordability that engaged policymakers such as Jerry Brown and Dianne Feinstein, activists from Eviction Defense Network and Los Angeles Tenants Union, and advocacy groups like Californians for Homeownership and Housing California. The existing Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act—originally enacted in 1995 during the administration of Pete Wilson and influenced by legal counsel from firms such as Latham & Watkins—limits local rent control by exempting single-family homes and new construction and permitting vacancy decontrol, which had shaped ordinances in jurisdictions including Berkeley, Santa Monica, and San Jose. Scholarly debate among authors at Harvard University, University of California, Berkeley, and Stanford University about rent stabilization, displacement, and housing supply contributed to the initiative's formulation, while municipal leaders such as Sam Liccardo and London Breed navigated local responses.

Provisions and Legal Changes Proposed

The text proposed repealing key Costa-Hawkins provisions to enable municipalities including Los Angeles County, Alameda County, San Diego, and Santa Clara County to impose rent control on units built after specified dates and on single-family homes and condominiums. The measure sought to alter legal frameworks established under precedents like decisions from the California Supreme Court and the interpretations used by courts such as the United States District Court for the Northern District of California, thereby affecting contractual rights recognized in rulings citing statutes from the California Civil Code. Proponents argued that changes would empower local governing bodies including city councils in Oakland City Council and San Francisco Board of Supervisors to adopt caps on rent increases, while opponents contended the repeal would interact with property rights cases brought before tribunals such as the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals and trigger litigation involving landlord associations such as the National Multifamily Housing Council.

Campaign and Opposition

The campaign featured prominent donors and organizations: tenant groups affiliated with the International Longshore and Warehouse Union and unions like the Service Employees International Union supported the measure, while real estate industry groups including the California Apartment Association, developers linked to Trammell Crow Company, and national donors including the National Association of Realtors funded opposition. High-profile endorsements and statements came from public figures such as Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in commentary, municipal officials including Eric Garcetti, and policy analysts from RAND Corporation who produced research cited by both sides. Advertising, mailers, and grassroots canvassing involved political consulting firms affiliated with veterans of campaigns for Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton, while legal strategy drew on counsel experienced with ballot litigation from firms like Munger, Tolles & Olson. Media coverage by outlets including the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, and The New York Times amplified debates over studies from the Brookings Institution and analyses by the California Legislative Analyst's Office.

Ballot Measure Result

Voters rejected the proposition by a decisive margin in the statewide tally certified by the California Secretary of State; county results in strongholds for rent control advocacy—such as San Francisco County and Alameda County—showed closer margins but did not alter the statewide outcome. Election administration involved county registrars including the Los Angeles County Registrar-Recorder/County Clerk and canvassing procedures guided by statutes administered by the California Secretary of State; post-election reporting appeared in databases maintained by the United States Election Assistance Commission. The outcome was analyzed in postmortems by think tanks including Urban Institute and academic centers at University of California, Los Angeles.

Aftermath and Legal Challenges

After the defeat, local governments such as Berkeley and San Francisco continued to explore local regulatory options within the constraints of Costa-Hawkins, while legal scholars from Yale Law School and Columbia Law School examined potential litigation strategies and legislative pathways for reform. Subsequent state-level efforts involved legislators in the California State Legislature and debates influenced by gubernatorial actors like Gavin Newsom; advocacy organizations including Tenants Together and the California Rental Housing Association adjusted strategies for ballot and legislative advocacy. Litigation and policy analysis continued in forums such as symposia at University of California, Berkeley School of Law and hearings before committees of the California State Assembly, with ongoing attention from national organizations such as the Brennan Center for Justice and the American Civil Liberties Union.

Category:2018 California ballot propositions