San Francisco Anti-Harrassment of Tenants Act, Proposition M (November 2008)
Proposition M prohibited 15 different acts that a landlord might have taken against a tenant, with provisions for triple damages and for the landlord to have to pay the costs of the tenant's attorney.
A court order not to enforce Proposition M was granted in January 2009. Nearly every provision of Proposition M was invalidated in October 2011.
- These final, certified, results are from the San Francisco elections office.
The San Francisco Apartment Association, the San Francisco Association of Realtors and the Coalition for Better Housing filed a lawsuit against Proposition M shortly after it was approved in November 2008, winning an injunction against it going into effect pending a full hearing.
The court ultimately said that the provisions of Proposition M were "an attempt to bypass the judicial system and permissibly endow the [rent] board with judicial power constitutionally reserved to the judiciary."
Three provisions of Proposition M survived the lawsuit. These are provisions that allow the Rent Board to decrease a person’s rent if the landlord fails to fix tangible physical damage.
The city will have to pay $122,500 to the attorneys of the plaintiffs in the lawsuit.
The question on the ballot:
|Proposition M: "Shall the City's Residential Rent Ordinance be amended to prohibit specific acts of tenant harassment by landlords and to provide for enforcement by means of court orders, rent reduction, monetary awards or criminal penalties?"|
Path to the ballot
Proposition M was referred to the ballot on July 29, 2008 by a 7-4 vote of the San Francisco Board of Supervisors.
In favor: Supervisors Ammiano, Daly, Maxwell, McGoldrick, Mirkarimi, Peskin and Sandoval.
Against: Supervisors Alioto-Pier, Chu, Dufty and Elsbernd.
- November 4, 2008 official San Francisco voter guide
- David Latterman's analysis of the November 2008 San Francisco local ballot measures