League of Women Voters of California Education Fund
	San Francisco County, CA November 4, 2008 Election
	Proposition M Changing the Residential Rent Ordinance to Prohibit Specific Acts of Harassment of Tenants by Landlords City of San Francisco Ordinance - Majority Approval Required Pass: 195,023 / 58.84% Yes votes ...... 136,416 / 41.16% No votes See Also: Index of all Propositions

Arguments For Proposition M

Arguments Against Proposition M

Current laws do not give tenants in San Francisco protection against harassment. Rent control has no provisions prohibiting landlords from harassing tenants. Even when landlords wage a war of intimidation against their tenants or constantly harass them to move so that they can raise the rent, the Rent Board will not get involved. Right now, when a tenant is being harassed, their only option is to live through, and document, this abuse for months or years until the harassment becomes so bad that the tenant actually suffers physical, mental or financial damages. Only then can a tenant file a lawsuit. Proposition M will stop landlords from harassing tenants or pressuring them to leave so that the rent can be raised. It adds to San Francisco's rent control law a section defining and prohibiting harassment. Under Proposition M tenants can get a rent reduction when victimized by harassment and, if faced with multiple & phony eviction notices, Proposition M ensures tenants get attorneys fees to fight off bogus eviction attempts. Harassment of tenants --often seniors who have lived in their homes for decades --is unacceptable behavior which San Francisco should not tolerate. Vote YES on Proposition M to stop landlords from harassing tenants so that they can get them out and raise the rent. Supervisor Aaron Peskin Supervisor Chris Daly Supervisor Ross Mirkarimi Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval Supervisor Tom Ammiano Supervisor Sophie Maxwell Supervisor Jake McGoldrick Rebuttal to Arguments For Current laws already provide ample protection for tenants who feel harassed. The San Francisco Rent Ordinance already permits a tenant to sue a landlord who wrongfully endeavors to recover possession of a rental unit without just cause. Even without Proposition M, tenants can, as numerous tenants have done, sue their landlords for any harassment that is intended to cause them to move. Current law allows tenants and their lawyers to recover actual damages, damages for emotional distress, injunctive relief and attorneys fees for acts of harassment. In fact, under current law, landlords can be put jail for harassing tenants. The Rent Ordinance already permits tenants to petition the Rent Board for a reduction in housing services. A tenant who feels harassed can simply ask the Rent Board for a lower rent based upon a decrease in quiet enjoyment of the premises. The real purpose of Proposition M is to increase the profits of greedy lawyers by giving them more complicated laws to abuse. A nice cottage industry has been developed by lawyers who represent BOTH landlords and tenants who thrive on conflicts and new laws. Vote Yes on M if you want to support this industry. Tenants don't have to wait years before filing a lawsuit. San Francisco is filled with lawyers eager to file lawsuits against errant landlords. Google "tenant lawyer San Francisco" and you get 300,000 hits! There's no shortage of laws or lawyers in San Francisco. Vote NO on M. San Francisco Apartment Association

Measure M should be called the Full Employment Act for Greedy Lawyers. State and local law already protects tenants from harassment and wrongful evictions and the other conduct prohibited by Measure M. The true purpose of Measure M is to give greedy lawyers another way to line their pockets at the expense of both property owners and tenants. Property owners will lose because they won't know the difference between a "warning" to a tenant and "harassment." If the property owner guesses wrong, a lawsuit will be filed and some lawyer will get a big paycheck. Tenants will lose because they won't be able to directly negotiate buyouts of their tenancies without an attorney, who will take at least a third of what the tenant is entitled to. The proponents of this measure believe that all tenants are idiots and can't negotiate without a lawyer. If you want to subsidize greedy lawyers, vote yes on M. Measure M violates the 1st Amendment. Measure M is unconstitutional and has already lost in court twice. In 2004, (Baba v. Board of Supervisors of CCSF), the California Court of Appeal struck down a similar law enacted by the San Francisco Board of Supervisors. In 2007, (Action Apartments Association v. City of Santa Monica) the California Supreme Court declared a Santa Monica law unconstitutional because it attempted to make it illegal for landlords to threaten tenants. Passage of this measure will lead to costly litigation that the voters will ultimately pay for. If you support free speech and oppose lawyers profiting at the expense of landlords and tenants, vote NO on M! San Francisco Apartment Association Rebuttal to Arguments Against Being forced to move under any circumstance is difficult. San Francisco rents are soaring and with prices on everything else rising too, finding affordable housing in the city is near impossible. When you are forced to move because your landlord has threatened and tormented you to the point that you have no choice but to leave, it is especially difficult to deal with. When we allow landlords to harass people out of their homes just so the landlord can raise the rent, we are condoning unacceptable behavior. Landlords claim it is their right to "threaten tenants." It is not okay to threaten someone hoping to make their life so miserable that they will move, so the rent can be doubled or tripled. Harassment has become epidemic in San Francisco because we have no local law prohibiting tenant harassment. In recent months we have seen the City Attorney file a lawsuit against Citi Apartments claiming it systematically harasses tenants and the District Attorney file criminal charges against another landlord, who went so far as to cut support beams under a tenants' apartment. Tenants should not have to depend on the City Attorney, the District Attorney or lawsuits to stop landlords from harassing them. Prop M provides a simple mechanism to stop harassment at the Rent Board, without lawyers or lawsuits. Please join elected officials, senior groups, labor groups, affordable housing advocates, community groups and the San Francisco Democratic Party in voting YES on Prop M. San Francisco Tenants Union http://www.sftu.org