Measure S: City of San Pablo Rent Control
City of San Pablo · Contra Costa County · November 3, 2026
The question on your ballot
Shall the proposed ordinance, prohibiting residential real property rental rate increases for some rental units that exceed sixty percent of the Consumer Price Index increase or three percent, whichever is lower, establishing a process for consideration of additional rent increases, requiring City administration estimated to cost approximately $1,080,000 to $2,360,000 annually, funded by annual rental property owner fees, limiting the grounds for evicting tenants of some rental units, and enacting additional housing regulations, be adopted?
In plain language
Measure S is a proposed law for San Pablo. A YES vote limits how much landlords can raise rent on some rental units. The cap is 60% of the Consumer Price Index increase, or 3%, whichever is lower. A YES vote also limits the reasons a landlord can evict tenants in some units. A NO vote keeps current rules. It would not add these rent and eviction limits. The city would set up a process to review requests for bigger rent increases. Rental property owners would pay fees to cover the cost.
Fiscal impact
The measure is expected to cost the city about $1,080,000 to $2,360,000 each year to administer. Annual fees on rental property owners pay for this.
Impartial analysis
City of San Pablo City Attorney’s Impartial Analysis (MEASURE S) Measure S qualified for the November 2026 ballot by citizen petition. This measure would repeal the City of San Pablo’s existing tenant relocation assistance ordinance (San Pablo Municipal Code Chapter 8.05) and replace it with a new, much broader ordinance called the “San Pablo Rent Stabilization and Tenant Protections Ordinance”. The new ordinance would also effectively replace the City’s current just cause for eviction protections ordinance (San Pablo Municipal Code Chapter 9.70) and housing stability and anti-harassment protections ordinance (San Pablo Municipal Code Chapter 9.80). The City’s current tenant relocation assistance ordinance applies relatively narrowly, only when the City orders a rental unit vacated because of serious code violations. In that situation, the owner must pay the displaced tenant relocation benefits equal to two months’ fair market rent. The City’s current just cause for eviction protections ordinance is consistent with state law and provides additional relocation benefits of two months’ rent for certain no-fault evictions. The City’s current ordinances do not otherwise add to state law regarding limits to rent increases. If approved, Measure S would roll back rents to the amount charged as of July 1, 2025, for existing tenancies, and then limit how much a landlord may raise rent each year - generally to 60 percent of the increase in the regional Consumer Price Index, with a maximum of 3 percent. The measure would confirm existing law to require landlords to have a specific, legally recognized reason before ending a tenancy, such as nonpayment of rent, the owner’s plan to move into the property, or a substantial renovation, and it would prescribe notice and procedural requirements for each. Relocation payments would apply more broadly than under current law, generally in an amount equal to four months’ fair market rent or $12,000, whichever is greater, with an additional payment for elderly, disabled, or terminally ill tenants. The measure would also expand existing prohibitions on specified forms of landlord harassment, protect tenants’ ability to organize, and regulate agreements in which a landlord pays a tenant to move out. It would create fees, a hearing process, and civil remedies, including damages and attorney fees, to administer and enforce these provisions. The City ordered a report on the measure’s fiscal impact pursuant to Elections Code Section 9212. That report estimates the administrative resources required to implement the new ordinance are expected to range from approximately 3.2 to 7.9 full-time-equivalent employees and $1.08 million to $2.36 million annually, funded by annual rental property owner fees. A “yes” vote approves the revisions to the City of San Pablo’s tenant relocation assistance ordinance, and effectively replaces other related ordinances, as summarized above. A “no” vote leaves the City of San Pablo’s current tenant relocation assistance ordinance, and other related ordinances, in place. Brian P. Hickey City Attorney Dated: August 19, 2026 The above statement is an impartial analysis of Measure S. If you desire a copy of the measure, please call the City Clerk at [phone number omitted] and a copy will be mailed at no cost to you.
Official ballot arguments
Filed for the official voter guide by each side, printed as submitted.
Argument in favor
Argument in Favor of Measure S A stable San Pablo is a safer San Pablo. Our community is strongest when families can remain in their homes, children stay in the same schools, seniors can age in place, and neighbors continue looking out for one another. Measure S will reduce homelessness and displacement of families in San Pablo by limiting rent increases to an amount that is fair to both tenants and landlords and by preventing evictions without a reason. This will make our community safer. Measure S is based on laws that have helped communities across California preserve stable neighborhoods by protecting working families, seniors, and longtime residents from being forced out by unreasonable rent increases. This measure protects the people who make San Pablo home. It helps provide stability for renters while preserving the schools, small businesses, and community organizations that depend on long-term residents. That benefits everyone. Everyone agrees we need to strengthen tenant protections. The steps taken by the City Council will not protect renters and mobile home park residents. Measure S establishes reasonable limits on annual rent increases for covered units and creates clear, fair rules that help families plan for the future instead of living with constant uncertainty. The measure protects responsible landlords by allowing fair annual rent increases and providing a process to seek additional adjustments when justified. It balances the interests of tenants and property owners while strengthening the long-term stability of our community. The city will charge landlords a rental housing fee to fund the administration of this measure. The cost of instability and losing the people who make San Pablo home is far greater. Communities are defined by the people who live in them. This measure protects the character, stability, and future of our city. Vote Yes on Measure S for a stable, safe San Pablo. The undersigned proponent or author of the Primary Argument in Favor of Measure S at the General Election for the City of San Pablo, to be held on November 3, 2026, hereby states that this argument is true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief. Name, Title Schylon Stewart, San Pablo Resident Ashley Quezada, San Pablo Resident Mashel Lindstrom, San Pablo Resident Rhea Elina Laughlin, Executive Director of Rising Juntos David Sharples, Director of Contra Costa County Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment
RUBUTTAL TO ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE S This Rebuttal to the argument in favor of Measure S is the opinions of the undersigned authors or proponents. The undersigned authors (#1 and #2) and proponents (#3 and #4) of the Rebuttal to the Argument in favor of Measure S at the General Election for the City of San Pablo, to be held on November 3, 2026, hereby state that this Rebuttal is true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief. (Elections Code § 9600) 1). Name (Title): Elizabeth Pabon-Alvarado (Mayor, City of San Pablo) Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________ 2). Name (Title): Rita Xavier (Vice-Mayor, City of San Pablo) Signature: _______________________________________________________________________________ 3). Name (Title): Dorothy Gantt (Registered Voter and San Pablo Renter) Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________ 4). Name (Title): David Alvarado (Elected Official and San Pablo Homeowner) Stability Sounds Good but Measure S Does Not Deliver It. Instead, it delivers costly new permanent bureaucracy we cannot afford, diverting resources from other important City priorities like police services, street repairs, code enforcement, and homelessness prevention. Proponents Don’t Explain the Full Costs. The City's independent analysis estimates Measure S could require nearly 8 full-time employees and up to $2.36 million annually to administer and enforce. Measure S will NOT make housing affordable. Instead, new fees will make rental housing more expensive to provide and place additional burdens on responsible housing providers. Measure S Builds No New Housing . Not One New Home. It does not advance the City’s state-mandated housing production goals. Added regulations may discourage investment and reduce the supply of the very rental housing San Pablo renters depend on, limiting housing choices. The City's Own Analysis Warns Measure S May Reduce Incentives to Maintain and Improve Property. Deferred maintenance can lead to deterioration. Deterioration can lead to vacancies, blight, and crime, threatening property values and neighborhoods. That is not a safer community. Measure S Hits Small “Mom-and- Pop” Housing Providers Especially Hardest. It imposes complex compliance requirements, new fees, and relocation payments that can exceed $12,000, without proper exemptions for affordable housing, single-family homes or ADUs. Renters Deserve Real Solutions . San Pablo needs local solutions, not a one-size-fits-all policy written and promoted by outside special interest groups. Measure S will derail our work on developing the City’s Rent Review program and building genuinely affordable housing. Vote NO on Measure S Signature:
Argument against
ARGUMENT AGAINST MEASURE S Arguments in opposition of Measure S are the opinions of the undersigned authors or proponents. The undersigned authors (#1 and #2) and proponents (#3 and #4) of the Argument Against Measure S at the General Election for the City of San Pablo, to be held on November 3, 2026, hereby state that this argument is true and correct to the best of their knowledge and belief. (Elections Code § 9600) 1). Name (Title): Elizabeth Pabon-Alvarado (Mayor, City of San Pablo) Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________ 2). Name (Title): Rita Xavier (Vice-Mayor, City of San Pablo) Signature: _______________________________________________________________________________ 3). Name (Title): Dorothy Gantt (Registered Voter and San Pablo Renter) Signature: ______________________________________________________________________________ 4). Name (Title): David Alvarado (Elected Official and San Pablo Homeowner) Vote NO on Measure S Initiative: San Pablo residents deserve housing policies that protect renters, support responsible housing providers, and strengthen our community. Measure S does not achieve that balance. San Pablo Needs Local Solutions : San Pablo needs locally developed solutions that serve our local community, not policies promoted by outside special interest groups. Our residents deserve policies tailored to San Pablo, not a one-size-fits-all approach. New Bureaucracy and Costs: Measure S creates a new, costly regulatory program. The City's independent report estimates that implementing Measure S could require up to almost 8 full-time equivalent employees and cost up to $2.36 million annually. These funds could otherwise support public safety, street repairs, prevention of homelessness, and other essential City services. Measure S Will Not Build New Homes: This measure does not create new housing; it does not increase San Pablo’s housing supply or directly contribute toward achieving the City’s state-mandated RHNA housing-production goals. Additional regulations may discourage housing investment and could reduce the number of rental homes available. Property Maintenance and Housing Quality: Research cited in the City’s analysis suggests that Measure S may reduce incentives for property improvements, potentially affecting housing quality and neighborhood conditions. Deteriorating conditions can contribute to blight and crime. Measure S Burdens Housing Providers : This Measure adds costly new compliance requirements, fees, and relocation payments that can exceed $12,000, without proper exemptions for single-family homes or ADUs. These complex requirements will place a significant financial burden on small “mom-and-pop” housing providers. Renters Deserve Real Solutions: San Pablo should focus on creating more affordable housing and developing its Rent Review program – a more meaningful, less costly alternative to rent control. For more information: https://www.sanpabloca.gov/2920/Housing-Stability-Hub Vote NO on Measure S Signature:
1 Rebuttal to Argument Against Measure S Opponents are trying to scare you with misleading statements about costs. Measure S requires the program to be funded by annual fees from landlords, not the City’s General Fund. Bay Area cities routinely fund renter protections through dedicated fees on landlords while continuing to provide police, parks, and other basic services. The official ballot question says the estimated administrative costs are “funded by annual rental property owner fees.” According to the city, only 12% of San Pablo’s multi-family real estate is owned by local owners. The rest is owned by investors headquartered outside of the area. Some families are experiencing rent increases of $500 a month or more and threats of eviction when these investors buy their homes, fueling homelessness and instability. This hurts all of us. Measure S puts reasonable, enforceable limits on rent increases while allowing landlords a fair return. The facts are clear: San Pablo homeowners and renters alike win with Measure S. It will make us safer because long-term neighbors look out for one another. Cities throughout California have proven that tenant protections work. Rental protections don't stop new housing. Over the past five years, cities with renter protections added more than 146,000 homes and built the same or slightly more housing than comparable California cities without local rent control. Measure S is fair to tenants, landlords, homeowners, and taxpayers. Opponents aren't offering any real solutions to help San Pablo families stay and thrive in our community. We are. Please vote Yes on Measure S. (Continued on next page) 2 The undersigned proponent(s) or author(s) of the rebuttal argument in favor of ballot proposition S at the General Election for the City of San Pablo to be held on November 3, 2026 hereby state that this argument is true and correct to the best of (his/her/their) knowledge and belief. Name, Title: Signature: 1. David Sharples Director, Contra Costa County, Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment____ 2. Mashel Lindstrom
What supporters and opponents say — outside sources (not official ballot arguments)
Statements by campaigns, officials and news coverage, quoted with attribution and linked to the original. VoterDecoder did not write them and does not endorse either side.
Supporters say
No public statements in favor were found.
Opponents say
No public statements against were found.