San Francisco voters turned down Proposition I, one of two affordable‑housing measures on the November ballot. With 99.5% of votes counted, the measure trailed by 11,735 votes, a 52‑48 split.
Opposition outspent supporters
Real‑estate developers and the housing‑industry lobby poured $2.8 million into a campaign against the measure. Television, radio and mail‑piece ads warned voters that the proposal would create a “slush fund” and remove city control over a lucrative transfer tax.
Mayor Daniel Lurie also publicly opposed Proposition I, joining a coalition of developers, the San Francisco Apartment Association, the Chamber of Commerce and venture‑capitalist Michael Moritz, who each contributed $200,000 to the anti‑measure effort.
What Proposition I would have done
The initiative sought to dedicate half of the city’s transfer tax on sales of real estate above $10 million to a new affordable‑housing fund. Currently, that revenue goes into the general fund. The measure also would have locked in the transfer‑tax rate—one of the highest in the nation—and required any future changes to be decided by a citywide ballot, removing the authority from the Board of Supervisors.
Supporters argued the change would create a permanent source of funding for affordable housing, criticizing past mayors for diverting the money to the general fund. They also highlighted a tenant‑governance component: residents of new social‑housing complexes would have the “right to participate directly and meaningfully” in building management.
Concerns about the tenant‑governance model
Housing professionals warned that the tenant‑participation provision could be problematic. They noted that tenants might be reluctant to raise rents to cover necessary upkeep, potentially jeopardizing the financial stability of the projects.
Proposition C wins broad support
While Proposition I failed, Proposition C—backed by Mayor Lurie, most city supervisors and affordable‑housing nonprofits—passed handily, reaching 82% of the vote. Prop C expands the city’s affordable‑housing trust fund, aiming to grow annual subsidies to $125 million.
The two measures were not direct opposites. Prop I was championed by the Democratic Socialists of America, progressive supervisors and labor unions, whereas Prop C represented a consensus among city leadership and the mayor’s office.
Implications for future housing policy
The defeat of Proposition I underscores the influence of the real‑estate lobby in San Francisco politics and the challenges of earmarking transfer‑tax revenue for housing. With Prop C now in place, the city will continue to fund affordable‑housing projects, but the broader debate over how to secure a stable, dedicated revenue stream remains unresolved.
Stakeholders on both sides say the outcome will shape future ballot initiatives and the city’s approach to addressing the housing crisis.
Original reporting: Mission Local — read the source article.
