CC SR 20230815 06 - RPV ACA 10
01203.0001/913927.1
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: 08/15/2023
AGENDA REPORT AGENDA HEADING: Regular Business
AGENDA TITLE:
Consideration and possible action to take a position on Assembly Constitutional
Amendment 10 (ACA 10).
RECOMMENDED COUNCIL ACTION:
(1) Direct Staff to work with the City Council Legislative Subcommittee and return on
September 5, 2023 with a position letter on ACA 10 to be sent to the California
Assembly Appropriations Committee, the City’s Assembly representatives, and the
City’s Senate representatives.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
Amount Budgeted: N/A
Additional Appropriation: N/A
Account Number(s): N/A
ORIGINATED BY: William Wynder, City Attorney
REVIEWED BY: Same as above
APPROVED BY: Ara Mihranian, AICP, City Manager
ATTACHED SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS:
A. Text of ACA 10 (as amended June 7, 2023) (page A-1)
B. Status of ACA 10 as of August 4, 2023 (page B-1)
C. Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee Bill Analysis, June
5, 2023 (page C-1)
BACKGROUND:
At the August 1, 2023 meeting, Mayor Pro Tem Cruikshank raised a concern with
legislation under consideration that may result in a ballot measure to amend the California
Constitution by declaring that there is a “fundamental human right to adequate housin g
for everyone in California.” The concern was of the potential unintended consequence to
local cities. The Council agreed to bring this matter back at the August 15 meeting for
their review and consideration.
1
RANCHO PALOS VERDES
01203.0001/913927.1
DISCUSSION:
The California State Assembly is considering whether to place on a future statewide ballot
a measure that would add a new amendment to the California Constitution. The measure,
known as ACA 10, would declare there is a “fundamental human right to adequate
housing for everyone in California.”
If adopted by the voters of California, ACA 10 would add Article XXV to the California
Constitution which, as presently proposed, would read as follows:
“The state hereby recognizes the fundamental human right to adequate
housing for everyone in California. It is the shared obligation of state and
local jurisdictions to respect, protect, and fulfill this right, on a non -
discriminatory and equitable basis, with a view to progressively achieve the
full realization of the right, by all appropriate means, including the adoption
and amendment of legislative measures, to the maximum of available
resources.”
While laudable in its commitment to provide adequate housing for all, ACA 10 could
impose troublesome legal obligations on California cities and may give rise to costly
litigation. First, the measure, as drafted, is vaguely worded. How will the State Legislature,
or the courts for that matter, determine what constitutes “adequate” housing? Cities have
struggled with this concept for decades and there does not seem to be a widely accepted
understanding of what that term means.
Does “adequate” mean a minimum per person square footage of living space ? Does
“adequate” include required green space, number(s) of bathrooms, bedroom size, kitc hen
size, living room size, and a whole host of potential issues?
Second, the enforcement provision in ACA 10, mandating that it is the “shared obligation
of state and local jurisdictions to respect, protect, and fulfill this right,” may be an invitation
to litigation. Can this “shared obligation” be enforced by the state against cities, by private
parties against cities, by developers against cities? Can cities compel the state to fund
this “shared obligation?” And who determines if a city’s planning and zoning laws “respect,
protect, and fulfill” the constitutional right to adequate housing?
Third, the measure would empower the State Legislature, the courts, and private litigants
to “achieve the full realization of the right, by all appropriate means, including the adoption
and amendment of legislative measures, to the maximum of available resources.” Given
the plethora of new state housing mandates being imposed on cities, this language could
seemingly abolish what remaining “home rule” cities have historically enjoyed over
matters involving “uniquely municipal affairs.”
Assembly Member Haney, the principal author of the measure, envisions empowering the
State Legislature to adopt such “land use policies that remove barriers to housing
production by zoning for more housing, expediting approve[sic] of affordable housing, and
adopting polices that further fair housing.”
2
01203.0001/913927.1
The Assembly Housing and Community Development report on this bill observed “a state
or local government could be sued to enforce the right to housing and the court could
direct the state or local government to take actions to fulfill the right to adequate housing.”
However, the measure would require a statewide vote of the residents of California and
such statewide measures have not fared particularly well in recent years.
It bears noting the State Legislature previously attempted to codify a right to housing in
both state law and in the California Constitution. In 2020, the Legislature passed AB 2405,
which would have established a policy that “every Californian has a right to safe, decent,
and affordable housing in the state.” The Governor vetoed AB 2405, citing its over $10
billion annual costs and the fact that the bill was duplicative of existing efforts being carried
out to create more housing as reasons for not signing it into law.
In 2020, then-Assemblymember Bonta (now the Attorney General) introduced an earlier
iteration of ACA 10, which would have “established a fundamental right to housing
enforceable through a private right of action.” Unlike the current iteration of ACA 10, the
2020 measure was exclusively enforceable by a public right of action, thereby preventing
other government bodies, such as the State of California, from suing local governments
to enforce this proposed right.
The 2020 iteration of ACA 10 failed to clear the Assembly Housing and Community
Development Committee. In 2022, Senator Gonzalez introduced Senate Constitutional
Amendment 9 (SCA 9), which would have established a fundamental right to housing.
SCA 9 failed to clear the Senate Housing Committee.
As noted, Assembly Member Haney from San Francisco is the principal author of the
current iteration of ACA 10. ACA 10 has cleared the Assembly Housing and Community
Development Committee and is pending before the Assembly Appropriations Committee.
The current legislative session adjourns on September 14, 2023 and the Legislature is in
recess until August 14, 2023.
To be placed before the voters in 2023, ACA 10 must clear the Assembly Appropriations
Committee and, of course, the full Assembly and Senate. There remains uncertainty as
to whether ACA 10 will continue on in the legislative process to, eventually, make it on
the ballot in time for the 2024 General Election.
If the City Council wishes to submit a written position letter on ACA 10 to state
representatives, it is recommended that staff work with the City Council Legislative
Subcommittee, consisting of Mayor Pro Tem Cruikshank and Councilmember Alegria, on
drafting such a letter for consideration at the September 5, 2023 meeting.
CONCLUSION:
There are significant policy issues implicated by ACA 10. Were it to be enacted by voters,
the impacts of the constitutional amendment on the City are difficult to predict or
anticipate. From the perspective of the City Attorney, the question for the City Council to
decide is whether the potential unintended consequences of this measure will adversely
impact local control over land use policies and the City’s adoption and enforcement of its
3
01203.0001/913927.1
local zoning regulations. Staff therefore recommends the City Council consider the
information in this report and, if desired, direct Staff to return with a draft letter taking a
position on ACA 10 for consideration at the September 5, 2023 meeting.
ALTERNATIVES:
In addition to Staff’s recommendation, the following alternative actions are available for
the City Council’s consideration:
1. Do not take a position at this time and wait to see how the legislative process
plays out.
2. Take other action, as deemed appropriate.
4
california legislature—2023–24 regular session
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 10
Introduced by Assembly Member Haney
(Principal coauthors: Assembly Members Bryan and Kalra)
(Principal coauthor: Senator Wahab)
(Coauthors: Assembly Members McKinnor and Quirk-Silva)
(Coauthors: Senators Blakespear, Gonzalez, and Smallwood-Cuevas)
March 6, 2023
Assembly Constitutional Amendment No. 10—A resolution to
propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the
Constitution of the State, by adding Article XXV thereto, relating to
housing.
legislative counsel’s digest
ACA 10, as introduced, Haney. Fundamental human right to housing.
The California Constitution enumerates various personal rights,
including the right to enjoy and defend life and liberty, acquiring,
possessing, and protecting property, and pursuing and obtaining safety,
happiness, and privacy.
This measure would declare that the state recognizes the fundamental
human right to adequate housing for everyone in California. The
measure would make it the shared obligation of state and local
jurisdictions to respect, protect, and fulfill this right, by all appropriate
means, as specified.
Vote: 2⁄3. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes.
State-mandated local program: no.
line 1 Resolved by the Assembly, the Senate concurring, That the
line 2 Legislature of the State of California at its 2023–24 Regular
Revised 6-7-23—See last page.99 A-1
line 1 Session commencing on the fifth day of December 2022, two-thirds
line 2 of the membership of each house concurring, hereby proposes to
line 3 the people of the State of California, that the Constitution of the
line 4 State be amended as follows:
line 5 That Article XXV is added thereto, to read:
line 6
line 7 ARTICLE XXV
line 8 Right to Housing
line 9
line 10 SECTION 1. The state hereby recognizes the fundamental
line 11 human right to adequate housing for everyone in California. It is
line 12 the shared obligation of state and local jurisdictions to respect,
line 13 protect, and fulfill this right, on a non-discriminatory and equitable
line 14 basis, with a view to progressively achieve the full realization of
line 15 the right, by all appropriate means, including the adoption and
line 16 amendment of legislative measures, to the maximum of available
line 17 resources.
line 18
line 19
REVISIONS: line 20
Heading—Line 2. line 21
line 22
O
99
— 2 — ACA 10 A-2
8/2/23, 6:26 PM Bill Status - ACA-10 Fundamental human right to housing.
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/billStatusClient.xhtml?bill_id=202320240ACA10 1/1
Measure:
Lead Authors:
Principal Coauthors:
Coauthors:
Topic:
31st Day in Print:
Title:
House Location:
Introduced Date:
Committee Location:
Voting Committee Location:
Committee Action Date:
Committee Motion:
Committee Vote Result:
ACA-10 Fundamental human right to housing.(2023-2024)
Senate:
Assembly:1st Cmt
Bill Status
ACA-10
Haney (A)
Bryan (A) , Kalra (A) , Wahab (S)
Blakespear (S) , Gonzalez (S) , McKinnor (A) , Quirk-Silva (A) , Smallwood-Cuevas (S)
Fundamental human right to housing.
04/06/23
A resolution to propose to the people of the State of California an amendment to the Constitution of the State, by
adding Article XXV thereto, relating to housing.
Assembly
03/06/23
Asm Appropriations
Asm Housing and Community Development
06/07/23
Be adopted and re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]
(PASS) »» Ayes: 6; Noes: 2; Abstain: 0;
Type of Measure
Active Bill - In Committee Process
Two Thirds Vote Required
Non-Appropriation
Fiscal Committee
Non-State-Mandated Local Program
Last 5 History Actions
Date Action
06/07/23 From committee: Be adopted, and re-refer to Com. on APPR. Re-referred. (Ayes 6. Noes 2.) (June 7). Re-referred to
Com. on APPR.
06/07/23 Coauthors revised.
04/20/23 Referred to Com. on H. & C.D.
03/07/23 From printer. May be heard in committee April 6.
03/06/23 Read first time. To print.
Home Bill Information California Law Publications Other Resources My Subscriptions My Favorites
B-1
ACA 10
Page 1
Date of Hearing: June 7, 2023
ASSEMBLY COMMITTEE ON HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Buffy Wicks, Chair
ACA 10 (Haney) – As Introduced March 6, 2023
SUBJECT: Fundamental human right to housing
SUMMARY: Adds a right to housing to the state Constitution. Specifically, this bill:
Establishes that the state recognizes the fundamental human right to adequate housing for
everyone in California. This right is a shared obligation of state and local jurisdictions to respect,
protect, and fulfill this right, on a non-discriminatory and equitable basis, with a view to
progressively achieve the full realization of the right, by all appropriate means, including the
adoption and amendment of legislative measures, to the maximum of available resources.
EXISTING LAW:
1) Establishes that it is the policy of the state that every human being has a right to safe, clean,
affordable, and accessible water adequate for human consumption, cooking, and sanitary
purposes. (Water Code 106.3)
2) Provides that he Legislature finds and declares that the subject of housing is of vital
statewide importance to the health, safety, and welfare of the residents of this state, for the
following reasons:
a) Decent housing is an essential motivating force in helping people achieve self-fulfillment
in a free and democratic society;
b) Unsanitary, unsafe, overcrowded, or congested dwelling accommodations or lack of
decent housing constitute conditions which cause an increase in, and spread of, disease
and crime;
c) A healthy housing market is one in which residents of this state have a choice of housing
opportunities and one in which the housing consumer may effectively choose within the
free marketplace; and
d) A healthy housing market is necessary both to achieve a healthy state economy and to
avoid an unacceptable level of unemployment. (Health and Safety Code (HSC) Section
50001)
3) Established the Homeless Housing, Assistance, and Prevention program to provide $650
million in one-time funding to continuum of care (CoCs), cities, and counties to support
regional coordination and expand or develop local capacity to address their immediate
homelessness challenges, informed by a best-practices framework focused on moving
homeless individuals and families into permanent housing and supporting the efforts of those
individuals and families to maintain their permanent housing. (HSC 50216 et al.)
FISCAL EFFECT: Unknown.
C-1
ACA 10
Page 2
COMMENTS:
Author’s Statement: According to the author, “Access to adequate housing is one of the first
steps to guarantee a person’s physical, emotional, and economic well-being. Despite a patchwork
of resources given to cities and counties across the state to provide affordable and accessible
housing, California is still struggling to address its worsening housing crisis. That is why adding
a right to housing to the California Constitution is crucial at this time. ACA 10 recognizes that
every Californian has the fundamental human right to adequate housing on an equitable and
nondiscriminatory basis. Putting this commitment to housing in our constitution brings it up in
comparison to other rights that we’ve said are nonnegotiable for us. This constitutional
amendment simply says housing is the highest priority and value in our state.”
United Nations (U.N.) Right to Adequate Housing: This bill amends the state Constitution to
establish a human right to adequate housing for everyone in California. If passed and signed by
the Legislature, this amendment would need to be ratified by a majority of voters for it to take
effect.
ACA 10 establishes a right to “adequate” housing modeled after international law. Adequate
housing was recognized as part of the right to an adequate standard of living in the 1948
Universal Declaration of Human Rights and in the 1966 International Covenant on Economic,
Social and Cultural Rights. The U.N. Committee on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights has
underlined that the right to adequate housing should not be interpreted narrowly. Rather, it
should be seen as the right to live somewhere in security, peace and dignity. Several key aspects
of a right to adequate housing include a right to protection from forced evictions, equal and
nondiscriminatory access to housing, and that housing must be adequate. Adequate housing is
defined as housing with security of tenure; availability of services, materials, facilities, and
infrastructure; affordability, habitability, accessibility; a location that is not inadequate, and
cultural adequacy.
A right to housing does not require the state or local governments to provide housing to every
person, nor does it allow people to automatically demand housing from the government.
According to the U.N., the right to adequate housing covers measures that are needed to prevent
homelessness, prohibit forced evictions, address discrimination, focus on the most vulnerable
and marginalized groups, ensure security of tenure to all, and guarantee that everyone’s housing
is adequate.
This ACA further defines the right as a shared right of the state and local jurisdictions to respect,
protect, and fulfill on a non-discriminatory and equitable basis, with a view to progressively
achieve the full realization of the right, by all appropriate means, including the adoption and
amendment of legislative measures, to the maximum of available resources.
Respect, Protect, and Fulfill: The language of ACA 10 also includes a requirement that local
and state government, “respect, protect, and fulfill the right to housing in a nondiscriminatory
way.” This construction is also modelled after U.N. Right to Housing:
“The obligation to respect requires States to refrain from interfering directly or indirectly
with the enjoyment of the right to adequate housing. For example, States should refrain from
carrying out forced evictions and demolishing homes; denying security of tenure to particular
groups; imposing discriminatory practices that limit women’s access to and control over
housing, land and property infringing on the right to privacy and protection of the home;
C-2
ACA 10
Page 3
denying housing, land and property restitution to particular groups; or polluting water
resources.
The obligation to protect requires States to prevent third parties from interfering with the
right to adequate housing. States should adopt legislation or other measures to ensure that
private actors—e.g., landlords, property developers, landowners and corporations—comply
with human rights standards related to the right to adequate housing. States should, for
instance, regulate the housing and rental markets in a way that promotes and protects the
right to adequate housing; guarantee that banks and financial institutions extend housing
finance without discrimination; ensure that the private provision of water, sanitation and
other basic services attached to the home does not jeopardize their availability, accessibility,
acceptability and quality; ensure that third parties do not arbitrarily and illegally withdraw
such services; prevent discriminatory inheritance practices affecting women’s access to and
control over housing, land and property; ensure that landlords do not discriminate against
particular groups; ensure that private actors do not carry out forced evictions.
The obligation to fulfil requires States to adopt appropriate legislative, administrative,
budgetary, judicial, promotional and other measures to fully realize the right to adequate
housing. States must, for instance, adopt a national housing policy or a national housing plan
that: defines the objectives for the development of the housing sector, with a focus on
disadvantaged and marginalized groups; identifies the resources available to meet these
goals; specifies the most cost-effective way of using them; outlines the responsibilities and
time frame for the implementation of the necessary measures; monitors results and ensures
adequate remedies for violations. Under the obligation to fulfil, States must also,
progressively and to the extent allowed by their available resources, prevent and address
homelessness; provide the physical infrastructure required for housing to be considered
adequate (this would include taking steps towards ensuring universal and non-discriminatory
access to electricity, safe drinking water, adequate sanitation, refuse collection and other
essential services); or ensure adequate housing to individuals or groups unable, for reasons
beyond their control, to enjoy the right to adequate housing, notably through housing
subsidies and other measures.”
Implications of a Right to Housing: Should a right to housing be added to the Constitution,
local and state governments would have an obligation to proactively ensure that people have
access to adequate housing. This could include land use policies that remove barriers to housing
production by zoning for more housing, expediting approve of affordable housing, and adopting
polices that further fair housing. This could also include enacting tenant protections, regulating
the housing market, building and preserving public housing, providing housing subsidies, and
implementing progressive tax policies. If a right to housing is added to the state Constitution, a
state or local government could be sued to enforce the right to housing and the court could direct
the state or local government to take actions to fulfill the right to adequate housing.
Funding: ACA 10 establishes the right to housing as a shared obligation of state and local
governments and requires the realization of the right by all appropriate means to the maximum of
available resources. The language requires the local and state governments to work
“progressively” toward fulfill the right. This is based on a recognition that the state and local
government does not have all of the necessary financial resource available to resolve
homelessness or the lack of affordable housing. The state has invested significantly in the local
homelessness response system and in affordable housing production over the last five years. In
C-3
ACA 10
Page 4
previous years, very little direct General Fund subsidy was allocated to affordable housing
production. Tax credits and bonds funded affordable housing production. Affordable housing is
not an entitlement and does not receive any ongoing, sustained funding from the state’s general
fund. Some larger cities and counties have passed local bonds and funding measures to build
more affordable housing and respond to homelessness. The state’s budget is limited by several
factors. Revenues are heavily dependent on volatile sources like personal income taxes which in
down economic times are reduced. The state is also constitutionally required to fund schools at a
minimum level, slightly more than half of the General Fund revenues. Local government
revenues are also highly constrained by Proposition 13. Should housing become a right, there
would be limitations on the amount that local and state governments could spend to fulfill the
right because of the existing obligations and the constraint on available funds. To be effective,
the state would need a sustainable and ongoing funding source to increase the supply of
affordable housing, prevent homelessness, and fund services for supportive housing – all
necessary components to ensure that a right to housing is a reality.
Not a Right to Shelter: ACA 10 is a right to adequate housing and not a right to shelter. A right
to shelter is a legal mandate that requires local governments to provide emergency shelter to
anyone experiencing homelessness. This approach to homelessness has had decidedly mixed
results. According to the latest Point in Time count for the City of New York, which has
operated under a legal right to shelter framework since a state Supreme Court decision and
consent decree in Callahan v. Carey (No. 79-42582 (Sup. Ct. N.Y. County, Cot. 18, 1979))
obligated the city to provide the right to shelter, the city’s unsheltered population is 4,294 out of
91,897 homeless people. Although many people are housed in New York, they are still
experiencing homelessness because they are living in temporary shelters or transitional housing.
Some people have been living in shelters for years with no solution for permanent housing. This
approach is also expensive and requires that resources that should be used for permanent housing
instead go toward maintaining emergency shelters and not toward building supportive housing,
housing with services for people who are chronically homeless, or for affordable housing. New
York City spends $1.7 billion a year to maintain its shelter system, which is $30,000 per
individual per year. In addition to the City of New York, the City of Portland and Multnomah
County as well as the state of Massachusetts have adopted a right to shelter.
This ACA would declare a right to housing. Unlike a right to shelter, a right to housing would
mean housing is provided across the continuum of need and not exclusively within the shelter
system. According to the Department of Housing and Community Development and the
California Housing Partnership, the state needs an additional 1.2 million units affordable to
lower-income households to meet demand, and more than 80 percent of existing housing units
are unaffordable or unavailable to extremely low-income families.
Housing First: California is a housing first state. This requirement would also ensure that a right
to housing is not interpreted as a right to shelter. Decades of research demonstrate that evidence-
based approaches like supportive housing – affordable housing coupled with wrap-around
services – resolves homelessness for most individuals. The state’s Housing First policy
prioritizes providing permanent housing to people experiencing homelessness, thus ending their
homelessness and serving as a platform from which they can pursue personal goals and improve
their quality of life. Over more than a decade, dozens of studies conducted across the world
demonstrate that the costs of delivering supportive housing using a Housing First model are
offset in large part by reductions in the use of crisis services, including shelters, jails,
ambulances, and hospitals. Many state and local programs effectively utilize these evidence-
C-4
ACA 10
Page 5
based approaches to address homelessness; however, the number of people falling into
homelessness continues to overwhelm the response system and surpasses the affordable housing
stock in many communities. These factors lead to persistently high rates of homelessness despite
recent state and local investments. Other strategies, such as rental assistance and help with
identifying and securing housing (housing navigation) can also help with those individuals who
need prevention tools to avoid homelessness.
Despite the overwhelming data and evidence that Housing First works to end homelessness,
there is a growing national movement to roll back Housing First policies. This short-sighted and
misleading push fails to recognize that Housing First is not the root cause of continued increases
in homelessness; rather, it is the lack of affordable housing for lower income households. The
federal government recently reasserted its commitment to Housing First in “All In: the Federal
Strategic Plan to End Homelessness” and emphasized the need to focus on data-driven solutions
like permanent housing linked to wrap-around services that end homelessness.
Arguments in Support: According to the ACLU, “It is clear that Californians support a right to
housing. A 2020 poll showed that 66% of all Californians support a state constitutional
amendment guaranteeing the human right to housing. California voters have approved more than
500 constitutional amendments, including adding new fundamental civil rights, and legislators
have enacted new rights-based laws in a variety of areas. For example, under California's right to
education, the government must provide equal access to public education and the right requires
state and local governments to fund public schools. Another comparable right is California's
right to water statute, which requires consideration of the human right to water by government
agencies when making decisions related to water access. These rights provide important
precedents for a right to housing. Rights are different from policies because they receive more
protection from courts and are harder to take away. Recognizing a right to housing is essential to
meaningfully address the housing crisis. Such a right is a guarantee that Californians’ housing
security is protected from the whims and uncertainties of politics, the charitable sector, or the
private market.”
Arguments in Opposition: None on file.
Related Legislation:
SCA 9 (Gonzalez) of 2022 would have established a fundamental right to housing. This bill was
referred to the Senate Housing Committee but not heard by the committee.
ACA 10 (Bonta) of 2020 would have established a fundamental right to housing enforceable
through a private right of action. This bill was referred to Assembly Housing and Community
Development Committee but not heard by the committee.
AB 2405 (Burke) of 2020 would have established a policy that every Californian has a right to
safe, decent, and affordable housing in the state. This bill was vetoed by the Governor. Veto
message:
I am returning Assembly Bill 2405 without my signature.
This bill would declare a state policy that every individual in California has the right to safe,
C-5
ACA 10
Page 6
decent, and affordable housing. The bill would also require state departments and agencies
to consider this policy when revising or adopting policies, regulations, and grant criteria.
This is a laudable goal that I share, and undoubtedly, California must continue to do more to
address homelessness. Regrettably, however, I cannot support this bill considering the cost
implications of such a policy, estimated at over $10 billion annually.
Moreover, I have always maintained that our efforts must come with greater accountability
and better results. Although well-intentioned, this bill is duplicative of existing efforts and
may ultimately force us to expend resources without commensurately creating new housing
or services for people experiencing homelessness.
I am committed to working with the Legislature and local government partners on a detailed
strategy to improve behavioral health outcomes and increase housing opportunities for
people experiencing homelessness. To make progress, we need more than policy goals. We
need tangible funding strategies and legal requirements - this means challenging accepted
norms and rejecting the status quo and identifying necessary revenues.
REGISTERED SUPPORT / OPPOSITION:
Support
Abundant Housing LA (Co-Sponsor)
ACCE Action (Co-Sponsor)
ACLU California Action (Co-Sponsor)
End Poverty in California (EPIC) (Co-Sponsor)
Golden State Opportunity (Co-Sponsor)
Housing Now! (Co-Sponsor)
National Homelessness Law Center (Co-Sponsor)
PowerCA Action (Co-Sponsor)
The Children's Partnership (Co-Sponsor)
Western Center on Law and Poverty (Co-Sponsor)
Acton & Agua Dulce Democratic Club
Affordable Housing Network of Santa Clara County
Aids Healthcare Foundation
Alameda County Democratic Party
BASTA
Bend the Arc: Jewish Action, Southern California
Berkeley Fellowship of Unitarian Universalists, Social Justice Committee
Berkeley Tenants Union
Bet Tzedek
California Calls
California Democratic Party Renters Council
California Housing Partnership Corporation
California Latinas for Reproductive Justice
California Pan - Ethnic Health Network
California Reinvestment Coalition
Care - CLT
Center for Community Action & Environmental Justice
C-6
ACA 10
Page 7
Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy
Centro Legal De LA Raza
ChangeLab Solutions
Climate Resolve
Coalition on Homelessness
Community Health Councils
Community Lead Advocacy Program Clap
Congregations Organized for Prophetic Engagement (COPE)
Council of Community Housing Organizations
Courage California
Disability Rights California
Dreher Law Firm
East Bay Alliance for a Sustainable Economy (EBASE)
East Bay Community Law Center
East Bay Permanent Real Estate Cooperative
Esperanza Community Housing Corporation
Evolve California
Faith in the Valley
Family Assistance Program
First Wednesdays San Leandro
Friends Committee on Legislation of California
Glide
Ground Game LA
Healing and Justice Center
Housing Is a Human Right - Orange County
Housing Rights Initiative
Human Rights Watch
Inland Equity Community Land Trusts
Inner City Law Center
John and Marilyn Wells Family Foundation, Stories from the Frontline
Koreatown Immigrant Workers
LA Voice
Latino Health Access
Leadership Council for Justice and Accountability
Legal Aid of Sonoma County
Long Beach Residents Empowered
Making Housing and Community Happen
Mi Familia Vota
National Association of Social Workers, California Chapter
National Housing Law Project
Oakland Tenants Union
Orange County Equality Coalition
Orange County Mobile Home Residents Coalition
Parable of Sower Intentional Community Cooperative
Peace Builders of Orange County
People Organized for Westside Renewal
Physicians for Social Responsibility - Los Angeles
Planting Justice
Pomona United for Stable Housing
C-7
ACA 10
Page 8
Power California
Prevention Institute
Public Interest Law Project
Public Advocates
Public Counsel
Public Health Advocates
Public Health Justice Collective
Regional Asthma Management & Prevention
Resilience OC
Riverside All of Us or None
Sonoma Valley Housing Group
Starting Over
Strategic Actions for a Just Economy
Stronger Women United
T.r.u.s.t. South LA
TechEquity Collaborative
Thai Community Development Center
The Los Angeles Metropolitan Churches
The People's Resource Center
The Santa Monica Democratic Club
U.s Vets Homeless Feeding N Housing Services
Union Station Homeless Services
Venice Justice Committee
Western Regional Advocacy Project
Young Invincibles
Opposition
None on file.
Analysis Prepared by: Lisa Engel / H. & C.D. / (916) 319-2085
C-8