California Appeals Court Largely Upholds Pasadena Rent Control Law, Strikes Limited Provisions

A California appeals court has largely upheld Pasadena’s voter-approved rent control law, rejecting constitutional challenges brought by landlord groups while striking down two provisions the court found conflicted with state law.

In a decision filed Dec. 18, the state Second District Court of Appeal ruled that Measure H, adopted by Pasadena voters in November 2022, was a lawful amendment to the city’s charter and did not unlawfully restructure city government, as opponents had argued.

Measure H imposed limits on rent increases for older apartment buildings, established just-cause eviction protections, and created an independent Rental Housing Board with broad authority over rent regulation and tenant protections. The measure passed with 53.8% of the vote and took effect in December 2022.

The lawsuit was filed by the California Apartment Association and individual landlords, who contended the initiative was an impermissible “revision” of Pasadena’s charter rather than a lawful amendment, a distinction that would have required a more formal legislative process. The court rejected that argument, finding Measure H addressed a single subject — housing — and did not fundamentally alter the city’s system of governance.

The court also rejected claims that Measure H violated constitutional provisions by reserving seven of the Rental Housing Board’s 11 seats for tenants. The justices ruled that limiting board eligibility based on tenant status does not constitute an unlawful property qualification and does not violate equal protection guarantees, applying a rational-basis standard of review.

However, the court sided with landlords on two preemption issues. It struck down a Measure H provision requiring landlords to pay relocation assistance when tenants are displaced due to lawful rent increases, ruling that the requirement conflicts with the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, which allows landlords to raise rents to market levels under certain circumstances.

The court also invalidated a provision requiring landlords to provide additional notice beyond state law before initiating eviction proceedings for nonpayment of rent. That requirement, the court said, conflicted with California’s unlawful detainer statutes and imposed an unlawful procedural barrier.

Those provisions were severed from the law, leaving the remainder of Measure H intact.

The ruling leaves Pasadena’s rent caps, just-cause eviction protections, and the authority of the Rental Housing Board largely unchanged, while clarifying limits on how far local governments may go when regulating rent increases and eviction procedures.

The case has been closely watched by cities across California that have adopted or are considering voter-approved rent control measures. The court emphasized that voter initiatives are entitled to broad deference and must be upheld unless they clearly violate constitutional or statutory law.

The decision sends the case back to the Los Angeles County Superior Court with instructions to enter judgment consistent with the ruling.