For years, nonprofit CEO and political activist Michael Weinstein has been at the forefront of efforts to empower California cities to manage skyrocketing rents. He has passionately advocated for repealing state laws that limit local rent control measures. However, despite his determination, Weinstein’s attempts have repeatedly met with failure. Now, following the results of the recent elections, his ability to continue this fight is under significant threat.
Proposition 33: Another Defeat in the Push for Rent Control
Weinstein’s most recent effort, Proposition 33, aimed to repeal the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, a state law that prevents strict rent control measures at the local level. The proposition promised to give municipalities more power to combat unaffordable rent increases. However, California voters decisively rejected it. With nearly all votes counted, Proposition 33 trailed by almost 3 million votes.
The failure of Proposition 33 is a major setback for Weinstein and housing activists across the state. Many believe that repealing Costa-Hawkins is a critical step in addressing California’s housing crisis. Under current laws, annual rent increases are capped at 5%, plus inflation, which can push the total increase to as much as 10% in some cases. Critics argue that these limits are insufficient to protect tenants, especially in areas where rents are already unaffordable.
Proposition 34: A Direct Blow to Weinstein’s Nonprofit
While the defeat of Proposition 33 was disappointing, the passage of Proposition 34 is potentially more damaging to Weinstein’s work. This measure directly targets the funding mechanisms of Weinstein’s nonprofit organization, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF). Proposition 34 requires healthcare providers to allocate at least 98% of their revenue from federal drug discounts to direct patient care. The measure includes additional conditions—such as owning and managing apartment buildings and having a history of safety violations—that seem uniquely tailored to AHF.
This targeting of AHF has raised eyebrows, with many viewing Proposition 34 as a calculated effort to limit Weinstein’s ability to fund housing initiatives. Although AHF operates within the law, the passage of Proposition 34 could significantly restrict its ability to support future rent control campaigns. With a narrow margin of 50.8% in favor and 49.2% against, the measure is expected to become law, further complicating Weinstein’s fight for affordable housing.
Powerful Opposition from Landlords and Corporations
Weinstein’s initiatives have consistently faced well-funded opposition from the California Apartment Association (CAA), a powerful landlord lobbying group. Backed by billion-dollar corporate interests, the CAA spent nearly $90 million to ensure the defeat of Proposition 33. Additionally, they allocated $44 million to promote Proposition 34, framing it as a measure to safeguard health care funds. In total, over $170 million was poured into campaigns against Weinstein’s efforts.
Critics of the CAA argue that its campaigns misled voters, focusing more on protecting landlord profits than addressing California’s housing crisis. Weinstein himself has called out the influence of “billionaires” in swaying public opinion, stating, “If billionaires spend more than $170 million lying and confusing voters, they are virtually guaranteed to win.” Despite this, he remains resolute, adding, “The battle for justice for renters marches on.”
What’s Next for Rent Control in California?
The passage of Proposition 34 may significantly limit Weinstein’s ability to lead future housing initiatives. By cutting off a major source of funding for his campaigns, the measure effectively sidelines one of California’s most vocal housing advocates. This outcome has been widely criticized by housing activists and media outlets, including the Los Angeles Times, San Francisco Chronicle, San Diego Union-Tribune, and Sacramento Bee, which condemned Proposition 34 as a direct attack on Weinstein’s work.
Despite these setbacks, California’s housing crisis persists. Rents continue to climb, and the supply of affordable housing remains inadequate. While opponents of rent control argue that limiting rents discourages new housing development, advocates like Weinstein see the issue as inseparable from poverty and homelessness. Weinstein has repeatedly called for stronger local control to address these challenges, arguing that state-level restrictions like Costa-Hawkins exacerbate the crisis.
For now, Weinstein’s next steps remain uncertain. When asked whether he would challenge Proposition 34 in court, he stated that AHF would first assess whether the law applies to the organization. Regardless of the outcome, the fight for affordable housing in California is far from over. Weinstein’s voice may be quieter for the time being, but other housing advocates are expected to continue the push for change.
The Broader Impact on California’s Housing Crisis
California’s housing challenges are complex, and the failure of Proposition 33 and the passage of Proposition 34 highlight the ongoing struggles to find solutions. The landlord lobby, supported by major corporate interests, has shown its ability to dominate state politics, often at the expense of renters and housing reform. Meanwhile, current laws, such as the 5% rent cap plus inflation, fail to address the underlying issues of affordability and supply.
For renters, the defeat of Proposition 33 means that strict rent control measures are still off the table. Local governments remain constrained by state laws, limiting their ability to respond to rapidly rising rents. At the same time, the passage of Proposition 34 signals a shift in how nonprofits like AHF can engage in housing advocacy.
Michael Weinstein’s determination to fight for renters’ rights may be tested like never before. While Proposition 34 could temporarily curb his influence, the broader movement for housing justice is unlikely to fade away. The battle for affordable housing in California continues, with activists and advocates striving to address one of the state’s most pressing issues.
