Proposition 33 would have repealed the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Act that prevents local governments from enacting rent control. (GV Wire Composite/Paul Marshall)
- Voters have largely rejected a third attempt to change a 1995 law restricting rent control in California cities.
- As of Wednesday morning, 61.6% of voters oppose the rent control measure.
- Opponents to rent control say it makes building housing more difficult.
Share
Voters have rejected another attempt to allow rent control in the Golden State.
With 61.6% of voters opposing Proposition 33 and 100% of precincts partially reporting, the Associated Press has called the attempt to repeal 1995’s Costa-Hawkins Act a failure.
Prop. 33 is the third attempt in recent years to repeal the act, which prevents local governments from passing rent control on newer apartment complexes and on single-family homes.
The AIDS Healthcare Foundation helped fund propositions to change Costa-Hawkins in 2020 and 2018, according to the California Apartment Association.
The California Apartment Association largely funded Proposition 34, which restricts how nonprofit health care groups receiving federal funds can spend their money.
Voters appear to approve the measure, with 51.5% in favor of the initiative. Ballots are still being counted in that race as of Wednesday.
Related Story: From Tax Measures to Prison Labor: Keep Track of State Propositions
Voters Appear to Think Rent Control Not the Answer to High Housing Costs
Proposition 33 would eliminate the 1995 law that keeps local governments from enacting rent control on newer apartments and single-family homes. It also would cap rent increases when a unit becomes vacant.
Many on both sides of the political aisle agree that rental costs have exceeded the budgets of many Californians — renters typically pay 50% or more of their household budget for housing, much more than in other states, according to the secretary of state.
Proponents of Prop. 33Â said the best way to address out-of-control housing costs is to allow local governments to enact rent control. By allowing cities to decide on whether to cap rent increases, it could dissuade people fleeing from California because of housing costs, advocates said on the California Secretary of State website.
Related Story: Voters Say ‘Enough is Enough’ for Drugs, Crime in CA: Tulare County ...
Opponents say rent control measures exacerbate housing crises as the solution to lower home prices is building more housing. By capping rental revenues, developers would be less incentivized to build, especially as construction costs continue to rise, opponents on the California Secretary of State website said.
Spending on the Prop. 33 campaign — both for and against — far outpaced any other proposition. Opponents of the initiative, largely the California Apartment Association, spent nearly $100 million. Proponents, including the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, spent more than $40 million.
The apartment association even heavily sponsored Prop. 34, which would severely restrict how nonprofits like the AIDS Foundation can spend money, something pundits say was in response to the rent control measure.
RELATED TOPICS:
Categories
Fresno Man With Multiple DUIs Gets 30 Years for Crash That Killed Two
JOANN Fabrics and Crafts to Close Visalia Distribution Facility, Shedding 209 Jobs
Kings County Sheriff Says Arrested Homicide/Kidnapping Suspect Had Fled to Mexico
Man Rescued After Falling 25 Feet Into Drainage Pipe in Fresno
