California landlords have secured a significant win in their ongoing battle with the AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) over rent control laws. Proposition 34, a measure aimed at curbing AHF’s ability to fund political campaigns, passed with a narrow majority, marking a pivotal moment in the decade-long clash between landlords and the nonprofit.
What Is Proposition 34?
Proposition 34 seeks to restrict nonprofits like AHF from using revenues generated through healthcare operations, such as prescription drug sales, to fund political campaigns. The measure is a direct response to AHF’s repeated attempts to challenge the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act, a California law that limits rent control regulations statewide.
With an annual budget of $2.5 billion, AHF has financed high-profile litigation and ballot initiatives since 2018. However, Prop. 34 aims to put an end to what opponents have called a misuse of resources unrelated to healthcare.
Why Proposition 34 Passed
Preliminary results show 50.7% of voters supported the proposition, reflecting public fatigue with AHF’s political interventions. In particular, landlords and housing organizations viewed AHF as a persistent opponent, citing the nonprofit’s efforts to repeal Costa-Hawkins in 2018, 2020, and 2024 as costly and disruptive.
The California Apartment Association (CAA), a key supporter of Prop. 34, spent heavily to ensure its passage. Campaigns opposing AHF-backed proposals, including this year’s Prop. 33, have cost over $124 million in total.
The Cost of Political Warfare
The financial stakes were high on both sides. AHF leveraged funds from its nonprofit pharmacy operations to fuel its political campaigns, while the Yes on 34 campaign focused its messaging on preventing the “misuse of public dollars.”
AHF’s Response and Future Plans
Despite the loss, AHF President Michael Weinstein has vowed to continue advocating for renters’ rights and pursuing justice for tenants. In a statement, he criticized the influence of wealthy donors in politics, claiming, “If billionaires spend more than $170 million lying and confusing voters, they are virtually guaranteed to win.”
While AHF’s legal challenge against Prop. 34 was dismissed earlier this year, the nonprofit has not ruled out further litigation or renewed efforts to address rent control in California.
Conclusion: A Turning Point in California Housing Policy
The passage of Proposition 34 marks a significant moment in the ongoing debate over rent control and nonprofit involvement in politics. For landlords and housing advocates, it represents a long-awaited victory against AHF’s political influence.
However, this battle is likely not the last. As Weinstein emphasized, “The battle for justice for renters marches on.” Both sides remain firmly entrenched, ensuring that the future of rent control in California will continue to be a contentious issue.