California Voters Reject Proposition 33, Keeping State Limits on Rent Control
Sandra Roman
California voters have rejected Proposition 33, a ballot measure that would have allowed cities to expand rent control, marking the third defeat for similar initiatives in recent years. With 62% voting “no,” the measure’s rejection keeps in place the Costa-Hawkins Act, a 1995 state law that restricts local rent control by exempting single-family homes, newer buildings, and vacant units.
What Prop 33 Would Have Changed
Proposition 33 aimed to repeal Costa-Hawkins, giving local governments greater authority to cap rent increases and prevent landlords from raising rents when new tenants move in. Supporters, including tenant advocacy groups and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation, argued that expanded rent control is crucial for addressing California’s high housing costs, homelessness, and tenant displacement.
- Real estate interests, landlords, and some YIMBY (Yes In My Backyard) advocates opposed the measure, warning that expanded rent control could discourage new housing development.
- The No on 33 campaign, bolstered by significant funding, argued that more housing construction—not increased regulation—was the key to easing California’s affordability crisis.
A Recurring Debate in California Housing Policy
The result highlights the ongoing tension between state control and local autonomy in California’s housing policy. While tenant advocates continue to push for stronger rent protections, local leaders remain divided. Proponents see expanded rent control as a tool to protect tenants, while opponents worry it could slow development.
Despite Prop 33’s failure, cities with high housing costs may still introduce rent stabilization measures under existing laws, and advocates say they’ll continue to seek ways to address rent burdens and housing stability across the state.
