If you’ve lived in California for more than five minutes, you know the housing market is basically a high-stakes poker game where the house always wins. Rents go up, the beach gets further away, and eventually, everyone starts talking about ballot measures. One of the biggest names to hit the ticket recently was Proposition 33. It wasn't just another boring line item on the 2024 ballot; it was a total attempt to rewrite the rules of the game.
So, what does Prop 33 do? Or rather, what was it supposed to do?
Basically, Prop 33 was designed to give local cities the power to control rent however they saw fit. It aimed to take the "training wheels" off local governments by repealing a 1995 law called the Costa-Hawkins Rental Housing Act. For decades, Costa-Hawkins has been the ultimate shield for landlords, preventing cities from putting rent caps on single-family homes or anything built after 1995.
Prop 33 wanted to burn that shield.
The Death of Costa-Hawkins (That Didn't Happen)
To understand Prop 33, you have to understand the wall it was trying to knock down. Since the mid-90s, the Costa-Hawkins Act has put three major "nopes" on local rent control:
- New Construction: Cities can't control rent on buildings finished after February 1, 1995 (or earlier in cities that already had rent control).
- Single-Family Homes: Your landlord can raise the rent as much as they want (within reason) if you're renting a standalone house or a condo.
- Vacancy Decontrol: This is the big one. When a tenant moves out, the landlord can reset the rent to whatever the market will bear.
Prop 33 would have deleted all of that. If your city council wanted to cap the rent on a brand-new luxury condo or a suburban house, they could. If they wanted to prevent a landlord from raising the price when a new person moved in—a practice called "vacancy control"—they would have had the legal green light.
It was a bold move. Honestly, it was the third time Michael Weinstein and the AIDS Healthcare Foundation tried to pull this off, following similar failed attempts with Prop 10 in 2018 and Prop 21 in 2020.
Why the 2024 Results Matter Right Now
Despite the massive push from tenant advocates, Prop 33 went down in flames. About 60% of California voters said "no thanks."
But don't think for a second the conversation is dead. We're sitting here in 2026, and the fallout from that vote is still shaping how we talk about housing. The "No on 33" camp—backed by groups like the California Apartment Association and even Governor Gavin Newsom—argued that if you make it too hard for landlords to make a profit, they’ll just stop building. Or worse, they’ll take their properties off the market entirely.
The "Yes" side countered that without Prop 33, we're just watching the slow-motion displacement of every working-class family in the state. They pointed to the fact that nearly 30% of California renters spend more than half their income just to keep a roof over their heads.
It's a mess.
The "NIMBY" Weapon Argument
One of the most interesting (and slightly nerdy) arguments against the measure was about "NIMBYism"—Not In My Backyard. Opponents like Nathan Click argued that wealthy cities could use Prop 33 as a weapon. How? By passing "rent control" rules so strict that no developer would ever want to build there. It would basically be a backdoor way to stop new housing from being built, keeping the neighborhood "exclusive" while pretending to help renters.
What Actually Stays the Same?
Since Prop 33 failed, the old rules are still the boss. If you’re a renter wondering what does Prop 33 do for you today, the answer is: nothing directly, because it didn't pass. However, you aren't completely unprotected.
California still has AB 1482, the statewide rent cap law passed in 2019. This law limits most annual rent increases to 5% plus the local rate of inflation (topping out at 10%). It’s not as "extreme" as what Prop 33 offered, but it’s the safety net currently in place until at least 2030.
Here is how the landscape looks right now:
- Single-Family Homes: Generally still exempt from local rent control unless owned by a corporation.
- Post-1995 Buildings: Still exempt from local caps (though they fall under the 10% state cap if they are at least 15 years old).
- New Tenants: Landlords can still hike the price to market rate when you move in.
The 2026 Outlook: What's Next?
Even though the ballot measure failed, the pressure hasn't let up. We're seeing state legislators in Sacramento trying to find a "middle ground." There’s talk about "rolling" dates—instead of the hard 1995 cutoff, maybe buildings become subject to rent control once they hit 15 or 20 years old.
It's a compromise that might actually stand a chance.
🔗 Read more: What Day Is The President Elected: The Surprising History Behind America's Big Vote
The reality is that California’s housing crisis isn't going away. Whether it’s through another ballot measure in 2028 or new laws being debated right now, the ghost of Prop 33 is still haunting every city council meeting from San Diego to Redding.
Actionable Next Steps for Renters and Owners
If you're trying to navigate this landscape, here's what you should actually do:
- Check Your Building's Age: Use local property records to find out exactly when your unit was built. If it was before 1995, you might already have more protections than you think.
- Track the 2026 Housing Agenda: Keep an eye on the California Legislature’s current session. They are currently debating bond measures and potential tweaks to the 10% state rent cap.
- Review Your Lease for "Vacancy Decontrol": If you’re moving, remember that the landlord has the right to set a new base rent. Your "protection" only kicks in once you’ve officially moved in and the state cap applies to your subsequent annual increases.
- Join a Local Group: Whether you're a "mom and pop" landlord or a tenant, groups like the California Renters Council or local taxpayers associations are the first to know when a new city ordinance is being drafted.
The fight over Prop 33 was never just about one law; it was about who gets to decide the price of living in California. For now, the state holds the reins, but the locals are still pulling at the bit.