LOS ANGELES — (BUSINESS WIRE) — The greedy corporate interests behind both the campaign to stop rent control in California and the campaign to punish the nonprofit sponsoring rent control now have raised more than $140 million. That money is being spent on – among other things – advertisements designed to deceive statewide voters in advance of the November 5th election.
In a kind of shell game, corporate landlords contribute millions in campaign cash to the California Apartment Association Issues Committee. CAA then moves that corporate landlord money to both No on 33 and Yes on 34.
To date, the CAA Issues Committee has raised $119,917,365, according to campaign filings at the California Secretary of State website. Its top three contributors are Essex Property Trust ($28,795,000), Equity Residential ($20,468,500), and AvalonBay Communities ($18,179,000). Both Essex Property Trust and Equity Residential are mired in the RealPage price-fixing scandal.
Three separate committees make up the No on 33 campaign: Californians for Responsible Housing sponsored by the California Apartment Association; Californians to Protect Affordable Housing; and Homeownership for Families sponsored by the California Association of Realtors. Those three committees have raised $104,500,738, with some of that money coming from the CAA Issues Committee mentioned above.
At the same time, CAA Issues Committee is contributing a large portion of money to the Yes on 34 campaign. Yes on 34 sponsored by the CAA has raised $36,441,114 so far.
Together, the grand total for the three No on 33 committees and Yes on 34 is $140,941,852.
Proposition 33, sponsored by AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) and now endorsed by more than 100 elected and formerly elected officials in California as well as more than 100 labor, senior, veteran, healthcare, and tenant groups, is just 23 words: “The state may not limit the right of any city, county, or city and county to maintain, enact or expand residential rent control.” Prop 33 also has the support of the California Democratic Party, labor icon Dolores Huerta, and U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders.
Meanwhile, the San Francisco Chronicle called Prop 34 “cheap political gamesmanship that doesn’t belong on the ballot.” The San Diego Union-Tribune called it a “vengeful attempt funded by landlords” that “sets a terrible precedent.” The Bakersfield Californian says Prop 34 is about “political rivalry.” The Mercury News calls it “Revenge of the Landlords.” And the Los Angeles Times, in three separate articles, has called 34 “a sleazy abuse of the ballot,” “weaponization of the state’s citizen initiative process,” and “a new low.”
