AIDS Healthcare Foundation

In 1987, activists Chris Brownlie, Michael Weinstein, Sharon Raphael, PhD, Mina Meyer, MA, and other advocates were among the earliest champions of the AIDS hospice movement.[10][11] They co-founded the Los Angeles AIDS Hospice Committee, which was the catalyst for the AIDS Hospice Foundation that we know today as the AIDS Healthcare Foundation.[12]

Members of the inaugural AIDS Hospice Committee—Brownlie, Weinstein, Myer, Raphael, Paul Coleman and others—negotiated for the opening of Chris Brownlie Hospice by protesting and picketing of then-Supervisor Mike Antonovich's home. Following an emotional plea for hospice care to Los Angeles County Commission on AIDS, which included the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, they secured a $2 million commitment to AIDS care on the grounds of the Barlow Respiratory Hospital.[13]

The group began converting a facility in Elysian Park that had been Barlow's old nursing quarters into Chris Brownlie Hospice —the County's first AIDS hospice—which was named in Brownlie's honor when it first opened December 26, 1988. Meyer, who also served as Treasurer of the AIDS Hospice Committee, was honored in 1987 by the Los Angeles AIDS Hospice Committee with its 'Heart of Gold Award' for her early work in the effort to formulate AIDS hospice care in Los Angeles.

The 25-bed hospice—the first of three operated by AHF, including the Carl Bean House and Linn House, which opened in 1992 and 1995, respectively—provided 24-hour medical and palliative care to people living through the final stages of AIDS. Brownlie died at the age of 39, on November 26, 1989,[14] less than a year after the hospice named in his honor first opened, survived by his father, sister, brothers, his longtime partner, Phil Wilson and countless friends and fellow AIDS activists. In addition to Brownlie, over 1,000 people had been given dignified, specialized, compassionate final care at the Chris Brownlie Hospice by the time it ended hospice operations in September 1996. The building that housed the Brownlie Hospice went through its own rebirths, housing various departments of AHF, including the headquarters for AHF's Public Health Division, before the organization officially turned the property back over to the City of Los Angeles with a sunset memorial ceremony on January 26, 2013.[15]

As medical opportunities for managing HIV became more available, AHF changed its mission to helping individuals with HIV/AIDS live well with the disease through advanced medical care. This shift was marked with the change of the Foundation's name to AIDS Healthcare Foundation in July 1990.

AHF operates the Out of the Closet thrift store chain. AHF acquired the MOMS Pharmacy chain of pharmacies in 2012, and in 2013, rebranded the chain as AHF Pharmacy.[16]

AHF sponsored HIV awareness themed Rose Parade floats in 2012 and 2013, each winning the Queen's Trophy for best use of roses.[17][18]

AHF produced the documentary film Keep The Promise: The Global Fight Against AIDS, depicting the AHF sponsored protest of government anti-HIV funding levels and anti-HIV drug prices at the XIX International AIDS Conference, 2012. The film premiered on March 29, 2013 at the Vail Film Festival.[19]

In 2017, AHF started acquiring hotels (often single-room occupancy) in the Los Angeles area for conversion to affordable housing units, renting them for about $400–600 per month.[4] By 2020, it owned seven such properties totalling 800 units.[4]

In 2020, tenants in one of the AHF's apartment buildings sued the AHF over slum-like conditions in the building.[4]

In 2004, Darren James and three other adult film actors tested positive for HIV. In response to the outbreak, AHF began lobbying in favor of laws requiring condom use by male actors during sex scenes in adult films.[27]

In 2010, AHF unsuccessfully sued the Los Angeles County government to compel its health department to mandate condom use in adult film productions.[27]

In 2012, AHF supported a Los Angeles city ordinance requiring condoms in certain adult films.[28] Later the same year, the organization spent US$1,654,681 funding the successful campaign to pass Measure B, a ballot initiative that expanded the condom requirement countywide.[29]

AHF again sued the Los Angeles County government, alleging that an August 2012 audit conducted by the county was an illegal retaliation for AHF's support for Measure B.[30][31] In 2013, AHF began collecting signatures for a ballot measure to create a Los Angeles city health department that would take over part of the county health department's jurisdiction.[32] The City of Los Angeles and County of Los Angeles oppose the measure, and the city has filed a lawsuit seeking to invalidate the measure.[33]

In August 2014, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed a formal complaint with Nevada OSHA,[34] against Cybernet Entertainment LLC, which does business as Kink.com and related spin-offs. The complaint alleges the California porn company did not require its actors to use condoms during an adult film shoot in Las Vegas.

In 2013, AHF found itself entangled in dual lawsuits when AHF attempted to use political clout to force the City of Los Angeles to develop health services independent from the county. Health officials in affected departments filed responsive suits, arguing massive wastes would result in a transition or duplication of services.[35]

In 2014, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed suit against the City of San Francisco. AHF claimed that city restrictions on chain stores targeted them unfairly when the organization attempted to open a retail store.[36][37]

In 2014, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed suit against the County of Dallas. AHF claimed that the County of not giving the agency a fair chance to bid for federal AIDS funding. [38]

In 2014, AHF was audited by Los Angeles county and billed $1.7 million for duplicated services. AHF filed suit, arguing that they were targeted on the basis of their political actions in the 2013 lawsuit. The lawsuit filed by AHF was thrown out by a judge.[39] The billing case was dismissed, finding AHF had not billed the county for $6 million in allowable services with neither the foundation nor the county having to repay funds.[40]

In 2014, the AIDS Healthcare Foundation filed suit against the County of Dallas. AHF claimed that the County of not giving the agency a fair chance to bid for federal AIDS funding.[41]

In 2015, a whistleblower lawsuit was filed by three former AHF managers. The employees allege AHF engaged and even documented kickback processes for positive HIV test results for social workers.[42]

In 2016, the AIDS healthcare foundation filed suit against East Baton Rouge Parish in Louisiana, claiming it was discriminated against in the awarding of healthcare contracts. The suit specifically targeted funds given to longtime-standing local AIDS service organizations such as HIV/AIDS Alliance for Region Two, Family Service of Greater Baton Rouge, and others.[43][44] The suit was settled with funding left unchanged.[45]

In an interview with The Advocate in 2016, Weinstein stated: "Why isn't there development in South L.A.? Why isn't there development in Boyle Heights? Why concentrate all this development in Hollywood? You have a [transit line] in the Valley and a [transit line] in South L.A.".[46][47]

Those and other similar statements have led opponents to characterize Weinstein as a rich NIMBY who opposes development because it would add traffic to his commute and block the views from his office building, rather than because he cares about the plight of poor renters or people with HIV.[46][47][5]

Dana Cuff, an urban planning professor at the University of California, Los Angeles stated that Weinstein's housing opposition "is not understandable,"..."I'd go further than that; it's actually a misuse of their funds." ..."They're putting a lot of energy into stopping this project," says Cuff. "If they put that same energy into getting some of this project to be affordable, I would understand [their motivation]. But to just stop it — they couldn't possibly be concerned about affordable housing."[46][47]

The AIDS Healthcare Foundation (AHF) filed suit against the City of Los Angeles, alleging that the city violated laws and the city charter when it approved the development of two residential towers that are expected to be up to 30 stories tall. The City Council changed existing zoning and height limitations to allow the development, which would be next to AHF's Hollywood headquarters. A spokesperson for the development accused Michael Weinstein of filing the suit to maintain the view from his office.[48] In 2019, the California Supreme Court Refused to hear the case, leaving in place a lower court decision against the foundation.[49]

In 2022, the AHF sued to block Los Angeles's Housing Element, which is a new strategy by the L.A. City Council to increase housing supply in L.A. with a goal of producing 500,000 new housing units by 2030, with 200,000 of those being affordable units.[9]

AHF spent $1.7 million sponsoring an initiative that requires the use of condoms in all vaginal and anal sex scenes in pornography productions filmed in Los Angeles County, California.[50] It passed 57% - 43%.

AHF spent $5.0 million (almost ten times what the total opposition spent) as the only financial backer of a statewide initiative that would have allowed Cal/OSHA to prosecute an enforcement action anytime a condom is not visible in a pornographic film.[51] It failed, 54% to 46%.

In 2013 AHF sponsored Proposition D in the City of San Francisco, which required the city to negotiate directly with drug manufacturers and set a city policy to request that state and federal lawmakers create laws that would reduce drug prices.[52] It passed 80% - 20%.[52]

AHF spent $18.7 million as the almost sole supporter of the California Drug Price Relief Act, (the opposition spent $109 million, making this the most expensive ballot measure to date across California and the United States) a statewide 2016 ballot initiative that would have revised California law to require state programs to pay no more for prescription medications than the prices negotiated by the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (notwithstanding any other provision of law and insofar as permissible under federal law), while exempting managed care programs funded through Medi-Cal.[53] It failed by a 6% margin.

AHF spend $18 million as the almost exclusive sponsor of the Ohio Drug Price Relief Act (the opposition raised $59 million).[54] According to the Ohio petition language, "The Ohio Drug Price Relief Act would ... require that notwithstanding any other provision of law and in so far as permissible under federal law, the State of Ohio shall not enter into any agreement for the purchase of prescription drugs or agree to pay, directly or indirectly, for prescription drugs, including where the state is the ultimate payer, unless the net cost is the same or less than the lowest price paid for the same drug by the U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs."[55] The initiative lost, 79% - 21%.[54]

In 2016, the foundation sponsored and provided more than 95% of the funding ($5.5 million)[56] for an anti-development ballot initiative, Measure S, which was rejected with 70.4% voting against.[57] This initiative would have imposed a two-year moratorium on spot zoning as well as developments requiring height and density variances and other changes that would, it claimed, prevent the city from gentrifying and growing too fast. "As we work to house patients in L.A., City Hall focuses on approving $3,500 apartments that sit empty," Weinstein wrote in a Los Angeles Times op-ed.[58] Opponents, who included many advocacy groups for the homeless as well as the city's business community, building trades unions, and developers, said that while the measure addressed some real problems, it went too far and would have not only prevented the construction of new affordable housing but made the city's overall quality of life worse by aggravating an existing housing shortage.[59] They questioned whether the money spent by the AIDS Healthcare Foundation to get the initiative on the ballot was related to the foundation's mission, and suggested that it was motivated by AHF director Michael Weinstein's desire to block a development that would have dominated the view from his office window.[60][5]

AHF contributed $22.5 million to the campaign for Proposition 10, a ballot initiative which sought to repeal the 1995 Costa-Hawkins Act.[61] The measure would have allowed local governments to adopt rent control on any kind of building.[61] Costa-Hawkins is a state law which disallows local governments (cities and counties) from enacting rent control on buildings constructed after 1995, all single-family homes (regardless of construction date), and disallows laws that keep a property under rent control when tenants change (vacancy control).[62]^: 1 The proposition failed, 59% to 41%.[63]

In 2019, the California legislature passed and the governor signed AB 1482, which created a statewide rent cap for the next 10 years.[64] The Tenant Protection Act of 2019 caps annual rent increases at 5% plus regional inflation, pegged to the rental rate as of March 2019.[64] The new law does not apply to buildings built within the prior 15 years, or to single-family homes (unless owned by corporations or institutional investors) and retains "vacancy decontrol", meaning that rents can increase to market rate between tenants.[64]

In 2020, Michael Weinstein, AHF's founder, sponsored and financed a second ballot initiative to allow more rent control, because he felt that AB 1482 (above) did not provide enough tenant protections, such as limiting rent increases between tenants.[64]

AHF spent $40 million (99.8% of the supporters' funding) in support of Proposition 21 (the opposition spent $85 million). It appeared on the ballot on November 3, 2020 and would have allowed local governments to establish rent control on residential properties that have been occupied for over 15 years. It would also have allowed landlords who own no more than two homes to exempt themselves from such policies, and would also have capped rent increases between tenancies at 15% over three years (vacancy control).[65][66][67] Proposition 21 was rejected by 60% of California voters, like Proposition 10 (above) before it.[68]