California 20252026 Regular Session Status: Passed Senate 1 D cosponsors

SB 880 — Residential property: transfers: institutional investors.

Last action — June 30 set for first hearing. Failed passage in committee. (Ayes 4. Noes 3.)

  1. ✓
    Introduced
  2. ✓
    In Committee
  3. 3
    Passed Senate
  4. 4
    Passed Assembly
  5. 5
    To Executive
  6. 6
    Enacted

This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced January 12, 2026. It now moves to the second chamber.

Next likely step: consideration and a floor vote in the Assembly.

Prognosis

Stalled 32% · moderate confidence

Where this bill stands today.

Odds of enactment

Moderate

How often bills like it became law.

  • Passed Senate

    Current position in the legislative process.

  • 1 sponsor

    1 primary, 0 co-sponsors signed on.

  • Single-party support

    Sponsorship is currently within one party (1 D).

  • Mixed recorded votes

    2 passed, 1 failed in recorded votes so far.

Prognosis reads this bill's own signals — stage, sponsorship breadth, committee status, recorded votes and cross-state momentum. Odds come from a model trained on which bills have become law.

In plain language

This bill regulates institutional investors' sale of residential properties to protect tenants' rights.

The bill requires institutional investors to notify tenants before selling properties and prioritizes homebuyers who will occupy the homes. It aims to ensure tenants are informed of their rights and have a chance to purchase their homes directly.

What this means for you
  • Tenants: For tenants, this means more transparency and the chance to potentially buy their home before it is sold to others.
  • Consumers: N/A
  • Small Business: N/A

Summary

Prospective federal law, the federal 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (H.R. 6644) , prohibits a large institutional investor from purchasing, or entering into a contract to directly or indirectly purchase, any single-family home, except as specified. If the above-described federal legislation is enacted, this bill would authorize the Attorney General, district attorney, or county counsel to coordinate with the Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the United States Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Chair of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States in the implementation of federal regulations, as described, related to violations of federal law involving tenants residing in properties owned, maintained, and managed by institutional investors. Existing law establishes various real estate disclosure requirements applicable to the transfer of residential real property. Before entering into specified transactions relating to residential real property, including an individual sale of residential real property, this bill would require an institutional investor, as defined, to provide written notice of the institutional investor's intent to sell the property to each tenant at least 90 days before advertising the residential real property for sale in a multiple listing service, as specified. The bill would require the notice to include, among other things, a statement that the tenant has the right to remain in possession until the end of the lease term, except as specified. For sales of residential real property containing 1 to 4 residential dwelling units by an institutional investor, this bill would require the institutional investor to, among other things, only accept offers from prospective owner-occupants, including any tenant in possession, during the first 30 days after the property is listed for sale. The bill would require the prospective owner-occupant to submit with their offer an affidavit or declaration executed under penalty of perjury stating they are purchasing the residential real property as an owner-occupant, as described. The bill would subject a prospective owner-occupant or an institutional investor to criminal or civil liability. The bill would also require an institutional investor that sells residential real property to record, or cause to be recorded, a certification of compliance under penalty of perjury, as specified. The bill would require the failure to record the certificate of compliance to result in a civil penalty, as described. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would also authorize the Attorney General, district attorney, city attorney, and tenant to bring an action in the superior court to enforce the bill's provisions, and upon prevailing, would allow for injunctive relief and civil penalties, as specified. The bill would require its provisions to be construed consistently with the above-described federal act, if enacted, and would make its provisions severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.

Bill Text

Action History

  1. June 30 set for first hearing. Failed passage in committee. (Ayes 4. Noes 3.)

  2. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  3. Referred to Com. on JUD.

  4. In Assembly. Read first time. Held at Desk.

  5. Read third time. Passed. (Ayes 36. Noes 0. Page 4166.) Ordered to the Assembly.

  6. Read second time. Ordered to consent calendar.

  7. From committee: Do pass. Ordered to consent calendar. (Ayes 13. Noes 0. Page 4084.) (April 28).

  8. Set for hearing April 28.

  9. Re-referred to Com. on JUD.

  10. From committee with author's amendments. Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on RLS.

  11. Referred to Com. on RLS.

  12. From printer. May be acted upon on or after February 12.

  13. Introduced. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment. To print.

Sponsors

Sponsorship breakdown

Export CSV (upgrade) →

1 sponsors · 0 co-sponsors · 121 not signed on · 3 voted No

Sponsors (1)

Co-sponsors (0)

None.

Not signed on (121)

121 members have not signed on to this bill.

Show all 121 →

"Not signed on" means a member has not sponsored or co-sponsored this bill — it does not imply opposition. Members flagged Voted No have a recorded No vote on this bill.

Whip count is in markup. Polling the chamber and every recorded vote this session. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Calling the roll · Tallying · Engrossing

Votes

Do pass as amended and be re-referred to the Committee on [Appropriations]

Failed 4 Yea · 3 Nay · 5 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Democratic 4005
Republican 0300
Total 4305
% of votes cast 33%25%0%42%
How each member voted (12)
Member Party Vote
Bauer-Kahan, Rebecca Democratic Not Voting
Bryan, Isaac G. Democratic Yea
Connolly, Damon Democratic Yea
Harabedian, John Democratic Yea
Kalra, Ash Democratic Yea
Pacheco, Blanca Democratic Not Voting
Papan, Diane Democratic Not Voting
Stefani, Catherine Democratic Not Voting
Zbur, Rick Chavez Democratic Not Voting
Dixon, Diane Republican Nay
Macedo, Alexandra Republican Nay
Sanchez, Kate Republican Nay

Official roll call →

Consent Calendar 2nd

Passed 36 Yea · 0 Nay · 4 Other
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 7003
Democratic 29001
Total 36004
% of votes cast 90%0%0%10%
How each member voted (40)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Archuleta, Bob Democratic Yea
Arreguín, Jesse Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Becker, Josh Democratic Yea
Blakespear, Catherine S. Democratic Yea
Cabaldon, Christopher Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Cervantes, Sabrina Democratic Yea
Cortese, Dave Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Gonzalez, Lena A. Democratic Not Voting
Grayson, Timothy S. Democratic Yea
Hurtado, Melissa Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Limón, Monique Democratic Yea
McGuire, Mike Democratic Yea
McNerney, Jerry Democratic Yea
Menjivar, Caroline Democratic Yea
Padilla, Stephen C. Democratic Yea
Pérez, Sasha Renée Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Richardson, Laura Democratic Yea
Rubio, Susan Democratic Yea
Smallwood-Cuevas, Lola Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Not Voting
Choi, Steven S. Republican Yea
Dahle, Megan Republican Yea
Grove, Shannon Republican Not Voting
Jones, Brian W. Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Not Voting
Ochoa Bogh, Rosilicie Republican Yea
Seyarto, Kelly Republican Yea
Strickland, Tony Republican Yea
Valladares, Suzette Martinez Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Do pass and be ordered to the Consent Calendar

Passed 13 Yea · 0 Nay
Party YeaNayPresentNot Voting
Republican 2000
Democratic 11000
Total 13000
% of votes cast 100%0%0%0%
How each member voted (13)
Member Party Vote
Allen, Benjamin Democratic Yea
Ashby, Angelique V. Democratic Yea
Caballero, Anna M. Democratic Yea
Durazo, Maria Elena Democratic Yea
Laird, John Democratic Yea
Reyes, Eloise Gómez Democratic Yea
Stern, Henry I. Democratic Yea
Umberg, Thomas J. Democratic Yea
Wahab, Aisha Democratic Yea
Weber Pierson, M.D., Akilah Democratic Yea
Wiener, Scott D. Democratic Yea
Alvarado-Gil, Marie Republican Yea
Niello, Roger W. Republican Yea

Official roll call →

Subjects

housing
Cross-referencing the record. Reading this bill against every other bill in the corpus by meaning, not keywords. Only the first open is slow. It’s instant for you after this. Matching · Ranking · Engrossing

Frequently asked questions

What does SB 880 do?
Prospective federal law, the federal 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act (H.R. 6644) , prohibits a large institutional investor from purchasing, or entering into a contract to directly or indirectly purchase, any single-family home, except as specified. If the above-described federal legislation is enacted, this bill would authorize the Attorney General, district attorney, or county counsel to coordinate with the Secretary of the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, the Director of the United States Federal Housing Finance Agency, the Chair of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, and the Secretary of the Treasury of the United States in the implementation of federal regulations, as described, related to violations of federal law involving tenants residing in properties owned, maintained, and managed by institutional investors. Existing law establishes various real estate disclosure requirements applicable to the transfer of residential real property. Before entering into specified transactions relating to residential real property, including an individual sale of residential real property, this bill would require an institutional investor, as defined, to provide written notice of the institutional investor's intent to sell the property to each tenant at least 90 days before advertising the residential real property for sale in a multiple listing service, as specified. The bill would require the notice to include, among other things, a statement that the tenant has the right to remain in possession until the end of the lease term, except as specified. For sales of residential real property containing 1 to 4 residential dwelling units by an institutional investor, this bill would require the institutional investor to, among other things, only accept offers from prospective owner-occupants, including any tenant in possession, during the first 30 days after the property is listed for sale. The bill would require the prospective owner-occupant to submit with their offer an affidavit or declaration executed under penalty of perjury stating they are purchasing the residential real property as an owner-occupant, as described. The bill would subject a prospective owner-occupant or an institutional investor to criminal or civil liability. The bill would also require an institutional investor that sells residential real property to record, or cause to be recorded, a certification of compliance under penalty of perjury, as specified. The bill would require the failure to record the certificate of compliance to result in a civil penalty, as described. By expanding the scope of existing crimes, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program. This bill would also authorize the Attorney General, district attorney, city attorney, and tenant to bring an action in the superior court to enforce the bill's provisions, and upon prevailing, would allow for injunctive relief and civil penalties, as specified. The bill would require its provisions to be construed consistently with the above-described federal act, if enacted, and would make its provisions severable. The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement. This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.
Who sponsors SB 880?
SB 880 is sponsored by Wahab, Aisha (Democratic).
What is the current status of SB 880?
This bill has passed the Senate. Introduced January 12, 2026. It now moves to the second chamber.
Where can I track SB 880?
Track SB 880 free on One Click Politics — get push/email alerts when it moves.

Make your voice heard on SB 880

Find the representatives who decide this bill and tell them where you stand — for yourself, or mobilize your whole list in one click with One Click Politics advocacy software.

Find my representatives → Run a campaign

Stay ahead of SB 880

Last checked for changes 3 months ago · updated continuously

One Click Politics tracks every bill in Congress and all 50 states.

Track this bill →