Gavin Newsom Prohibits Offering To Buy People's Property
The California governor is using state of emergency powers to make unsolicited offers to buy people's property in fire-affected areas "for an amount less than the fair market value."

Wildfires continue raging across southern California, so far killing more than two dozen people, displacing untold numbers of residents, and causing billions of dollars in damage. Gov. Gavin Newsom is contending with the fires as well as criticism over the state's preparedness. This week, Newsom took aim at the real villain of the story: opportunistic real estate investors.
On January 7, Newsom issued a state of emergency as fires spread in Los Angeles County. On Tuesday, Newsom signed Executive Order N-7-25, prohibiting buyers for three months from "making any unsolicited offer to an owner of real property" in fire-affected areas "for an amount less than the fair market value of the property or interest in the property on January 6, 2025."
"As families mourn, the last thing they need is greedy speculators taking advantage of their pain," Newsom said in a statement. "I have heard first-hand from community members and victims who have received unsolicited and predatory offers from speculators offering cash far below market value—some while their homes were burning. We will not allow greedy developers to rip off these working-class communities at a time when they need more support than ever before."
"Today's executive order gives homeowners breathing room and protection by prohibiting unsolicited, low-ball offers for their property in fire-affected areas," added California Attorney General Rob Bonta. "Let me be crystal clear: if you target vulnerable Californians who have not said they want to sell, we will investigate you and we will hold you accountable."
Newsom issued the order during a state of emergency, which under California law allows him to craft orders and regulations that take effect immediately; failure to comply with a governor's order constitutes a misdemeanor, punishable by up to a $5,000 fine, up to a year in prison, or both. Newsom used the same authority in March 2020 to issue the country's first stay-at-home orders at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic.
To that end, developers would jump at the chance to scoop up parcels of land from owners suddenly willing to sell. And if owners suddenly displaced from their homes are willing to part with the land and are amenable to the terms on offer, who is harmed?
Granted, it's certainly distasteful to hit somebody up who has just lost their home to a wildfire, to ask whether they'd like to sell whatever's left—especially if it's a lowball offer. But shouldn't that be the property owner's decision to make?
Unsolicited offers to buy property are annoying, and increasingly common—any reader who owns property is likely no stranger to them. (I sold a home in 2022, and for months afterward, I continued receiving phone calls offering cash for the property.)
Some offers truly are scams designed to take advantage of elderly or credulous homeowners who will accept an offer well below market value.
But not every offer is a scam. Los Angeles is one of the most expensive places to live in the entire country, and it already faced a significant housing shortage—a deficit of 400,000 homes, prior to the pandemic. Buyers want property in high-demand areas that, by definition, see little turnover. If few properties are for sale, buyers are within their rights to make an unsolicited offer.
Sure, it seems uncouth to offer to buy people's property just days after their homes were taken by fire. But not every resident will want to stick around and rebuild in the same place.
"For those who lost their homes, much of the value of their properties is in the land they still own, but rebuilding on it will be a long and expensive process," The Wall Street Journal reported this week. "It's unclear how many homeowners in these areas lack insurance or are underinsured. A number of leading insurers have stopped selling new home-insurance policies in the state. State Farm said last year it would not renew 69% of its property policies in the Pacific Palisades."
Even if insurance would cover the full cost, it may not be worth the hassle: "Rebuilding could be a yearslong slog," the Journal authors added. "It's often a convoluted process winding through a web of insurance adjusters, contractors and local permitting agencies." A property owner may well just decide to take whatever payout they can get—if any—and sell the land to whoever wants it. Not only would that help them avoid a potentially yearslong rebuilding process, but it would let a buyer jump in and start building a new structure right away.
In that case, Newsom's order would limit the ability to field offers. Notably, the prohibition only applies to "unsolicited" offers for "less than the fair market value," but specifically the fair market value before the property was ever touched by fire. Any realistic offer—including solicited offers—would take into account the current state of the property, including the fact that it may, for example, no longer contain a house where one once stood.
Newsom cited a 2023 proclamation by Hawaii Gov. Josh Green as an inspiration for his own order. After devastating wildfires in Maui, Green "prohibited" anyone from "making any unsolicited offer to an owner of real property" in the affected areas. Unlike Newsom's, Green's order was not limited to below-market offers. And yet even after Green's order, offers flowed in.
In March 2022, the Wisconsin Antigo Daily Journal reported that local residents were receiving "unsolicited offers to buy unused property for cash." The article cautioned property owners to pay special attention to the terms being offered and seek legal guidance before signing anything, but that otherwise, "the offer made in the letters circulating now [is] certainly a fee-free and stress-free way to sell land. The property is purchased as-is, back taxes are paid for by the buyer, and closing is often handled within just a few weeks."
Indeed, property owners should be free to weigh any offers presented to them, and it should be their decision whether to accept, counter, or tell the caller to take a long walk off a short pier. Newsom's order is overtly paternalistic and could even hurt Los Angeles' ability to recover from both the fires and its preexisting housing shortage.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Trump should put LA under martial law after he is inaugurated, and remove any control of the situation from Marxist morons like Newsom. Also, AG Pam Bondi should look at federal charges for democrats officials who caused this to happen.
No, not martial law. How about free market law and order? Let owners, builders, speculators, insurance companies do whatever they mutually agree to. And shoot looters on sight.
Everyone will be a lot freer under Trump’s martial law than they ever were under Newsom and his democrat hordes.
He can't and shouldn't do it. If he does anything even remotely like this, all we are going to hear is that he's a power monger. The clowns here at Reason will be leading the pack on this. Let California fend for itself. Maybe that will make the voters make wiser choices in the near future. I find it amusing that all of these "celebrities" who were kissing Newsome's ass are now complaining about him.
I imagine there are a lot of older residents who would love to walk away with cash. Especially if they’re unable to sustain insurance coverage.
California and Maui do not just bite the hand that feeds them- they kill the golden goose and are left with nothing.
Much as I think Newsom gives used car dealers a bad name and can't wait for him to never darken my door again, there's an easy solution in this case: just list the property as for sale. The ban is only on unsolicited offers.
That said, making an unsolicited offer is (a) free speech and (b) might encourage people to more seriously consider moving out. I don't see how that's a bad thing.
I also want to get a job hand-delivering offers on April 15, the day this moratorium expires. Everyone in Pacific Palisades is going to get a dozen offers that day.
>>I also want to get a job hand
lol read that a little too quickly
We all see what we want to see!
But you can't always get what you want.
St Augustine put it better: We see what we ARE
But that's a pretty sucky way to fix the fact that Newsom is grossly and blatantly violating the 1st amendment rights of everybody but the property owners.
A fascist has to do what a fascist has to do.
>>Even if insurance would cover the full cost
has anybody at Reason ever made an insurance claim?
Nah. That's government tyranny...or something.
also if I was on twitter I'd offer Gavin a Franklin for his new pullover.
Don't you intersectional political parties? Only oppressor parties can tyranny. Victim parties impose justice.
“Listen, we may not protect your home; but you bet your ass we’re gonna protect you from having to field offers for what’s left of it.”
Meanwhile bankrupting the few insurance companies that remain in California so when your house is finally rebuilt in 3 years you can just watch it burn down again and sell the vacant lot for less than you could get now.
"Gavin Newsom Prohibits Offering To Buy People's Property"
Shocker. someone like Newscum banning free speech and free trade.
I have no idea what legal ground he believes himself to be standing on.
for all he knows he might be hurting someone's ability to get out of a property that they don't want to deal with.
Wait, did the realtor lobby get him to do this in order to make sure both sides have realtor involvement when and where one is not needed?
More likely that this is a precursor to some government program, and Newsom wants to lock things down until he gets the state and his democrat cronies in place.
Deflection before trying to secure a federal bailout.
FAIR (California state run prop insurance of last resort) has seen a 164% increase in demand since 2019, its exposures ballooning to $458 billion as of last September, up from $153 billion four years prior. The state-backed insurance program has just $377 million available to pay claims and $5.9 billion in exposures in the Palisades alone, meaning CA is a fallen civilization
Remember when federal politicians insisted insurance companies were gouging people for flood insurance, so they created a(nother) federal insurance company that charged far less, then quickly discovered the insurance companies were right to charge so much.
Federal flood insurance couldn't cover all of the first losses due to absurdly low premiums so had to run to the federal coffers and take taxes people paid to run the government to pay off the insured? And instead of admitting the insurance companies were right those politicians just kept up the facade and stealing tax dollars.
Fair market value is whatever the seller accepts for his property.
Without government approval?
Your property value is in our 5 year plan.
Government will let you know what it's worth when they reassess for taxes.
If the homeowner sells for more than the 1/6/25 value, I suppose the homeowner would be guilty of "price gouging"...
Well without a house there's obviously some shrinkflation going on.
No doubt the tax assessor will be using pre-fire valuations.
the oily douche-nozzle never misses a chance to remind us how badly california is managed. Newsome got this brainiac idea from the jackoff governor Green of hawaii. they are two nanny state peas in a pod. fortunately newsome is termed out. those who think he has a chance running for president should watch carefully...his bullshit only flies in california
I repeat my call to put Hawaii, coastal Washington, coastal Oregon, and coastal California (along with Sacramento) into a new nation called Pacifica. Let then prove five years plans actually work if you just do them right.
I call BS . . . maybe there’s been a couple of ‘unsolicited’ offers but not the wholesale assault governor Nonsense states, he’s deftly deflecting responsibility for this disaster. This is what happens when government ignores maintenance and infrastructure and redirects bond money to the general fund for progressive socialist spending.
"...but rebuilding on it will be a long and expensive process". the process is long and expensive BECAUSE NEWSOME AND HIS BOLHEVIK DICKHEAD FRIENDS HAVE MADE IT THAT WAY. Think Coastal Commission! those of us in calif know that crew well.
Newsom continues to knee-cap CA's economy; he thinks HE's smart enough to run the economy.
Newsom and his fellow travelers should be rounded up and thrown in GitMo. Pending his conviction for treason, among other things.
I think that's called "restraint of trade," and it's unconstitutional. So the reasonable question is: if there is a state government operating in a flagrantly unconstitutional manner, does that trigger martial law?
I'm not an attorney, so I defer to those who are.
Part deux: If someone wants to sell his property and, say, California prevents that, that means that the person can't relocate himself out of California. Why is that not kidnapping?
Constitution? What constitution? We don't need no stinkin' constitution.
Buying up a block or two in Altadena, then building a large apartment block might be a godsend for those displaced. A 5 story development of a million sq feet could house up to 1000 families. If those selling (at a market price) would have first choice and a discounted rent, it would be a win-win.
More likely outcome: developers buy up the lots and combine them, building new 5M dollar mansions (to get under the mansion tax cap).
'On Tuesday, Newsom signed Executive Order N-7-25, prohibiting buyers for three months from "making any unsolicited offer to an owner of real property" in fire-affected areas "for an amount less than the fair market value of the property or interest in the property on January 6, 2025."'
Did anyone explain to Governor Hairgel what "fair" and "market" mean in economic terms?
'Granted, it's certainly distasteful to hit somebody up who has just lost their home to a wildfire, to ask whether they'd like to sell whatever's left—especially if it's a lowball offer. But shouldn't that be the property owner's decision to make?'
What? Allow people to think and decide for themselves? Don't you even Democrat?
Only government knows what’s best for you.
So if you want to sell you put a sign in the ground next to your smoldering house saying "Offers Accepted" and your phone number. Now offers are not unsolicited.
The problem with California is Californians. You brought this on yourselves, and no one else should foot the bill for your stupid (political) choices.
Newsome can't let these people sell in order to avoid the pain of dealing with CA's building and zoning regulators.
"I sold a home in 2022, and for months afterward, I continued receiving phone calls offering cash for the property."
Lol. Try being a landlord with rental houses. The text messages, voice messages, and postcards never end. And this is in relatively quiet St. Louis.
I just read over at The Gateway Pundit that Newsum has other plans. Including a globalist city which probably means "15 minute city".
If the people don't do something and soon, they will regret it.
Greasy Gavin plans to stab those people in the back.
Jeebus. It's an offer. It's voluntary. No one is forcing anyone to do anything.
Except Newsom and Bass.
I am not an expert in constitutional law, but even given that commercial speech is given somewhat less protection under the First Amendment. Moreover, it is ludicrous for Newsom to expect that buyers would pay for land alone as much as they might have paid for land and improvements before the fire.
Maybe, during, e.g., 2025, all such offers should be subject to a 15-day waiting period before they can be accepted, and offerors should advise offerees to obtain advice from an independent lawyer, financial advisor, etc. But Newsom's emergency order is far too draconian to survive a First Amendment challenge.
Why should people have to stay homeless an extra 15 days? If they get a bucket full of cash they can go live somewhere cheaper. Even a low ball offer on a lot near the beach will buy a decent house somewhere else.
I'm actually surprised that anyone's making these "predatory" offers. I don't see how any prospective buyer rebuilds on the fire-torn land, what with California laws and regulations that are vehemently against doing anything that creates value in real property.
This is a state that cares more about the welfare of bait fish and scrub plants than they do seven-plus figure real estate. You really think they're going to let people build houses in the Palisades again? Or that, even if they do, that any will get built within this decade?
Actually, delta smelts are good eating - barbecued right on the beach once a year!
It's prime ocean front property. It will be valuable in a year or two to the celebrities wanting a new house on the beach.
Asset with long term value and limited short term use is the classic case for money changing hands between those with patience and cash and those with neither.
He's protecting his tax base and by extension teacher unions. FAIR is under reserved by billions needing a federal bailout. The bailout may not come with Trump in office. As such, California real estate has been massively devalued.
As families mourn, the last thing
theyCDTFA need is greedy speculatorstaking advantage of their painlowering property taxes."for an amount less than the fair market value of the property or interest in the property on January 6, 2025."
Man alive, if you think rent ceilings destroy property values, wait until you see rent floors. Making a prediction right now: Massive swathes of territory are simply abandoned and return to nature. The owners cannot afford to rebuild and no one is allowed to buy at a price the market will bear. As the appeal of living in southern California neighborhoods that no longer exist dries up the FMV continues to plummet, creating a vicious cycle where even structures unharmed by fire, but still within "fire affected zones", become abandoned because they cannot be sold, thus creating massive urban rot that drives down prices even further.
Edit: One more prediction. Tens of thousands of property owners, now left homeless and maybe even jobless, are unable to pay property taxes on the land that they cannot build on and cannot sell. The state snaps up the land at forfeiture and passes it along to cronies.
What is the 'fair market value' of a charcoal briquette?
Oh, I see. He wants to go by the valuations of before the area burned down. Well, it's possible those lots will be worth that again. It's also possible it won't since now a whole lot of people have first hand knowledge of the area's little fire problem.
That said, it's pretty gross to cold call a bunch of fire victims and make offers on the disaster zone. One does wonder how exactly one proves that an offer was made given that California is a two party consent state.
""What is the 'fair market value' of a charcoal briquette?"'
Before or after it's used?
It's not gross to the people who need the money, and most of their net worth is tied up in smoldering lot near the beach.
its going to be a long time before even teh first house gets built some people mainly families may not be able to wait that long especially if their job was lost as well. taking a low ball offer maybe enough for some to get on with their lives in other locations.
I am curious have any houses been built in the fire zone in Hawaii, i haven't heard anything. guess i'll look it up
looked it up at least one was finished Nov 2024
my experience with the paradise fire and other fires nothing gets started for at least a year since the government wants to test all the soil and cleanup does take time
A family member of mine moved out there to work large-scale construction management of an active development on Maui. Things are happening...just slow because a lot of stuff runs on islander time.
the insurers are what we might call the smartest guys in the room, their actuaries CERTAINLY are when compared to the dullards in sacramento and city hall. they had a good hard look, weighed the risks of their CALIFORNIA book of business and decided to get out. that SHOULD have been a memo to the governor and his retard pals but of course it was not. the regulatory obstacles, plans and permit fees, burdensome building codes, materials costs...ALL ARE GOING TO COME CLEAR THE BURNOUT OWNERS. ironically they were the ones that voted the dumpster-fire into existence
In California the smartest guys in the room still have to follow the dictats of state, because the initiative system means that voters get to pick and choose what rates the smartest guys in the room can charge. This is why people build in high fire risk areas.
As you say, they GOT OUT. Because voters voted them out. We literally have referendums here on how much auto and home insurance rates should be. It's flipping nuts.
> "for an amount less than the fair market value."
The fair market value for a home that has burned down is low. It has lost its value. Just saying. Insurance (in California that means the taxpayer) can rebuild it to recover some of the value, but there are people who would rather sell and leave than to stick around.
It sounds like Newsom is trying to assert that home values need to be the same as they were the day before they burnt down. Which is ridiculous. So someone trying to sell their property can't do it. Newsom is forcing them to stay. It's like Cuba not letting people leave. Love to see people get on boats and sail away to Mexico...
This bonehead cannot do anything right. How does he keep getting elected?
Trump should put Judge Arthur Engoron in charge of determining the real fair market value for California properties prior to the LA fires. This was the guy who said Mar A Lago was worth 1/20th of what the banks agreed it was in order to loan Trump money.
Granted, this only prevents unsolicited offers, so owners can still put their properties up on Zillow and take whatever the market's best offer is.
"Would you like me to make a cash offer on your house?"
Not an offer.
"Sure, please give me an offer"
Solicitation for an offer
"I offer $2 million"
Perfectly legal solicited offer.
Distasteful? More like a godsend. Your house is burned down, most of your net worth was in your home, and you have a valuable lot near the beach that will take a year to rebuild, and nowhere to live. A "below market" cash offer could set you up in style somewhere else.