The Brief

Homeownership has become increasingly out of reach for many young families, especially in pricey California. On Wednesday, President Donald Trump said he plans to make housing affordable again by cutting deep-pocketed investors out of the single-family home market.

“I am immediately taking steps to ban large, institutional investors from buying more single-family homes, and I will be calling on Congress to codify it,” Trump said on the social media platform Truth Social. “People live in homes, not corporations.”

But in California, housing policy experts say Trump’s strategy might not move the needle on affordability much. That’s because institutional investors aren’t buying many single-family homes in the Golden State to begin with.

“It's kind of a red herring,” said Richard Green, director of the USC Lusk Center for Real Estate. “Institutional ownership of single-family rentals is a very small share of all single-family rentals, let alone all of the housing stock in the United States.”

Less than 3% of CA homes 

Trump’s idea is not new. Democratic California lawmakers have also proposed limits on investor home-buying. To inform the legislative process, state researchers have looked into the question of how California homes are getting scooped up by institutional buyers.

The answer: Not many.

Statewide, 2.8% of single-family homes are owned by investors who own 10 properties or more. That’s according to the California Research Bureau, which produces nonpartisan policy research for the Governor’s Office and the state Legislature.

According to the Urban Institute, large investors own a much greater stock of single-family homes in cities including Jacksonville, Charlotte and Atlanta, where institutional investors own nearly 29% of single-family rentals.

Corporate ownership rates are much lower in California. In Los Angeles County, home to more than 10 million people, only about 72,474 homes are owned by large investors, according to the California Research Bureau. That number includes single-family homes as well as condos, townhomes and duplexes.

Would banning corporate owners reduce competition?

Invitation Homes is the largest owner of single-family homes in California, with more than 11,000 properties to its name statewide, including about 3,100 in Los Angeles County. Its business model involves buying single-family homes, updating them and then renting them out to tenants who may not otherwise be able to afford home-ownership.

LAist reached out to Invitation Homes for comment on Trump’s announcement. We were sent a statement from the National Rental Home Council.

“Housing affordability is a critical issue, and we appreciate the administration’s focus on ensuring Americans have access to a diverse mix of housing options,” the statement read.

The statement continued: “Professional single-family housing providers represent a small segment of the overall housing market, and the single-family rental industry remains focused on supporting renters while also supporting pathways to homeownership.”

David Garcia, deputy director of policy at UC Berkeley’s Terner Center for Housing Innovation, said getting rid of institutional investors probably wouldn’t do much to bring down home prices for young Californians.

“The vast, vast majority of homes that are purchased are by people who are generally going to live in them,” Garcia said. “So you're not really reducing the main competition for home buyers, which is other home buyers.”

Lack of supply, lots of demand fuel CA’s high prices

Garcia and USC’s Green both said California’s home prices are high because of lack of supply. Steady demand for California homes coupled with low building rates since the Great Recession have produced a market where the wealthiest buyers out-bid everyone else for the few homes coming up for sale.

Trump’s proposal echoes similar policy explorations from the L.A. City Council, which voted in 2021 to consider banning companies like Zillow and Redfin from buying homes within the city.

Details were scant in Trump’s post, but he said more information about his plans would be forthcoming.

In his Truth Social post, he said: “I will discuss this topic, including further Housing and Affordability proposals, and more, at my speech in Davos in two weeks.”

Lines stretched around the block Sunday at the Original Saugus Cafe in Santa Clarita. It was supposed to be the restaurant's last day before closing after 139 years — making it the oldest continually operated restaurant in Los Angeles County.

But earlier this week, a sign was posted on the door saying, "Reopening under new ownership soon," although there were few details about who would be running it.

The sign was a surprise to the Mercado family, who have operated the restaurant for nearly 30 years. The family now is in a legal dispute with the Arklin family, who owns the property, about the potential re-opening and who owns the historic name.

The background

Alfredo Mercado worked his way up from bartender to restaurateur, purchasing the business in 1998. Since then Mercado and his daughters have operated the restaurant, leasing from the Arklin family. For most of that time, according to the Mercado side, the two families maintained good terms. Property owner Hank Arklin Sr., a former state assemblyman who owned other properties in the area, kept a verbal month-to-month agreement with the Mercados — no written lease required.

That changed when Arklin died in August at age 97.

New terms, failed negotiations

Larry Goodman, who manages multiple properties for the Arklin family's company, North Valley Construction, took over the landlord relationship. In September, the Mercado family say they were presented with a new written month-to-month lease.

Yecenia Ponce, Alfredo's daughter, said the new terms included various changes to the existing agreement, including a rent increase and charges for equipment.

Months of back and forth negotiations about different options, including selling the business, ultimately fell apart. Their attorney, Steffanie Stelnick, says they are being forced out, without proper legal notice, and has sent a cease-and-desist letter to Goodman saying the family has plans to continue running the business.

LAist reached out to Goodman for comment repeatedly Wednesday and Thursday by phone but did not hear back.

Goodman told The Signal, a Santa Clarita valley news outlet, that Alfredo Mercado had changed his mind several times in recent weeks about keeping the business.

“I said, ‘Fine,’ then I got out and got someone to take it over,” Goodman said.

He said he'd been in contact with Eduardo Reyna, the CEO of Dario's, a local Santa Clarita restaurant, and that the cafe could re-open as soon as Jan. 16.

Who owns what?

The dispute also focuses on who owns the rights to the Original Saugus Cafe name.

Ponce said when her father purchased the restaurant in 1998, it was called The Olde Saugus Cafe, but the name was then changed to The Original Saugus Cafe. State records show that name registered as an LLC under Alfredo Mercado.

After Arklin’s death, however, the Arklin family filed a pending trademark application to lay its own claim to the name.

The Mercado family is resisting.

"As long as they don't buy the name from us, we're not handing it over," Ponce said.

Ponce said the family had no idea the landlord planned to continue operations.

"We truly did think we were closing," she said. "We were not aware that they had plans to continue."

She apologized to customers for the confusion.

Whether the decades-old restaurant name survives — and under whose control — may ultimately be decided in court.

Community leaders and politicians in Los Angeles are responding in outrage after an ICE agent shot and killed a woman in Minnesota on Wednesday.

The fatal ICE shooting of 37-year-old Renee Good has sparked anger and fear in Los Angeles, which has been an epicenter of federal immigration enforcement since the summer.

Jorge-Mario Cabrera with the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights, or CHIRLA, says the killing was upsetting but not surprising.

" Los Angeles has been witness of the escalating aggressiveness of these federal agents against the community," he told LAist.

Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem has defended the shooting, saying Good was trying to run agents over with her car. That account has been disputed by eyewitnesses, the mayor of Minneapolis and other officials. Bystander video also challenges the federal narrative, according to MPR News.

L.A. politicians have joined a chorus demanding justice for Good. Mayor Karen Bass posted on X, saying that ICE agents are waging "a purposeful campaign of fear and intimidation" on American cities.

"The senseless killing of an innocent and unarmed wife and mother by ICE agents today in Minneapolis is shocking and tragic and should never have occurred," she said in the post.

L.A. County Supervisor Janice Hahn called on Noem to withdraw ICE from U.S. cities.

“These ICE agents are undertrained and trigger happy and everyone who has seen this video knows ICE murdered this woman,” she said in a statement.

Some protesters also gathered outside the federal building in downtown L.A. Thursday morning to condemn the killing.