Individual legislator voting records for this vote are not currently available. Includes all politicians who were in office at any point during the 2011-2012 Legislature.

AB 278 - An Act to Amend and Add Sections 2923.5 and 2923.6 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 2924 Of, to Add Sections 2920.5, 2923.4, 2923.7, 2924.17, and 2924.20 To, to Add and Repeal Sections 2923.55, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.18, and 2924.19 Of, and to Add, Repeal, and Add Sections 2924.11, 2924.12, and 2924.15 Of, the Civil Code, Relating to Mortgages.

Mortgages and deeds of trust: foreclosure. 2011-2012 Legislature. View bill details
Author(s):
Summary:
(1)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower prior to filing a notice of default to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as specified. Existing law requires a notice of default or, in certain circumstances, a notice of sale, to include a declaration stating that the mortgagee, trustee,… More
(1)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower prior to filing a notice of default to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as specified. Existing law requires a notice of default or, in certain circumstances, a notice of sale, to include a declaration stating that the mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent has contacted the borrower, or has tried with due diligence to contact the borrower, or that no contact was required for a specified reason.

This bill would add mortgage servicers, as defined, to these provisions and would extend the operation of these provisions indefinitely, except that it would delete the requirement with respect to a notice of sale. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, additionally require the borrower, as defined, to be provided with specified information in writing prior to recordation of a notice of default and, in certain circumstances, within 5 business days after recordation. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent from recording a notice of default or, until January 1, 2018, recording a notice of sale or conducting a trustee’s sale while a complete first lien loan modification application is pending, under specified conditions. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, establish additional procedures to be followed regarding a first lien loan modification application, the denial of an application, and a borrower’s right to appeal a denial.

(2)Existing law imposes various requirements that must be satisfied prior to exercising a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust, including, among other things, recording a notice of default and a notice of sale.

The bill would, until January 1, 2018, require a written notice to the borrower after the postponement of a foreclosure sale in order to advise the borrower of any new sale date and time, as specified. The bill would provide that an entity shall not record a notice of default or otherwise initiate the foreclosure process unless it is the holder of the beneficial interest under the deed of trust, the original or substituted trustee, or the designated agent of the holder of the beneficial interest, as specified.

The bill would prohibit recordation of a notice of default or a notice of sale or the conduct of a trustee’s sale if a foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved and certain conditions exist and would, until January 1, 2018, require recordation of a rescission of those notices upon execution of a permanent foreclosure prevention alternative. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, prohibit the collection of application fees and the collection of late fees while a foreclosure prevention alternative is being considered, if certain criteria are met, and would require a subsequent mortgage servicer to honor any previously approved foreclosure prevention alternative.

The bill would authorize a borrower to seek an injunction and damages for violations of certain of the provisions described above, except as specified. The bill would authorize the greater of treble actual damages or $50,000 in statutory damages if a violation of certain provisions is found to be intentional or reckless or resulted from willful misconduct, as specified. The bill would authorize the awarding of attorneys’ fees for prevailing borrowers, as specified. Violations of these provisions by licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate would also be violations of those respective licensing laws. Because a violation of certain of those licensing laws is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill would provide that the requirements imposed on mortgage servicers, and mortgagees, trustees, beneficiaries, and authorized agents, described above are applicable only to mortgages or deeds of trust secured by residential real property not exceeding 4 dwelling units that is owner-occupied, as defined, and, until January 1, 2018, only to those entities who conduct more than 175 foreclosure sales per year or annual reporting period, except as specified.

The bill would require, upon request from a borrower who requests a foreclosure prevention alternative, a mortgage servicer who conducts more than 175 foreclosure sales per year or annual reporting period to establish a single point of contact and provide the borrower with one or more direct means of communication with the single point of contact. The bill would specify various responsibilities of the single point of contact. The bill would define single point of contact for these purposes.

(3)Existing law prescribes documents that may be recorded or filed in court.

This bill would require that a specified declaration, notice of default, notice of sale, deed of trust, assignment of a deed of trust, substitution of trustee, or declaration or affidavit filed in any court relative to a foreclosure proceeding or recorded by or on behalf of a mortgage servicer shall be accurate and complete and supported by competent and reliable evidence. The bill would require that before recording or filing any of those documents, a mortgage servicer shall ensure that it has reviewed competent and reliable evidence to substantiate the borrower’s default and the right to foreclose, including the borrower’s loan status and loan information. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, provide that any mortgage servicer that engages in multiple and repeated violations of these requirements shall be liable for a civil penalty of up to $7,500 per mortgage or deed of trust, in an action brought by specified state and local government entities, and would also authorize administrative enforcement against licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate.

The bill would authorize the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate to adopt regulations applicable to persons and entities under their respective jurisdictions for purposes of the provisions described above. The bill would provide that a violation of those regulations would be enforceable only by the regulating agency.

(4)   The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature in relation to foreclosures in the state generally, and would state the purposes of the bill.

(5)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. Hide
 
Status:
The bill has become law (chaptered). 
Senate Vote: On Passage

PASSED on July 2, 2012.

voted YES: 25 voted NO: 13
2 voted present/not voting

An Act to Amend and Add Sections 2923.5 and 2923.6 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 2924 Of, to Add Sections 2920.5, 2923.4, 2923.7, 2924.17, and 2924.20 To, to Add and Repeal Sections 2923.55, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.18, and 2924.19 Of, and to Add, Repeal, and Add Sections 2924.11, 2924.12, and 2924.15 Of, the Civil Code, Relating to Mortgages.

AB 278 — 2011-2012 Legislature

Summary
(1)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower prior to filing a notice of default to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as specified. Existing law requires a notice of default or, in certain circumstances, a notice of sale, to include a declaration stating that the mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent has contacted the borrower, or has tried with due diligence to contact the borrower, or that no contact was required for a specified reason.

This bill would add mortgage servicers, as defined, to these provisions and would extend the operation of these provisions indefinitely, except that it would delete the requirement with respect to a notice of sale. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, additionally require the borrower, as defined, to be provided with specified information in writing prior to recordation of a notice of default and, in certain circumstances, within 5 business days after recordation. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent from recording a notice of default or, until January 1,… More
(1)Existing law, until January 1, 2013, requires a mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent to contact the borrower prior to filing a notice of default to explore options for the borrower to avoid foreclosure, as specified. Existing law requires a notice of default or, in certain circumstances, a notice of sale, to include a declaration stating that the mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent has contacted the borrower, or has tried with due diligence to contact the borrower, or that no contact was required for a specified reason.

This bill would add mortgage servicers, as defined, to these provisions and would extend the operation of these provisions indefinitely, except that it would delete the requirement with respect to a notice of sale. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, additionally require the borrower, as defined, to be provided with specified information in writing prior to recordation of a notice of default and, in certain circumstances, within 5 business days after recordation. The bill would prohibit a mortgage servicer, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary, or authorized agent from recording a notice of default or, until January 1, 2018, recording a notice of sale or conducting a trustee’s sale while a complete first lien loan modification application is pending, under specified conditions. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, establish additional procedures to be followed regarding a first lien loan modification application, the denial of an application, and a borrower’s right to appeal a denial.

(2)Existing law imposes various requirements that must be satisfied prior to exercising a power of sale under a mortgage or deed of trust, including, among other things, recording a notice of default and a notice of sale.

The bill would, until January 1, 2018, require a written notice to the borrower after the postponement of a foreclosure sale in order to advise the borrower of any new sale date and time, as specified. The bill would provide that an entity shall not record a notice of default or otherwise initiate the foreclosure process unless it is the holder of the beneficial interest under the deed of trust, the original or substituted trustee, or the designated agent of the holder of the beneficial interest, as specified.

The bill would prohibit recordation of a notice of default or a notice of sale or the conduct of a trustee’s sale if a foreclosure prevention alternative has been approved and certain conditions exist and would, until January 1, 2018, require recordation of a rescission of those notices upon execution of a permanent foreclosure prevention alternative. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, prohibit the collection of application fees and the collection of late fees while a foreclosure prevention alternative is being considered, if certain criteria are met, and would require a subsequent mortgage servicer to honor any previously approved foreclosure prevention alternative.

The bill would authorize a borrower to seek an injunction and damages for violations of certain of the provisions described above, except as specified. The bill would authorize the greater of treble actual damages or $50,000 in statutory damages if a violation of certain provisions is found to be intentional or reckless or resulted from willful misconduct, as specified. The bill would authorize the awarding of attorneys’ fees for prevailing borrowers, as specified. Violations of these provisions by licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate would also be violations of those respective licensing laws. Because a violation of certain of those licensing laws is a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The bill would provide that the requirements imposed on mortgage servicers, and mortgagees, trustees, beneficiaries, and authorized agents, described above are applicable only to mortgages or deeds of trust secured by residential real property not exceeding 4 dwelling units that is owner-occupied, as defined, and, until January 1, 2018, only to those entities who conduct more than 175 foreclosure sales per year or annual reporting period, except as specified.

The bill would require, upon request from a borrower who requests a foreclosure prevention alternative, a mortgage servicer who conducts more than 175 foreclosure sales per year or annual reporting period to establish a single point of contact and provide the borrower with one or more direct means of communication with the single point of contact. The bill would specify various responsibilities of the single point of contact. The bill would define single point of contact for these purposes.

(3)Existing law prescribes documents that may be recorded or filed in court.

This bill would require that a specified declaration, notice of default, notice of sale, deed of trust, assignment of a deed of trust, substitution of trustee, or declaration or affidavit filed in any court relative to a foreclosure proceeding or recorded by or on behalf of a mortgage servicer shall be accurate and complete and supported by competent and reliable evidence. The bill would require that before recording or filing any of those documents, a mortgage servicer shall ensure that it has reviewed competent and reliable evidence to substantiate the borrower’s default and the right to foreclose, including the borrower’s loan status and loan information. The bill would, until January 1, 2018, provide that any mortgage servicer that engages in multiple and repeated violations of these requirements shall be liable for a civil penalty of up to $7,500 per mortgage or deed of trust, in an action brought by specified state and local government entities, and would also authorize administrative enforcement against licensees of the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate.

The bill would authorize the Department of Corporations, the Department of Financial Institutions, and the Department of Real Estate to adopt regulations applicable to persons and entities under their respective jurisdictions for purposes of the provisions described above. The bill would provide that a violation of those regulations would be enforceable only by the regulating agency.

(4)   The bill would state findings and declarations of the Legislature in relation to foreclosures in the state generally, and would state the purposes of the bill.

(5)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. Hide
Learn More
At LegInfo.ca.gov
Title
An Act to Amend and Add Sections 2923.5 and 2923.6 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 2924 Of, to Add Sections 2920.5, 2923.4, 2923.7, 2924.17, and 2924.20 To, to Add and Repeal Sections 2923.55, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.18, and 2924.19 Of, and to Add, Repeal, and Add Sections 2924.11, 2924.12, and 2924.15 Of, the Civil Code, Relating to Mortgages.
Author(s)
Mike Eng, Mike Feuer, Holly Mitchell, John Perez
Co-Authors
Subjects
  • Mortgages and deeds of trust: foreclosure
Major Actions
Introduced2/08/2011
Referred to Committee
Passed Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection5/03/2011
Passed Assembly Committee on Appropriations5/18/2011
Passed Assembly5/23/2011
Passed Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development6/20/2011
Passed Senate4/19/2012
Failed passage in Assembly4/23/2012
Passed Assembly7/02/2012
Passed Senate7/02/2012
Presented to the governor (enrolled)7/06/2012
Became law (chaptered).7/11/2012
Bill History
Chamber/CommitteeMotionDateResult
select this voteAssembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer ProtectionDo pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.5/03/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection
9 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssembly Committee on AppropriationsDo pass.5/18/2011This motion PASSED the Assembly Committee on Appropriations
17 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblyAB 278 HILL Assembly Third Reading5/23/2011This bill PASSED the Assembly
78 voted YES 0 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic DevelopmentDo pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.6/20/2011This motion PASSED the Senate Committee on Business, Professions and Economic Development
9 voted YES 0 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
select this voteSenateAssembly 3rd Reading AB278 Hill By Vargas4/19/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
23 voted YES 13 voted NO 4 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblyAB 278 HILL Concurrence in Senate Amendments4/23/2012This bill DID NOT PASS the Assembly
5 voted YES 57 voted NO 18 voted present/not voting
select this voteAssemblyAB 278 ENG Conference Report7/02/2012This bill PASSED the Assembly
54 voted YES 26 voted NO 0 voted present/not voting
currently selectedSenateConference Reports AB278 Eng By Leno7/02/2012This bill PASSED the Senate
25 voted YES 13 voted NO 2 voted present/not voting
ActionDateDescription
Introduced2/08/2011
2/08/2011Read first time. To print.
2/09/2011From printer. May be heard in committee March 11.
2/24/2011Referred to Com. on B., P. & C.P.
4/05/2011In committee: Hearing postponed by committee.
select this voteVote5/03/2011Do pass and be re-referred to the Committee on Appropriations.
5/04/2011From committee: Do pass and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (May 3). Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
5/18/2011From committee: Do pass. (Ayes 17. Noes 0.) (May 18).
select this voteVote5/18/2011Do pass.
5/19/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
5/23/2011Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Senate. (Ayes 78. Noes 0. Page 1505.)
5/23/2011In Senate. Read first time. To Com. on RLS. for assignment.
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage5/23/2011AB 278 HILL Assembly Third Reading
6/02/2011Referred to Com. on B., P. & E.D.
select this voteVote6/20/2011Do pass as amended, and re-refer to the Committee on Appropriations.
6/22/2011From committee: Do pass as amended and re-refer to Com. on APPR. (Ayes 9. Noes 0.) (June 21).
6/23/2011Read second time and amended. Re-referred to Com. on APPR.
7/11/2011From committee: Be placed on second reading file pursuant to Senate Rule 28.8.
7/12/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
9/01/2011Read third time and amended. Ordered to second reading.
9/02/2011Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
9/09/2011Ordered to inactive file at the request of Senator Price.
4/16/2012From inactive file. Ordered to second reading.
4/17/2012Read second time. Ordered to third reading.
4/19/2012Read third time. Passed. Ordered to the Assembly. (Ayes 23. Noes 13. Page 3219.).
4/19/2012In Assembly. Concurrence in Senate amendments pending. May be considered on or after April 21 pursuant to Assembly Rule 77.
select this voteSenate Vote on Passage4/19/2012Assembly 3rd Reading AB278 Hill By Vargas
4/23/2012Assembly refused to concur in Senate amendments. To Conference Committee. (Ayes 5. Noes 57. Page 4482.) Assembly Members Eng, Feuer, and Wagner appointed to Conference Committee.
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage4/23/2012AB 278 HILL Concurrence in Senate Amendments
4/24/2012Senators Evans, Vargas, and Blakeslee appointed to Conference Committee.
5/02/2012Senators Evans, Calderon, and Blakeslee appointed to Conference Committee.
5/14/2012In Assembly: Joint Rule 29.5(a) suspended. (Ayes 72. Noes 0. Page 4808.) In Senate: Joint Rule 29.5(a) suspended. (Ayes 37. Noes 0. Page 3498.)
6/27/2012From Conference Committee: Be adopted. Assembly (Ayes 2 (Eng and Feuer). Noes 1 (Wagner)). Senate (Ayes 2 (Evans and Calderon). Noes 0.)). To print.
6/28/2012From printer.
7/02/2012Assembly adopts Conference Committee report. (Ayes 54. Noes 26. Page 5549.).
7/02/2012Senate adopted Conference Committee report. (Ayes 25. Noes 13. Page 4221.)
7/02/2012Ordered to Engrossing and Enrolling.
select this voteAssembly Vote on Passage7/02/2012AB 278 ENG Conference Report
currently selectedSenate Vote on Passage7/02/2012Conference Reports AB278 Eng By Leno
7/06/2012Enrolled and presented to the Governor at 2:15 p.m.
7/11/2012Approved by the Governor.
7/11/2012Chaptered by Secretary of State - Chapter 86, Statutes of 2012.

Total contributions given to Senators from interest groups that…

71 Organizations Supported and 2 Opposed; See Which Ones

Organizations that took a position on
An Act to Amend and Add Sections 2923.5 and 2923.6 Of, to Amend and Repeal Section 2924 Of, to Add Sections 2920.5, 2923.4, 2923.7, 2924.17, and 2924.20 To, to Add and Repeal Sections 2923.55, 2924.9, 2924.10, 2924.18, and 2924.19 Of, and to Add, Repeal, and Add Sections 2924.11, 2924.12, and 2924.15 Of, the Civil Code, Relating to Mortgages.: Conference Reports AB278 Eng By Leno

71 organizations supported this bill

Able Works
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Advocates for Neighbors, Inc.
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Affordable Housing Services
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
AFSCME Local 3299
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Alliance of Californians for Community Empowerment
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Aspera Housing, Inc.
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Bet Tzedek Legal Services
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
California Association of Realtors
Assembly Committee on Business, Professions and Consumer Protection (2011, May 2). Assembly Committee Analysis. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from Leginfo: Bill Analysis.
California Capital Financial Development Corporation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
California Coalition for Rural Housing
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
California Federation of Teachers
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
California Reinvestment Coalition
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
California Rural Legal Assistance Foundation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
CALPIRG
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Causa Justa: Just Cause
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Center For California Homeowner Association Law
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Central Valley Realtist Association
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Civic Center Barrio Housing Corp.
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Clearinghouse CDFI
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Clearpoint
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Communities for a New California
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Community Action Agency Of Butte County, Inc.
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Community Housing Development Corporation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Consumer Action
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Consumer Credit Counseling of Orange County
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Contra Costa Interfaith Supporting Community Organization
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Council 3120 League Of United Latin American Citizens
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Courage Campaign
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
East Bay Housing Organizations
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
East Bay Neighborhood Housing Services
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
East Los Angeles Community Corporation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
East Palo Alto Council of Tenants Education Fund
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Fair Housing Council of the San Fernando Valley
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Fair Housing of Marin
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Friends Committee on National Legislation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Greenlining Institute
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
HomeownershipSF
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Housing And Economic Rights Advocates
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
LA Voice
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Law Foundation of Silicon Valley
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Los Angeles Neighborhood Housing Services
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Mission Economic Development Agency
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Moveon East Bay Council
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Mutual Housing California
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
National Council of La Raza
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
National Housing Law Project
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Neighborhood Housing Services Silicon Valley
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Opportunity Fund
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Orange County Community Housing Corporation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
PICO California
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Pico Union Housing Corporation
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Project Sentinel
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Public Advocates
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Public Counsel
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Renaissance Entrepreneurship Center
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Sacramento Housing Alliance
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
San Diego Home Loan Counseling And Education Center
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
SEIU 1021
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
SEIU 721
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Self-Help Enterprises
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
STAND Affordable Housing
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Stand With California Homeowners
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Tenants Together
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Thai Cdc
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Tri-valley Housing Opportunity Center
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
UAW 2865
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
UAW 4123
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
United Service Workers West
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Unity Council
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
University of California Student Association
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.
Western Center on Law and Poverty
undersigned organizations (2012, June 6). Re: Whose Side Are You On – Banks or Homeowners?. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Reinvestment Coalition.

2 organizations opposed this bill

California Chamber of Commerce
CA Chamber (2012, May 25). 2012 'Job Killer' Bills. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from California Chamber of Commerce.
California Mortgage Bankers Association
Sorohan, Mike (2012, March 24). Mortgage Action Alliance Issues Call to Action on Calif. Legislation. Retrieved June 7, 2012, from Mortgage Bankers Association.

Need proof?

View citations of support and opposition

Includes reported contributions to campaigns of Senators in office on day of vote, from interest groups invested in the vote according to MapLight, January 1, 2009 – December 31, 2012.
Contributions data source: FollowTheMoney.org

Contributions by Legislator

Namesort iconPartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Elaine AlquistDCA-13$3,250$0
Joel AndersonRCA-36$37,725$12,000
Tom BerryhillRCA-14$41,866$11,800
Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
Ron CalderonDCA-30$28,350$10,400
Anthony CannellaRCA-12$22,700$6,400
Ellen CorbettDCA-10$40,100$2,000
Lou CorreaDCA-34$59,650$7,000
Kevin De LeonDCA-22$115,799$7,000
Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$56,695$3,000
Bob DuttonRCA-31$17,350$6,650
Bill EmmersonRCA-37$30,575$4,950
Noreen EvansDCA-2$54,920$3,000
Jean FullerRCA-18$37,600$1,000
Ted GainesRCA-1$46,649$11,900
Loni HancockDCA-9$115,050$0
Tom HarmanRCA-35$34,350$9,500
Ed HernandezDCA-24$104,129$3,500
Bob HuffRCA-29$56,139$23,900
Christine KehoeDCA-39$13,900$1,500
Doug La MalfaRCA-4$9,850$4,500
Mark LenoDCA-3$82,295$0
Ted LieuDCA-28$164,951$2,000
Carol LiuDCA-21$49,675$5,800
Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$34,500$7,800
Alex PadillaDCA-20$60,250$5,000
Fran PavleyDCA-23$129,550$100
Curren PriceDCA-26$59,716$2,000
Michael RubioDCA-16$108,958$7,800
Sharon RunnerRCA-17$15,300$0
Joe SimitianDCA-11$12,800$0
Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$146,450$8,500
Tony StricklandRCA-19$84,950$9,500
Juan VargasDCA-40$101,900$8,900
Mimi WaltersRCA-33$91,550$18,000
Lois WolkDCA-5$50,466$0
Rod WrightDCA-25$68,100$8,400
Mark WylandRCA-38$33,799$7,000
Leland YeeDCA-8$84,720$5,000

Add Data Filters:

Legislator Filters
Legislator Filters
Show All
NamePartyDistrict$ From Interest Groups
That Supported
$ From Interest Groups
That Opposed
Vote
Elaine AlquistDCA-13$3,250$0
Joel AndersonRCA-36$37,725$12,000
Tom BerryhillRCA-14$41,866$11,800
Sam BlakesleeRCA-15$0$0
Ron CalderonDCA-30$28,350$10,400
Anthony CannellaRCA-12$22,700$6,400
Ellen CorbettDCA-10$40,100$2,000
Lou CorreaDCA-34$59,650$7,000
Kevin De LeonDCA-22$115,799$7,000
Mark DeSaulnierDCA-7$56,695$3,000
Bob DuttonRCA-31$17,350$6,650
Bill EmmersonRCA-37$30,575$4,950
Noreen EvansDCA-2$54,920$3,000
Jean FullerRCA-18$37,600$1,000
Ted GainesRCA-1$46,649$11,900
Loni HancockDCA-9$115,050$0
Tom HarmanRCA-35$34,350$9,500
Ed HernandezDCA-24$104,129$3,500
Bob HuffRCA-29$56,139$23,900
Christine KehoeDCA-39$13,900$1,500
Doug La MalfaRCA-4$9,850$4,500
Mark LenoDCA-3$82,295$0
Ted LieuDCA-28$164,951$2,000
Carol LiuDCA-21$49,675$5,800
Alan LowenthalDCA-27$0$0
Gloria Negrete McLeodDCA-32$34,500$7,800
Alex PadillaDCA-20$60,250$5,000
Fran PavleyDCA-23$129,550$100
Curren PriceDCA-26$59,716$2,000
Michael RubioDCA-16$108,958$7,800
Sharon RunnerRCA-17$15,300$0
Joe SimitianDCA-11$12,800$0
Darrell SteinbergDCA-6$146,450$8,500
Tony StricklandRCA-19$84,950$9,500
Juan VargasDCA-40$101,900$8,900
Mimi WaltersRCA-33$91,550$18,000
Lois WolkDCA-5$50,466$0
Rod WrightDCA-25$68,100$8,400
Mark WylandRCA-38$33,799$7,000
Leland YeeDCA-8$84,720$5,000

Interest Groups that supported this bill

$ Donated
State & local government employee unions$707,723
Real estate$368,945
Teachers unions$344,330
Real estate developers & subdividers$255,675
Real estate agents & managers$247,902
Education$159,320
Financial services & consulting$102,916
Health & welfare policy$41,716
Welfare & social work$34,500
Automotive unions$22,800
Minority & ethnic groups$14,000
Democratic-based groups (but not official party committees) and generic liberal/progressive ones$4,500
Nonprofit foundations$2,250
Human rights$0
Commercial service unions$0
Consumer groups$0

Interest Groups that opposed this bill

$ Donated
Mortgage bankers & brokers$136,900
Chambers of commerce$88,900
Loading…
Date Range of Contributions
Enter a custom date range