Editor’s Note: The RISMedia series Legislative Round-Up looks at pending and passed federal and state-level legislation that impacts real estate professionals.
Illinois Realtors® back Governor JB Pritzker’s housing plan to revise zoning
Illinois Governor JB Pritzker, who has been speculated as a 2028 Democratic presidential candidate, appears to be cultivating a relationship with the Illinois Realtors® Association. Earlier in 2026, Pritzker adopted several housing reforms championed by the association for his Building Up Illinois Development (BUILD) plan, drawing praise from the association.
In April, Pritzker spoke at the Illinois Realtors® Association’s Capitol Conference to highlight the BUILD plan. This proposal is aimed at boosting housing supply in Illinois through a variety of regulatory reforms, and designed in collaboration with other partners including construction businesses. According to the Pritzker administration, Illinois is currently short 142,000 housing units and will need to build 225,000 units to match demand in the state.
For one, the plan calls for lifting requirements against building multifamily units (such as duplexes) in some single-family zoned districts. Accessory dwelling units (ADUs), or smaller units attached or on the same lot as a residential property, would also be permitted for construction statewide in Illinois. In 2025, Massachusetts passed a housing reform omnibus that included expansion of ADUs.
During his speech, Pritzker cited a statistic (first reported by the University of Illinois and subsequently by the Chicago Tribune) that found that as of 2025, new-home listings in Illinois dropped by 64% over the preceding five years, while home values have gone up 37% since 2019. In 2025, Illinois also received a “C” grade on housing affordability from Realtor.com®.
“For too long, a patchwork of local restrictions have made it too difficult and expensive to build and buy housing. Illinois working families deserve better, and through BUILD, we’re fighting for the most significant housing affordability package in decades,” said Pritzker in a March press release.
Massachusetts real estate groups oppose ballot initiative for rent control
It’s not just elected officials who will be on the ballot come November. In Massachusetts, there is a ballot initiative to enact rent control in the commonwealth. If Massachusetts voters approve the initiative, annual rent increases would be capped at 5% (using where rents were on January 31, 2026) or the same number as inflation recorded in the Consumer Price Index, depending on which is lower.
This ballot initiative would overturn current Massachusetts law that explicitly bans localities in Massachusetts from enacting rent control. Exceptions would be made for certain properties, such as owner-occupied buildings with less than five units, or units with a date of first occupancy less than 10 years.
The ballot initiative is opposed by the Massachusetts Association of Realtors®. A lawsuit has been filed to block the ballot initiative, and will be heard by the Massachusetts Supreme Court. The National Association of Realtors® (NAR) has joined with the Chamber of Commerce and trade group the Associated Industries of Massachusetts in filing a legal brief to the Supreme Court opposing the ballot initiative.
In a statement, NAR State and Local Policy Representative Drew Myers said the ballot initiative “would establish the most restrictive statewide rent cap currently contemplated in the United States.”
The initiative is also opposed by Massachusetts Governor Maura Healey (D), but is supported by Boston Mayor Michelle Wu (D). The Boston City Council also adopted a resolution endorsing the initiative. Wu had campaigned on enacting rent control in Boston during her run for mayor.
Massachusetts is ranked as one of the most expensive states to live in, including housing. Realtor.com found that rents in the Boston metro area trended down slightly in 2025, with the median rent falling by 2.6% to $2,581.
The issue of rent control has also come up south of the Massachusetts border in Providence, Rhode Island. On Friday, April 17, Mayor Brett Smiley (D) vetoed a rent control bill passed by the city council that would have capped annual rent increases at 4%. Smiley claimed in his veto message that “based on available data and the experience of other municipalities, policies of this kind do not lower rents and often lead to higher costs and diminishing housing stock across the market over time.”
Smiley’s opponent in the mayoral race, Rhode Island State Representative David Morales, has said he would sign a rent control bill, potentially setting this issue up to play a major role in the race.
New York leaders propose tax on uninhabited second properties
New York Governor Kathy Hochul (D) and New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani (D) have announced a proposal for a “pied-à-terre tax.” The French term refers to a house kept for occasional temporary use; accordingly, the proposed tax would be imposed on second homes in New York City that are valued at $5 million or more.
Both Hochul and Mamdani’s offices have claimed the tax would generate at least $500 million annually in revenue for New York City, arguing that the tax would be targeted at “ultrawealthy out-of-city residents and global elites who use New York City real estate as a vehicle for wealth storage rather than as homes,” specifically citing the $238 million Midtown penthouse owned by billionaire Ken Griffin. The tax explicitly does not apply to luxury properties which are kept as primary residences.
In comments to RISMedia, Real Estate Board of New York (REBNY) President James Whelan criticized the proposed tax: “This annual tax will weaken the city’s broader economy—all without addressing its fiscal problems in the first place. Its impact will reach far beyond a small group of owners. It will not raise the amount of revenue expected, but will eliminate thousands of construction jobs, lower property values and raise costs for New Yorkers. Albany should focus on policies that encourage investment and housing production to create a more affordable city, not ones that stifle its growth.”
The New York State Association of Realtors® also said in comments to RISMedia that “the New York State Association of Realtors® opposes all impediments to purchasing, selling and owning real estate. We ask that policymakers focus on increasing housing supply and improving affordability for all New Yorkers.”
New Jersey online privacy law faces legal challenge
Currently before the New Jersey Supreme Court is Daniel’s Law, a privacy law which has implications for what information can be displayed on real estate listings.
Daniel’s Law was enacted in 2020 following the murder of Daniel Anderl, son of United States District of New Jersey Judge Esther Salas, in a home invasion. The law’s intent is to protect the private information, such as addresses or phone numbers, of New Jersey public officials. To that end, the law requires that such information of qualified persons can’t be posted on government websites, and that it must be removed from private entities—which includes online real estate listing platforms—upon request.
The question before the court is whether the law includes “strict liabilities” for people who receive requests to take down private information but then do not do so.
New Jersey Realtors® previously collaborated with New Jersey legislators on an amendment to Daniel’s Law, one that resolved the “unintended consequences” of real estate professionals being unable to obtain information needed for property transactions.
Florida enacts land-use reform to spur more development
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis (R) has signed a law which limits local control over zoning restrictions and property fees. For instance, localities’ ability to impose development application fees would be dependent on them being able to demonstrate the fees “reasonably relate” to the actual process of the application review process.
To deny an application, the local government must also demonstrate “each area of incompatibility,” and may recommend areas of improvement to the applicant.
“References to ‘community character’ or ‘neighborhood feel’ are not sufficient, in and of themselves, to support a denial of an application on compatibility grounds,” the law reads. New local land development regulations must also be designed “to incorporate measures for mitigating or minimizing potential incompatibility.”
State Representative David Borrero (R), the bill’s sponsor, said that “You have local government regulations that are preventing people from supplying inventory to a much-needed market. You don’t have enough land, and you don’t have enough housing to meet the demand, and that’s why the cost of housing has skyrocketed.” Opponents of the bill argue that it could have a negative environmental impact; all Democratic representatives in the Florida House voted against the bill, along with six Republicans.
California Realtors® oppose condo cost reform bill
Two bills in California are targeting costs incurred by condo owners during property damage. One of these, Assembly Bill 1406, reforms the “liquidated damages cap” on seller compensation in the event of a buyer default on new condominium units from 3% of sale price to 6%. California YIMBYs have voiced support for the bill, arguing it reforms “outdated” rules, and that it will financially assist builders while assisting homeownership affordability.
The California Association of Realtors® (CAR), though, is an opponent of the legislation; the association even issued a “red alert” calling on its members to oppose the bill. The association argued the legislation “dismantles strong, long-standing consumer protections for buyers, putting their savings, life-changing sums of money, at risk to finance the condominium projects.”
The legislation has not advanced in the legislature since January 2026.
The other bill, Assembly Bill 1903, reforms the building repair process in the event of a construction defect with changes that ease the process for the builder. The bill specifically states that “a builder has a complete and unrestricted right to inspect and repair a certified building at times mutually agreed upon by the builder and claimant and within timeframes established by the builder. If a claimant refuses the offer of repair or prevents, restricts, delays or frustrates access for more than 7 days from the mutually agreed upon day, the bill would deem the builder to have received a release.”
California YIMBYs has also backed this bill, arguing it assists builders by giving them more time to repair defects and streamlining the claim process, and that this will encourage the construction of more “denser, urban homes” for “middle-income families.” California housing nonprofit the Housing Action Coalition has voiced support for AB1903 as well, saying it will “(unlock) more homeownership in California,” and that it will spur more condo construction in California that’s been held back by construction defect costs.
This bill has been referred to the legislature’s judiciary committee as of March 2026.
