This story was originally published by Capitol Weekly.
Housing and affordability remain the top concerns for most Californians. To no surprise, when the California state legislature convened for the 2026 session, Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas (D-Hollister) called on his colleagues to “renew the California Dream by focusing on affordability,” including housing.
Perhaps the legislature’s most important housing action this year was placing Prop 1 on the November ballot. Endorsed by voters, Prop 1 authorizes $11.25 billion in bonds to fund state housing affordability programs.
“If it passes on the ballot, that’s $11 billion for primarily housing production that we need for the lowest income folks in our communities,” Assemblymember Buffy Wicks (D-Oakland), who called the bond a top priority, said before the election.
According to Assemblymember Matt Haney (D-San Francisco), Chair of the Assembly Housing and Community Development Committee, the bond will help get shovels in the ground on already approved projects.
“Because of this bond, we will have thousands of people living there with mixed-use retail and thriving communities right next to some of our biggest transit stations,” Haney said. “Right now, especially at a time where we aren’t seeing as much private housing development, largely because of the market and interest rates and tariffs and a variety of factors that are beyond our control, this is hugely important to get California building.”
With California 2.5 million homes short of its 2030 goals, Haney said the state needs to build more housing at greater density and height to lower rents and home prices. Haney said he authored AB 2074 to take advantage of the opportunity to build housing close to transit hubs.
“Building housing in downtowns where there’s existing transit infrastructure, jobs, and services is a hugely impactful opportunity,” Haney said. “It will require qualifying major cities to establish a regional transit hub, which will allow for residential and mixed-use projects to be streamlined.”
The bill, signed by Gov. Gavin Newsom, will apply first to California’s seven largest cities, but allow other cities to opt in. Haney said AB 2074 and similar bills will streamline the approval process for housing developers.
Rivas highlighted AB 2074 as one of the bills that makes “it easier to build housing in all corners of the state.” Other bills include AB 1751, which makes building townhomes faster and easier, AB 1842, which will protect disaster survivors from losing their homes, and AB 2518, which will launch a pilot program to connect affordable housing to power faster.
As part of the Assembly’s housing efforts, the Select Committee on Housing Construction Innovation was established last December with Wicks as chair. She said while the legislature has done a lot to streamline work and make it easier to build, most of the housing built has been rental units.
“Part of tackling that for me this past year was establishing the committee on housing construction innovation,” Wicks said. “See if we can bring about more innovative models of construction to bring down the cost of housing.”
Wicks said after leading delegations to factories in Sweden and Idaho, followed by dozens of meetings and hearings, the committee put forth a package of six bills. All six passed the legislature, but Gov. Gavin Newsom vetoed half.
Among the bills signed, Wicks authored AB 1815, which prohibits local jurisdictions from enforcing building standards that exceed the state’s on factory-built housing. The bill means factories won’t have to stop production between projects to adapt to different building standards.
From the package, Newsom also signed AB 2058, which would allow statewide building inspectors to inspect factory-built housing on site instead of a local inspector, and AB 2185, which requires state agencies to revise housing programs to include factory-built housing.
Wicks said the package focused on incentivizing developers to invest in factory-built housing to create constant demand and a stable workforce.
That was the goal of AB 2166, a bill Newsom vetoed that would have established a financial backstop to finish a project if a factory fails, a bill Wicks said would have incentivized developers to go with factory-built housing by assuring them they wouldn’t be left on the hook if the factory fails.
“The goal being that you would get enough factories going; over time there’s other options,” Wicks said. “You don’t want to create a system where you have one factory that works, and that’s it because it’s too risky for people.”
Wicks said she understands why the governor vetoed the measure, as they couldn’t secure funding for it in the budget. She said she hopes to bring all three vetoed bills back next year.
While Haney believes streamlining the approval process will reduce barriers to housing development and ensure cities can’t just say no, others worry about losing local control over housing development.
Jason Rhine, Senior Director of Legislative Affairs for the League of California Cities (Cal Cities), said the approval process exists to identify unique circumstances and plan around them.
“You can’t possibly have the same rules in every jurisdiction because every city is different,” Rhine said. “We see lots of bills that, and I hate to say it, are one-size-fits-all, but we know that that approach just isn’t really working.”
According to Rhine, the legislature has focused more on what kind of housing to build rather than on just building it. While Cal Cities supported Prop 1, Rhine said California needs a permanent source of funding for housing development.
Rhine noted the bond’s interest costs of “about $500 million to $600 million a year,” adding “We would be much better off just investing that money annually in perpetuity than to pay all that debt service.”
Assemblymember Joe Patterson (R-Rocklin) argued a different point, saying the state spends too much time on Regional Housing Needs Assessments (RHNA), a state-mandated planning process for future housing needs. He contends those assessments don’t directly result in housing, with “unachievable” numbers set by the state.
“I think it’s a huge failure by the state,” Patterson said. “I think the solution to that is creating incentives for local jurisdictions to actually produce housing and assist developers.”
According to Patterson, the legislature also focuses too much on giving the attorney general power to sue local jurisdictions. He said jurisdictions should be incentivized to build more housing, not punished for not meeting RHNA numbers, “because the private market isn’t bringing them anywhere.”
Patterson said that with the governor failing to meet his promise to build 3.5 million houses, the legislature has taken the lead on addressing housing, including restoring funding cuts Newsom proposed to housing programs. But he said the legislature now needs to focus on actually building houses.
“Moving forward, I don’t think it has to do with taking away more local control,” Patterson said. “It’s going to have to be more focused on how we help communities deliver on what we’ve already done.”
Haney, however, believes the bills passed by the legislature will make it easier to build housing.
“I think that this was a monumental year for housing policy for California, largely because of the affordable housing bond,” Haney said. “We continue to take many of the important steps around making it easier, faster and cheaper to build housing and to reduce bureaucracy, red tape and hold everyone accountable to do their part.”
Wicks said she would give the legislature a B- on housing legislation this year, citing the failure of her construction defect liability reform bill, which she said died “in an end-of-session hostage negotiation situation.” If passed, the bill would have strengthened standards for suing condo builders while still protecting consumers.
“If you’re a consumer and you buy a condo, if there’s a defect, it needs to get fixed,” Wicks said. “But I think what we’re seeing now is there’s a lot of civil lawsuits that don’t really benefit the consumer, the HOA or obviously the builder.”
Wicks said condos have dropped to 4% of California’s housing stock because developments end up in court. She plans to bring the bill back next year.
Wicks said the vetoed bills in her package just need more time to get it right. She concedes that whether it’s Newsom or Gov.-elect Xavier Becerra, the governor’s job is to veto unfunded bills like AB 2166.
“Sometimes we run out of time to get it right,” Wicks said. “I think it’s better to take a beat and get it right than push too fast and get it wrong.”
Capitol Weekly covers California government and politics in order to enlighten and educate Californians about public policy and state governance, and to provide a platform for engagement with public officials, advocates and political interests.