California’s Democratic gubernatorial candidates have transformed the usually contentious policy debates about housing construction into a contest over who says they’ll advance housing reform the most aggressively.
A few years ago, few Democratic politicians would mention things like supporting zoning reform, but at a recent forum moderated by Ezra Klein, co-author of the influential book Abundance, which highlights how California and other governments have created housing shortages, the gubernatorial candidates made their cases for a variety of reforms to cut red tape and increase housing supply.
One key point of discussion was allowing more construction and higher-density neighborhoods. California Senate Bill 79, signed in 2025 and set to take effect July 1, establishes minimum density requirements near transit stops, basically allowing up to nine-story apartment and housing developments within half a mile of rail and bus stops, and gives the state one of the nation’s strongest transit-oriented development frameworks.
Combined with 2022’s Assembly Bill 2097, which aimed to lower the cost of building housing and increase the number of units built by removing mandates for parking spaces, California has made progress toward a legislative foundation to support housing development in ways that were unlikely a decade ago.
A pressing question, however, is what happens after these state laws go into effect. Historically, rather than spurring more housing, the answer has been local resistance and delays. Laws that preempt local zoning do not implement themselves and face major hurdles.
California’s experience with 2021’s Senate Bill 9, which legalized duplexes on single-family lots, showed that cities responded by adopting additional design standards and minimum lot size requirements, making many projects financially or physically infeasible. As a result, duplex production has remained far below state projections.
Research on transit-oriented development finds that successfully building housing requires alignment among state law, local governments, zoning codes, fee structures, and administrative processes. Without that coordination, even well-designed state housing laws produce limited results.
One of the gubernatorial candidates, San Jose Mayor Matt Mahan, has focused more directly on implementation barriers than most. In 2024, San Jose recorded zero market-rate housing construction starts. Mahan’s administration identified process barriers as a primary obstacle. Approval timelines were unpredictable, administrative requirements had accumulated around projects that technically complied with zoning, and developers could not move forward with confidence.
San Jose’s experience illustrates how housing projects stall when permitting systems and local processes remain misaligned with state housing reforms. But San Jose streamlined permitting timelines, reduced administrative requirements, created a direct pathway for qualifying infill projects, and saw housing projects move forward last year. But this type of effort needs to be scalable statewide.
To get a better idea of what the candidates can deliver on housing, they should answer three key questions.
First, what carrots, sticks and enforcement mechanisms will ensure cities rezone in line with Senate Bill 79 after it takes effect?
Cities like Los Angeles already appear to be slow-walking changes, legal action moves slowly, and to be successful, the law needs accountability structures with timelines.
Second, what is the plan for reforming development fees?
These fees charged to developers, supposedly to cover the costs of expanding infrastructure and services for new housing construction, are astronomical. The RAND Housing Center found “impact and development fees average $29,000 per unit in California, compared to less than $1,000 per unit on average in Texas.” Cities and the state must find ways to lower these fees.
Third, how will the next governor address localities that technically comply with state housing laws while undermining their intent, a recurring pattern?
California needs a governor who can lead the state, push local governments to enact pro-housing policies and then hold localities accountable when they don’t. California’s housing reforms in recent years have been among the most comprehensive in the country. But they don’t help renters and homebuyers if cities and counties don’t implement them.
It’s great that gubernatorial candidates are talking about building more housing. Now they need concrete strategies to overcome local resistance that is slowing the progress of state housing reforms.
Christina Mojica is a senior policy analyst at Reason Foundation.