Key points:
- California lawmakers pass significant housing bills SB 79 and CEQA reform.
- Davis community remains largely unaffected by new state housing laws due to Amtrak station type.
- Davis faces a housing shortage due to Measure J, despite state law changes.
California lawmakers have just passed two of the most significant housing bills in recent memory. SB 79, which loosens zoning restrictions around transit stops, and the companion CEQA reform bill, which trims down opportunities for legal challenges, are being heralded as watershed victories for housing advocates.
But the question here in Davis is whether any of this changes the landscape for a community that has long resisted growth. The short answer is: not really.
SB 79 does not apply to Davis in any meaningful way. The measure is designed around Tier 1 and Tier 2 transit stops. Tier 1 encompasses heavy rail like BART, Caltrain, and LA Metro’s B and D lines. Davis has an Amtrak station, but it is intercity passenger rail, not commuter or heavy metro rail. Tier 2 covers light rail systems such as SacRT and SF Muni, high-frequency commuter rail, and dedicated bus rapid transit. Davis doesn’t have any of those either. That means the sweeping density changes envisioned by the bill will not touch Davis directly.
That doesn’t mean state law won’t eventually affect Davis. SB 79 was passed as part of a package of reforms that collectively signal Sacramento’s growing impatience with local obstruction.
CEQA reform may have little to do with train stops, but it could change the calculus for housing projects in Davis. CEQA litigation has been the preferred weapon for opponents of growth, and courts have often been willing to hear cases on even the thinnest of claims.
By tightening up the grounds for lawsuits and trimming the timelines, the Legislature has given developers a bit more breathing room. In practical terms, it could make it harder to weaponize CEQA to delay or kill projects.
At the same time, the Governor’s Office, the Department of Housing and Community Development, and Attorney General Rob Bonta have not let up on enforcement. They have taken city after city to court for failing to comply with housing element law. Huntington Beach is the most high-profile example, but not the only one.
Time and again, courts have ruled against local jurisdictions that have tried to slow-walk compliance. If anything, the legislative victories will embolden state officials to keep pressing. The clear message is that California intends to hold cities accountable for blocking new housing.
But in Davis, the real constraint is Measure J.
Every major project on the city’s periphery must go to the voters for approval, and historically those votes have been extremely difficult to win. The state has not yet directly challenged Measure J, but it looms in the background of every housing discussion in town. If the courts eventually determine that voter-imposed constraints like Measure J amount to an unlawful barrier under state housing law, that will be the real game-changer.
For now, the practical effect of SB 79 and CEQA reform is symbolic in Davis.
They won’t change zoning around Amtrak, nor will they guarantee approval of new subdivisions. But they shift the balance of power toward the state, reinforcing the reality that local preferences cannot be used to permanently block housing. If cities fail to comply, Sacramento is prepared to sue, and courts have shown they will back the state.
This matters because Davis has become increasingly isolated in its resistance.
Other cities are being forced to rezone, approve projects, and comply with regional housing needs allocations. Davis remains protected by Measure J—for now. But as more case law piles up against local obstruction, it is not hard to imagine a day when the courts will no longer accept voter approval as a justification for noncompliance.
Meanwhile, the city is already struggling with the downstream effects of its housing policies. Enrollment in Davis schools is declining. The university continues to grow, but students and staff are priced out of the market, creating pressure on surrounding communities. The lack of housing supply has driven up costs and forced many workers into long commutes. Measure J may remain politically popular, but it has exacerbated a housing shortage that the state is determined to solve.
The bigger question for Davis is whether it wants to lead or be dragged.
If the city continues to lean on Measure J as a shield, it may find itself on the losing side of a legal battle. If it chooses instead to proactively plan for housing, it might retain some control over where and how growth occurs.
In that sense, the new laws should serve as a warning. The state has signaled that it is no longer willing to accept excuses. Local politics in Davis may revolve around the ballot box, but state politics now revolve around production numbers. Sacramento is setting the stage for a reckoning.
Davis will need to grapple with whether Measure J is sustainable in this environment. Every project that comes forward faces not only the scrutiny of voters but also the scrutiny of the courts. Developers, the city, and opponents alike should assume that CEQA lawsuits will be harder to win and that HCD will not hesitate to intervene if Davis falls short of its housing obligations.
If history is any guide, Davis residents will continue to vote down peripheral projects. The legal system, however, may not allow that pattern to stand forever. Courts are already defining the limits of local control. At some point, they may decide that Measure J is incompatible with state law. That would be the most significant change to the Davis housing scene in decades.
Until then, little changes. SB 79 will not reshape the Amtrak station. CEQA reform may shorten a few lawsuits but won’t build a single unit. The enforcement machine in Sacramento rolls on, but it will take a court decision to break the logjam in Davis. For all the statewide victories, the local battle remains the same.
Davis has always prided itself on being different. That difference is increasingly at odds with state priorities. New laws may not change that today, but the momentum is unmistakable. If the courts ever turn their attention to Measure J, the Davis housing scene will look very different, and no local vote will be able to stop it.
Follow the Vanguard on Social Media – X, Instagram and Facebook. Subscribe the Vanguard News letters. To make a tax-deductible donation, please visit davisvanguard.org/donate or give directly through ActBlue. Your support will ensure that the vital work of the Vanguard continues.
What needs to happen now is for interest rates to come down. These changes in law combined with lower interest rates will spur construction.
Trump wants lower interest rates, he’s been calling for the Federal Reserve to lower them for months.
Just in time to unleash inflation again. Trump has created the environment for stagflation. That rocked the housing markets in the 1970s.
Three percent inflation is going to be the new norm despite the Federal Reserve target of two percent. Inflation has been running at three percent for the last three years so acceptance of reality is also the new norm.
In the stagflation 1970’s there was something called the misery index. It was the sum of the the inflation and unemployment rates. Right now the misery index is 7%. In the 1970’s it was well into the teens. Stagflation may return but currently it is manageable.
“SB 79 will not reshape the Amtrak station.”
Was that ever an issue? That’s a difficult-to-access weird triangle with historic structures.
“The enforcement machine in Sacramento rolls on”
Like the Columbia.
“For all the statewide victories, the local battle remains the same.”
What battle, except those your blog creates? Housing prices are collapsing, vacancy rates are climbing. Students are camping out overnight in a line to get a rare room. Isn’t that what you wanted? If not, what do you want? Subsidized housing?
“Davis has always prided itself on being different.”
Like a marriage, for better or for WORSE
“That difference is increasingly at odds with state priorities.”
Wait, why does the state care about our Toad Tunnel?
“New laws may not change that today, but the momentum is unmistakable.”
Yeah, vacancy rates are going up and prices are going down. The momentum is unmistakable.
“If the courts ever turn their attention to Measure J, the Davis housing scene will look very different”
I thought we were talking about AB-79, which is about transit stations, instead you turn this to Measure J, which is about peripheral housing, as far from the Amtrak station as one can get. Except “J” approved and yet unbuilt Nishi.
“and no local vote will be able to stop it.”
Unable to stop the abolition of a bad law that you have supported for years? I’ve been opposed to Measure J since when it was known as Measure R, and D. Still doesn’t make me a freaking YIMBY. Opposed because — well look how our votes have gone and what it’s done to our town.