California Governor Candidates Debate Housing Crisis Solutions in Pre-Convention Clash

• “Is California affordable?” – Brian Hanlon, founder and CEO of California YIMBY
• “Anybody who thinks that localities are not a problem hasn’t had to represent Huntington Beach like this girl.” – Katie Porter

SACRAMENTO — Democratic candidates for governor laid out sharply defined visions for confronting California’s housing crisis at a forum hosted last Friday by California YIMBY ahead of the state Democratic Convention, offering a mix of regulatory reform, financing innovation, rent stabilization and state enforcement as competing paths forward.

Brian Hanlon, founder and CEO of California YIMBY, framed the stakes plainly, asking the audience, “Is California affordable?” before noting that “despite our recent legislative successes, we have a lot more work to do, which also means the next governor of California will have a lot more work to do.”

The forum featured Democratic contenders including Katie Porter, Xavier Becerra, Eric Swalwell, Betty Yee, Tom Steyer, Matt Mahan and Tony Thurmond. Each was asked to identify the primary causes of the housing shortage and outline how, as governor, they would expand supply and reduce costs.

Several candidates squarely blamed regulatory barriers.

Porter answered “Yes” when asked whether “California’s housing shortage is primarily the result of local and state regulatory barriers to home building,” adding that “anybody who thinks that localities are not a problem hasn’t had to represent Huntington Beach like this girl.”

Becerra also responded “Yes,” arguing that “we’ve never had good state policy for housing in California. It’s all driven by localities,” and calling for “a coherent statewide strategy so that no one jurisdiction can try to stop the development where we need it.”

Swalwell took a similar tack. “On housing, California is a blue state held down by red tape,” he said, proposing 90-day deadlines for agencies to approve or deny housing applications. “If we put more deadlines in place, we’ll see fewer reports and more rooftops.”

Mahan, who has emphasized his record in San Jose, agreed that “regulation has been at the heart of the problem,” but argued that the “next phase of work” must focus on construction costs, including “capping impact fees, industrializing housing production in California factories, and take on building codes that increase costs without making us safer.”

Steyer described the challenge as multifaceted.

“There is no silver bullet in housing. It is silver buckshot,” he said, contending that regulation “probably is the biggest part of the problem,” while also emphasizing technological change. “There’s technology. It’s here to reduce it right now by 36%,” he said of construction costs. “We need to bring down the cost of housing, we need to build houses, we got to make it legal to build houses in California.”

Yee answered “Yes,” but paired regulatory reform with financing reform, saying, “Regulations have become a barrier both at the state and local level, but equally important is our funding and financing.”

Thurmond also agreed that permitting delays are a core obstacle. “If it takes six years in some counties to permit a project, that is a huge barrier, who will do that? No one,” he said.

When pressed on what political risks they were willing to take, the candidates diverged.

Thurmond said he would “take on the homeowner’s insurance folks,” arguing that companies collecting premiums should not “skip out of town when they think it’s easy.” He also promoted legislation to provide “another 10 billion of funding for building affordable housing.”

Yee said she would seek to “bring back redevelopment financing,” acknowledging that it “will be a fight with our education community,” but asking, “Where are educators living today?”

Becerra likewise pledged to confront the insurance industry and “wealthy communities who feel very comfortable where they are,” saying “we need them to understand that we’re all in this boat together.”

Mahan signaled he would challenge segments of the environmental movement, saying the state needs “further streamlining of review processes, CEQA and related requirements,” and that making infill development harder “is not actually doing us any favors.”

Porter said that labor’s opposition to certain housing bills posed a challenge. “There is a path to a residential labor union, residential union construction workforce, but they need to get on that path, not just say no to housing,” she said, adding, “This answer is going to get me in a hell of a lot of trouble.”

Steyer pointed to his record confronting corporate interests and said he would close “the corporate real estate tax loophole,” asserting, “They’re going to hate me for it, but we’re going to have to do it.”

On local control, most candidates said the state must step in when cities fail to meet housing obligations.

Steyer said local jurisdictions should be held “responsible to living up to the laws of the state of California.” Swalwell answered, “Yes,” saying the state should expand by-right approvals and enforce regional housing mandates.

Mahan said the state should “cap excessive fees” and require “ministerial or by right approval for conforming uses,” adding that for “bad actors … the state needs to use the legal system and or step in.”

Becerra was emphatic: “Cities and counties are subdivisions of the state of California. They are not independent of the state. They are not sovereigns.”

Porter was blunt about local resistance, saying, “A lot of cities are not building because they just don’t want to … they’re NIMBYs. Let’s just call it what it is.”

Thurmond struck a more cautious note, saying, “I don’t know that it’s ever a good idea for the state to carry out the local planning decisions,” but supported enforcement of housing targets and state incentives.

Candidates were also asked how they would define success after four years in office.

Porter cited the share of income spent on housing. “We used to talk about 30%. Now you’re darn lucky if it’s under 50,” she said, adding that population growth would also be a key metric.

Thurmond offered a concrete benchmark: “We build 2.3 million housing units by the year 2030.”

Steyer listed “the number of houses,” “the price of housing,” who is buying them, and rent levels, saying, “I’m for rent control. I’m going to care a lot about what rent is.”

Yee focused on both total supply and reducing “the number of people who are feeling housing insecure.”

Swalwell pointed to “average rents,” “the average age of a first time home buyer,” total units added, and “the speed at which we are supplying new housing.”

Becerra said he would inventory “near shovel ready projects” in his first 100 days and “swarm ’em and make ’em shovel ready,” while also pursuing rent stabilization and lower per-unit costs.

Mahan said voters should measure not only affordability outcomes but also “the things that we actually have direct control over in government,” including permitting speed and building codes.

On construction costs, candidates returned to familiar themes: impact fees, delays and liability.

Mahan said some cities have impact fees that represent “20% of the cost of a project,” calling for state caps. Swalwell estimated “about a hundred thousand dollars per home that we pay additionally … because of the red tape” and proposed expedited litigation timelines.

Porter referenced a RAND study and concluded, “It’s the delay,” adding, “Time is money.”

Becerra pointed to fees, liability and modular construction. “We can reduce the cost by going modular,” he said.

Steyer agreed on fees and timing but emphasized technological change, saying, “The technology is here, we can do it.”

In closing exchanges on vulnerable populations, candidates highlighted different tools.

Swalwell stressed apartment construction and use of underutilized public land. Steyer supported mid-rise projects that include affordable units. Thurmond promoted programs for unhoused youth and seniors, saying “we have to build housing for our families and our workforce and at the same time build programs for those who are unhoused.”

Becerra underscored infill development, rent stabilization and enforcement of anti-discrimination laws “to make sure that if there’s a unit available, you have an equal right to compete for that unit.”

Porter turned to financing, arguing that the traditional 20% down payment “is not backed by the data” and that lowering barriers could expand homeownership.

Throughout the forum, candidates agreed that housing affordability is central to California’s economic future. Where they differed was in emphasis: regulatory reform versus financing reform, statewide mandates versus incentives, rent control versus market expansion, and technological innovation versus labor and code changes.

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.

Categories:

Tags: