California’s housing shortage remains a central theme in the race for governor, with the party’s two highest-polling Democrats offering contrasting routes to increase supply and affordability. Both candidates present aggressive goals to scale up production, yet they emphasize different levers: one seeks new public revenue and industrialized building techniques, while the other focuses on enforcing current laws, releasing stalled affordable projects and protecting labor standards. The debate highlights competing philosophies about the role of taxation, regulation and construction methods in resolving a decades-long policy failure.
What unites them is a recognition that incremental change is insufficient. Voters hear ambitious promises, but the difference lies in implementation — whether to pursue systemic tax reform and large-scale capital deployment or to marshal existing state powers to compel local compliance and accelerate projects already approved.
Tom Steyer: generating revenue and industrializing construction
Tom Steyer frames his housing agenda around bold financing and production reforms designed to deliver a rapid uptick in housing units. His plan calls for generating tens of billions in new state revenue by modifying property tax breaks for commercial owners under Prop. 13. The revenue, Steyer argues, would be directed to local governments so they can reduce burdensome developer fees and support construction without creating unfunded mandates. He has also pledged to call a special election early in his term to pursue that ballot change.
Alongside tax changes, Steyer champions large-scale adoption of prefabrication and modular construction as a path to lower costs and accelerate timelines. He envisions leveraging the state’s purchasing power to create an industrialized construction market that produces components off-site and assembles them quickly, which proponents say can cut costs by roughly 20% or more. He pairs this with proposals to simplify funding streams, expand low-interest revolving loans and streamline permitting to reduce bureaucratic delays.
Policy trade-offs and priorities
Steyer also supports targeted measures such as bulk purchasing of materials for accessory dwelling units to bring down homeowner costs and prioritizing development near transit through support for laws that override restrictive local zoning. On homelessness, his emphasis leans toward expanding transitional or bridge housing rather than relying primarily on permanent supportive housing, arguing for faster, more flexible temporary solutions for people experiencing homelessness.
Xavier Becerra: enforcement, unlocking stalled projects and protecting labor
Xavier Becerra emphasizes the power of existing laws and administrative action to speed housing delivery. He proposes declaring a statewide housing emergency immediately upon taking office, directing all agencies to treat production and affordability as top priorities. Central to his plan is unlocking about 40,000 affordable units that his campaign identifies as approved but held up by local requirements or funding gaps—projects he would try to finish through targeted subsidies, bonds and public-private partnerships.
Becerra favors rigorous enforcement of state housing requirements, instructing the state Department of Housing and Community Development to identify jurisdictions that fail to meet housing element commitments and to pursue remedies including fines. As a long-standing ally of organized labor, he consistently supports prevailing wage standards and union labor on state-backed construction, while acknowledging limited exceptions for some smaller infill projects where wage waivers exist.
Support for buyers and tenants
On the demand side, Becerra proposes expanding down payment assistance to enable more first-time buyers to qualify for purchase, and he wants to strengthen rent protections by fully enforcing the California Tenant Protection Act to curb steep rent increases and unjust evictions. He also proposes a new, dedicated fund aimed at preventing homelessness by helping families at imminent risk of losing housing due to small shortfalls in rent payments.
Where the candidates overlap and where voters decide
Despite their differences, both candidates acknowledge the urgency of the housing crisis and support measures that would, in various ways, push more development. Both advocate for renter protections and some form of tenant relief. Yet their contrasting instincts—Steyer’s willingness to pursue sweeping tax change and industrial-scale building versus Becerra’s focus on enforcement, unlocking existing projects and labor protections—reflect deeper choices about how aggressive and disruptive the state should be.
For Californians weighing which approach could move the needle, the choice will hinge on questions of political feasibility, cost, timing and values: whether to prioritize rapid scale-up through new revenue and prefab markets or to squeeze more production from the current statutory framework while preserving labor standards. The outcome will shape how quickly and equitably the state addresses housing shortages in the years to come.
