The electric vehicle revolution is gaining momentum, with used EVs now being the most affordable cars to buy, drive, and maintain. As gas prices surge and EV prices drop, demand is skyrocketing, and 2026 may be the tipping point for widespread adoption. However, a significant barrier threatens to slow down this progress, particularly for residents of affordable housing.

Assembly Bill 2748, authored by Assemblymember Sharon Quirk-Silva, aims to reduce building costs for affordable housing by allowing developers to follow the 2026 building standards instead of the 2026 standards. While the goal is commendable, the bill could inadvertently limit EV charging access for those who need it most.

The Cost of Public Charging

Public charging is not just less convenient; it’s also more expensive. Only residential charging rates are regulated; public charging companies set their own prices—often as much as six times more than residential rates. This price disparity disproportionately affects apartment residents without home charging, who in California tend to be young, Black, or Latino.

Michelle Pierce, an electric vehicle advocate and consultant who founded EV Nirvana, experienced this firsthand. When she moved to an apartment, she discovered how hard it was to rely on public chargers. She often drove out of her way to find a working charger, waited for it to become available, and then dashed back to avoid idling fees.

The Impact of Assembly Bill 2748

The 2026 building code was carefully designed to expand charging access for residents while minimizing costs for developers. When parking is assigned, it removes a requirement for expensive charging stations and allows developers to provide simple, lower-cost outlets. This approach roughly doubles the number of charging outlets compared with the 2026 code for essentially the same or lower costs.

By exempting affordable housing development from the current code provisions, AB 2748 would roughly halve charging access and set up tenants and property managers for much higher future costs. Installing EV charging as a retrofit can triple costs—and in one instance was 30 times more expensive—versus including it during construction before concrete is poured and transformers are sized.

The Financial Burden

Taxpayers and ratepayers will ultimately bear the burden as state agencies and utilities spend millions retrofitting multifamily buildings to add charging. Delaying EV charging infrastructure until it becomes dramatically more expensive isn’t savings—it’s deferred spending with interest.

Reducing charging access for California’s lowest-income residents isn’t an effective way to reduce construction costs. EV charging infrastructure accounts for less than 1% of the cost of building affordable housing, far less than the 10 to 15% spent on development fees. The main culprits of high construction costs are not charging outlets; they are lumber, labor, and land.

The Need for Equitable Access

Affordable housing tenants deserve the same opportunity that residents of new market-rate apartments enjoy: to charge at home while they sleep and never need to pump gas again. Housing must be affordable not only to build but also to live in.

As we move towards a future where electric vehicles are the norm, it’s crucial that we ensure equitable access to charging infrastructure. By addressing the barriers that limit EV adoption for low-income communities, we can accelerate the transition to cleaner, more affordable transportation for all.