DAVIS, CA – In a wide-ranging interview on Friday, The Vanguard sat down with two prominent leaders from California YIMBY to discuss the state’s ongoing housing crisis, newly advancing legislation, and the future of growth in communities like Davis. Nolan Gray, a policy expert and former New York City planner, and Brooke Pritchard, a UC Davis alum and longtime housing advocate, offered their insights on recent developments at the Capitol, key policy proposals, and the urgent need for statewide solutions.
Much of the conversation focused on Senate Bill 79, a measure designed to promote dense housing near high-quality transit hubs and limit urban sprawl. The bill passed the California Senate with the bare minimum of 21 votes—a narrow victory that Gray described as both thrilling and nerve-wracking. “It’s incredibly exciting that it passed,” he said. “It is probably the boldest piece of housing legislation that the legislature has considered certainly in the last few years.” Gray emphasized that while the bill’s passage represents meaningful progress, the narrow vote also signals how much more work remains to build consensus.
Gray pointed to SB 79 as a recognition by lawmakers that California’s housing shortage is the defining issue of the state’s affordability crisis, one that continues to impact elections and erode trust in governance. “We know why we have the highest cost of housing in the country,” he said. “It’s not because our developers are greedier than developers in Texas. It’s because California has not been building housing at scale for the past 50 years.”
SB 79 is designed to change that, Gray explained, by encouraging housing construction in areas that are already developed, near transit and job centers. The bill’s goal is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, protect open space and working lands, and increase access to affordable housing without expanding the urban footprint. The California Assembly is expected to take up the bill next, and both Gray and Pritchard expressed optimism that it will advance. “We’re feeling pretty good about the Assembly,” Gray said. “Obviously, we’re going to have to earn every single vote.”
Pritchard noted that the Assembly is already moving on a number of housing-related bills, including Speaker Rivas’s wildfire recovery and housing package. “People still need places to live,” she said, referencing communities displaced by disasters and the state’s struggle to build back housing stock quickly and affordably. Both leaders stressed the importance of aligning legislative priorities with the reality that Californians across the income spectrum are being squeezed by the cost of living.
The conversation also covered long-anticipated efforts to reform the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), which critics have long said contributes to housing delays and higher costs. Two bills—AB 609 and SB 607—have emerged as key vehicles for reform. California YIMBY is co-sponsoring AB 609, which aims to exempt infill development from certain CEQA requirements. SB 607 takes a broader approach by streamlining aspects of the CEQA process and establishing clearer thresholds for review.
“There’s something approaching a consensus now,” Gray said. “We need to carve out infill projects from endless CEQA delays.” He emphasized that reforming CEQA is necessary but not sufficient—“CEQA is a huge barrier, but you also have to be able to legally build housing in the first place.” AB 609 is written to avoid environmental trade-offs, applying only to urbanized infill and excluding greenfield development, a distinction that has helped bring some environmental groups to the table. Gray also highlighted his surprise at how much of SB 607 represented common-sense improvements that are already standard practice in other states. “Having been a city planner in New York, our environmental reviews are quite a bit more straightforward and carefully tailored around the actual impact of concern than California’s environmental law.”
Pritchard added that conversations around CEQA reform are also being driven by bipartisan and institutional interest. “The Little Hoover Commission identified this last year,” she said. “When you have groups like that calling for change, it shows how overdue this is.”
When asked whether these changes would meaningfully reduce the cost of housing, Gray pointed to real-world case studies. He cited Minneapolis, which in recent years has adopted zoning and transit-oriented reforms similar to those being proposed in California. “Minneapolis was one of the only cities among its peers where home prices didn’t rise in real terms,” he said. “That’s a direct result of building more housing.” Closer to home, Pritchard pointed to Sacramento, where some rents have begun to fall after local reforms increased housing production. Still, both agreed that the broader trends in California remain discouraging. “The honest answer is no,” Gray said when asked if the state is turning the corner. “We’ve not seen overall production increase.”
The conversation turned local when the Vanguard brought up the situation in Davis, where Measure J requires voter approval for any development on agricultural or open space lands at the city’s periphery. Over the last two decades, Davis has largely stopped building single-family housing, relying instead on student and multifamily housing to meet its obligations under the state’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Now, however, the city has nearly exhausted its infill options and will likely face difficult choices in the upcoming sixth RHNA cycle.
“I think Davis is a microcosm,” Gray said. “It’s a case study of what happens when a city resists growth for too long and runs out of space. At some point, the state is going to have to decide whether to intervene.”
Pritchard, who has long ties to Davis, described the city as a community she would love to return to—but not one that currently accommodates families like hers. “I love the public schools. I love the idea of my kids biking around and taking the bus. But there’s just not enough housing,” she said. “You look at the school district, and the number of students who don’t live in Davis is growing. That’s a warning sign. It’s a graying community, and the vibrancy is slipping.” She recalled her time as a student when the rental vacancy rate in Davis hovered around 0.1 percent. Even now, at about 2 percent, conditions remain tight. “That’s still not enough,” she said.
Gray agreed, drawing parallels between Davis and larger cities that have also hit the limits of outward growth. “Los Angeles can’t sprawl anymore—not because they don’t want to, but because people are commuting three hours from the desert,” he said. “For cities like Davis and LA, the only way forward is infill, missing middle housing, and smart density.”
Both Gray and Pritchard emphasized the critical role of state-level intervention. “Local officials will say, ‘Sorry, we have to approve this project, the state tied our hands.’ Then they’ll turn around and thank us for giving them political cover,” Gray said. “But for that argument to work, the state actually has to act.”
In response to a final question about whether the Democratic Party is taking the housing crisis seriously enough, both leaders expressed concern. Pritchard had just returned from the California Democratic Convention, where she said she spent hours talking to people excited about the YIMBY message but disappointed in the party’s priorities. “There’s a big constituency out there,” she said. “People feel it in their pocketbooks, and they’re looking for leadership.”
Gray added that there are broader implications for the state’s future. “Housing is not just about affordability,” he said. “It’s about political power. We’re heading toward a possible loss of five congressional seats. That’s like losing Nevada. Even if you’re not moved by the human cost of the housing crisis, there are real political consequences.” He ended on a hopeful but urgent note. “We’re not helpless. We can still lead. But time is running out.”
Categories:
Breaking News City of Davis Housing Land Use/Open Space State of California
Tags:
Affordable Housing california environmental quality act California YIMBY CEQA Housing Crisis Los Angeles Measure J Sacramento Senate Bill 79