The First 100 Days: How an Incoming California Governor Might Use Executive Power to Address the Housing Crisis

Authors:
Ben Metcalf, Managing Director
David Garcia, Deputy Director of Policy
Sarah Karlinsky, Director of Research and Policy

California’s two gubernatorial candidates, Xavier Becerra and Steve Hilton, have both acknowledged that housing is a top issue. But how much can a governor do on their own to respond to the housing crisis? And how quickly can they act?

This commentary explores the possible executive actions that the next governor could pursue within their first 100 days that might result in meaningful progress towards stabilizing and boosting housing production, while signaling their dedication to solving the housing challenge over the long-term. These ideas are intended to be illustrative rather than prescriptive, and to serve as a starting point rather than an exhaustive list of potential actions. In addition, while the first 100 days of a new administration is often seen as a benchmark for whether rapid progress can be achieved, the next administration’s commitment to housing should reach well beyond this timeframe to include working with the legislature on issues that can only be addressed through changes in state law.

Declare a Housing State of Emergency

One of the strongest powers available to a governor is the ability to declare a state of emergency. Such a declaration allows the administration to supersede certain laws as a means to adequately address the emergency. The next governor could use this authority, given to them by the California Emergency Services Act, to declare a “housing state of emergency” to quickly enact bold housing policies. To be sure, declaring a state of emergency should not supplant the need for the next administration to work through traditional legislative and rule-making avenues to ensure that the structural issues leading to housing instability are addressed in a more permanent way.

A recent example of a similar declaration was during the COVID pandemic. In 2020, Governor Gavin Newsom declared a state of emergency that allowed his administration to bypass existing state and local laws to streamline the procurement of personal protective equipment and allow localities to halt evictions, among other things. More recently, Governor Newsom issued executive orders in the aftermath of the Palisades and Eaton fires to suspend certain rules around housing review and approvals—such as the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the California Coastal Act, among others—to support rebuilding efforts.^[1]

In theory, a similar approach to the state’s housing crisis could be taken on day one of a new gubernatorial administration. Such a declaration could allow the governor to suspend regulatory statutes that they deem to be an impediment to addressing the state’s housing shortage. This could include suspending certain approval processes—such as CEQA or local entitlements—for some housing development, or quickly making underutilized and excess government-owned land available for housing. An emergency declaration could also allow the governor to immediately suspend rules that increase building costs, such as certain building code requirements. The governor might also be able to ban local impact fees altogether, or eliminate sales tax on construction materials. Of course, such actions must be weighed against their immediate side effects and long-term impacts, such as the strong potential for litigation or pushback from impacted stakeholders, including localities. Moreover, these actions would be temporary and would need to be followed by collaboration with the legislature to ensure more lasting and impactful change. However, actions such as these would make it clear that the next administration takes the state’s housing situation seriously.

Further Executive Orders or Administrative Actions

At the same time, the governor could use existing executive authority to direct state agencies and officials to develop concrete plans within the first 100 days to address the structural challenges limiting the state’s housing supply. Such actions could be supported by embedding newly appointed staff at key agencies to facilitate the goals laid out in any executive orders. Below are examples of areas that Terner Center work has identified could be partially addressed through such executive actions.

1. Catalyze the next generation of California starter homes and smaller-scale housing.

Our research has found that smaller-scale “missing middle” housing—which includes duplexes, fourplexes, cottage courts, etc.—can be a critical part of addressing housing supply and affordability issues in many parts of California. This is especially true as it pertains to homeownership. As fewer Californians have access to existing for-sale homes, supporting missing middle housing can unlock a new supply of starter homes accessible to more families.^[2] The next governor could pursue several paths in the first 100 days to jumpstart the growth of this type of housing.

Design and capitalize a revolving fund for small builders

As our work has shown, developers of missing middle housing can face difficulty obtaining traditional financing for their projects because of underwriting challenges associated with this housing typology, as well as the fact that much of this housing stock is currently built by developers who are themselves relatively small scale with limited experience.

The next governor could address this in part by directing the California Housing Finance Agency (CalHFA) to develop a revolving acquisition, predevelopment, and construction-loan pilot for small (e.g., two- to 10-unit) for-sale housing projects, potentially delivered through Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFIs) and participating lenders. Such a fund could provide gap financing with favorable terms where the private market falls short. The governor could require the development of a term sheet, eligible funding sources, and capitalization proposal within 100 days.

Further action could include issuing a directive to CalHFA to fast track implementation of Proposition 37, if passed, which would enable the State to issue up to $25 billion in bonds to cover the costs of providing second mortgage assistance products for families purchasing newly built homes and create incentives for developers to build for-sale projects.

The next administration could also direct the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to implement changes in CalHome—an existing program that provides grants to local public agencies and nonprofits to help low- and very low-income households become or remain homeowners—that would prioritize eligible duplexes, townhomes, small subdivisions, and accessory dwelling units (ADUs).

Create a simpler residential-code pathway for missing middle housing

Missing middle housing is often subject to the same level of building code standards as much larger structures—an imbalance adding significant costs to missing middle development.^[3] The next governor could address this in part by directing HCD, in consultation with the State Fire Marshal and the California Building Standards Commission, to develop a code and legislative package extending the California Residential Code pathway to small multifamily buildings, which could provide some relief for builders of missing middle projects. HCD would be tasked to develop a scope, safety analysis, and adoption schedule within 100 days, with proposals ready for the earliest lawful code-adoption opportunity.

2. Address permanent supportive housing portfolio challenges.

California has made strides in recent years in addressing the needs of people experiencing homelessness. This progress includes dedicating significant funding to homelessness services and programs—including prevention and interim housing—as well as investing in expanding the supply of permanent supportive housing (PSH). However, rising operating costs, as well as the lack of ongoing funding to provide supportive services, are threatening the success of the PSH model.^[4] Moreover, the state continues to face homelessness funding threats from the federal administration.

Stabilize the State-assisted permanent supportive housing portfolio

Understanding the financial conditions and stressors facing the PSH stock is critical to designing targeted solutions; however, there is currently no comprehensive analysis of the status of the State’s investments in PSH. The next governor could direct HCD, CalHFA, and relevant health and homelessness agencies to collect data and produce a report identifying the regulatory and financial risks facing State-assisted PSH properties. This report could identify the operating deficits, insurance exposure, reserves, vacancies, service-funding gaps, and expiring assistance. The report could also make recommendations for prioritized interventions, including administrative relief and a budget request for gaps that cannot be addressed with existing resources.

Protect the continuity of State efforts to leverage Medi-Cal for supportive services in PSH

California has been a leader in using Medi-Cal, the state’s Medicaid program, to help pay for services that help people exit homelessness and stay housed, such as assistance finding an apartment and ongoing case management to prevent eviction.^[5] Early evidence shows promise,^[6] but federal Medicaid cuts under House Resolution (HR) 1 and state budget pressures are making it more difficult to sustain this model. There is the risk that managed care plans will cut back on optional Community Supports, such as housing navigation and housing tenancy sustaining services.^[7]

The next governor could direct the California Department of Health Care Services (DHCS) to issue guidance clarifying that living in PSH is not by itself grounds for ending services; publish clear eligibility standards that accept nonclinical evidence, such as case manager assessments; update its 2021 guidance on what plans could pay for these services using current cost data; and require plans to give providers longer notice before changing rates or policies. DHCS could also add supportive housing and homelessness service providers to its Stakeholder Advisory Committee, which advises on CalAIM but currently includes neither.^[8] The next governor could also direct CHHA, DHCS, and the Department of Finance to develop a plan for filling gaps between Medi-Cal, county behavioral health funding, and other sources of PSH services funding, including making a determination of whether a dedicated state source of supportive services funding is needed.

3. Create more efficient and effective governance.

The next governor of California will be tasked with enforcing existing housing laws and shepherding current efforts to consolidate the state’s various housing functions into one entity. While progress has been made in toughening rules around local housing policies and goals, more can be done to hold local jurisdictions accountable and support localities that are working in good faith to put pro-housing policies into practice.

Hold localities accountable for falling behind on housing goals

The next governor could direct HCD to promptly undertake a comprehensive review of the Housing Element for any city or county that has fallen substantially behind their Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) targets for housing production. An immediate decertification, or threat of such action, would be a powerful catalyst to force local policymakers to make significant changes to local rules in short order. In cases where this action does not lead to immediate change, the decertification would open up local jurisdictions to a Builder’s Remedy, which would allow developers to immediately file applications for new projects that circumvent existing local rules and obtain vesting rights for those projects.

To identify where such a strategy could be deployed, HCD would need to undertake compliance reviews to identify local jurisdictions that have 1) missed rezoning deadlines, 2) failed to implement required programs, or 3) adopted unlawful constraints subsequent to their certification. When supported by such evidence, the State could promptly issue findings and revoke those jurisdictions’ Housing Element compliance mid-cycle. To then aid jurisdictions in regaining compliance, HCD could offer technical assistance on removing regulatory constraints—for example, encouraging implementation of impact fee holidays or waivers, targeted feasibility reforms (e.g., assessing proper calibration of inclusionary zoning policies or transfer tax rates, etc.) and expedited permitting review.

Support one-stop financing for affordable housing at the state, regional, and local levels

The State has taken commendable steps to consolidate some functions across agencies and to streamline financing sources. The next governor could continue to support these efforts within CHHA. The Governor could also prioritize building a strong relationship with the incoming State Treasurer early on in their administration to harmonize funding across the two constitutional officers and to articulate a systemwide vision for affordable housing production.

Moreover, there remains significant financing fragmentation at the regional and local levels. The next governor could explore with the Treasurer how to ensure that projects that rely solely on local gap financing could be certain to receive LIHTC funding. The next governor could direct HCD and CalHFA to negotiate one or more pilots with qualified regional housing finance agencies—such as the Bay Area Housing Finance Authority (BAHFA) or the Los Angeles County Affordable Housing Solutions Agency (LACAHSA). A pilot could combine state funds—such as from the Multifamily Housing Program or Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities program—and local funds through one application, coordinated underwriting, aligned award calendars, and common closing documents. Such a pilot could come with resources to support necessary increases in staff at these agencies. Ideally, the Treasurer’s tax-credit and bond-allocation committees would be asked to participate in this effort in order for it to be most effective.

Make housing agencies faster and more accountable

Despite concerted efforts to consolidate and streamline through CHHA, there remain many inconsistent, overlapping, or burdensome rules and regulations across state agencies that continue to hinder housing development. To identify these issues, the next governor could direct CHHA to complete a 100-day operational review of HCD and related housing functions in other agencies. This review could identify duplicative reviews, manual work well suited for automation, contracting delays, and avoidable handoffs. This review could also recommend redeployment, consolidation, automation, and vacancy savings where consistent with statutory duties and service targets. These savings could be used to substantiate the issuance of an RFP requesting third-party business consulting services to further aid CHHA in comprehensively restructuring, streamlining, and cutting unnecessary activities and business functions in an amount commensurate with the scope of the challenge and beyond existing support contracts currently in place.

Make pro-housing status reflect implementation and results

The California Prohousing Designation Program was created with the hope that local jurisdictions would voluntarily incorporate policies to boost housing supply in order to receive access to modest pools of funding, as well as the prestige of being labeled pro-housing.^[9] As our work has shown, more tangible incentives are likely needed in order for such a program to achieve its desired result.^[10] The next administration could order HCD to develop updated rules for the Prohousing Designation Program that create stronger incentives for cities and counties to proactively pursue policies that lead to housing growth. Such an incentive could be higher-priority scoring for additional state funding sources, including transportation or infrastructure programs. The program could also include a back-end mechanism to measure housing production as a result of such policy changes,^[11] such as a benchmark of permitting at least 10 percent above the regional rate, using permits relative to housing stock. For local jurisdictions that have already received a pro-housing designation, the next governor could also direct HCD to audit the implementation of their stated policies and compliance with housing law.

Make shared permit-review technology available to local governments

Many California cities and counties have a dearth of planning capacity and expertise—leaving communities with fewer resources to ensure compliance with state law, as well as to move applications through the review and approval process.

The next governor could direct CHHA, HCD, the Department of General Services, and the Department of Technology to launch a housing permit-technology initiative in collaboration with local building officials. Within 100 days, this effort could identify suitable uses for AI automation; establish accuracy, outcome, and security benchmarks; and begin a competitive process for shared contracts or pilots with two or three qualified vendors that can meaningfully reduce building permit review times and also commit to training local building officials. This collaboration could measure review time, error rates, and applicant costs as part of the decision-making process.

4. Reduce the cost to build new homes.

The cost to build housing in California is much higher than in peer states. One study found that the average market-rate apartment in California costs more than twice a similar apartment constructed in Texas on a square-foot basis.^[12] And costs have been rising. Between 2010 and 2025, the average cost per unit for new affordable housing construction projects rose from $510,000 to $660,000, an increase of approximately 30 percent, even after accounting for inflation.^[13] Taking swift action to understand the forces that are driving these increases and could be addressed with quick administrative action should be paramount for the incoming administration.

Require a housing-cost assessment across state government

The next governor could issue an executive order requiring agencies under the governor’s supervision to create a process for identifying new rules and pending practices likely to raise housing costs or delay delivery. This order could also require the establishment of a common assessment of per-home costs, delays, benefits, and less costly alternatives for significant new discretionary actions, coordinated by CHHA and the Department of Finance.

Advance targeted building-code reforms, including for single-stair apartments

The incoming governor could direct HCD, the California Building Standards Commission, and the State Fire Marshal to publish a prioritized package of cost-reducing code proposals within 100 days. These proposals could include explicit height, unit-count, fire-protection, and emergency-access parameters, alongside reforms relevant to small buildings and adaptive reuse. They could include a safe pathway for single-stair apartment buildings where supported by evidence. The proposals could also build on the findings the 2026 State Fire Marshall Single Stair Exit Legislative Report ^[14] rather than commissioning another open-ended study.

Use state housing investments to scale factory-built housing

Industrialized construction—including using prefabricated building elements assembled off-site and other advanced construction methods—has the potential to reduce the cost and time it takes to deliver new homes. The next governor could pursue efforts to support the use of factory-built housing in ways that leverage significant policy advances from the federal 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act and the California State Assembly Select Committee on Housing Construction Innovation’s package of successful bills in 2026. For example, the governor’s first budget proposal could introduce a financial backstop for developers who consider utilizing factory-built homes, as was proposed in AB 2166 (2026). The next governor could also establish a goal that, by the end of their first term, a percentage of newly awarded state-subsidized affordable homes would rely on cost-saving industrialized construction methods to support a significant share of their construction processes and products.

5. Expand affordable housing supply.

Despite billions spent on new construction, the state is still far from Governor Newsom’s stated goal of building 2.5 million homes by 2030. To deliver on this target, the next governor will need to think creatively about how to leverage the state’s limited existing resources, and maintaining and expanding the pace of affordable housing development should be a top priority.

Restart entitled projects with a narrowly targeted financing initiative

The next governor could accelerate construction of homes that are currently entitled but do not pencil out in today’s economic environment by directing CalHFA to identify otherwise viable projects stalled by discrete financing gaps and pilot a financing project to support them. As part of this order, CalHFA could publish a bridge-loan, credit-enhancement, or completion-funding pilot term sheet within 100 days, using existing CalHFA discretionary reserves and proposing additional capital where necessary. This effort could prioritize projects that can start promptly and could require evidence that such State- provided financing is truly additive, rather than supplanting other available funds. The pilot could also require evidence of private risk-sharing and projects meeting enforceable milestones. Such an effort could also include the requirement of an affordability component (e.g. 20 percent of units at 80 percent of Area Median Income) to the extent that this can be achieved without requiring further subsidy.

Secure industry commitment to affordable housing

The next governor could convene California’s business community—such as tech leaders, chipmakers, communications providers, healthcare, and finance companies—to enlist their support in directly addressing the housing affordability challenge in California. In the short-term, that could include soliciting immediate commitments of low-cost capital or credit guarantees, philanthropic grants, and contributions of suitable land—with priority given to investments that accelerate construction and fill financing gaps in otherwise viable projects—all provided via a deployment schedule and with measurable housing outcomes.

California’s next governor will ultimately need to work with the legislature to address the long-term structural issues that have led to the state’s current housing challenges. But the next administration has the authority to take immediate actions that could make a meaningful impact in the short-term. By using the power of the executive in the first 100 days, the governor can set the tone for the conversations needed to address the problem during their full term, while also setting into motion policies to address the state’s long-standing housing supply and affordability challenges.

Endnotes

^[1] Executive Department, State of California. (2025, February 13.) Executive Order N-20-25. Office of Governor Gavin Newsom. Retrieved from: https://www.caloes.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/Legal-Affairs/Documents/Proclamations/2.13.2025-State-Permitting-and-Housing-Laws-EO-N-20-25_-ATTESTED.pdf

^[2] Garcia, D., et al. (2022). Unlocking the Potential of Missing Middle Housing. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/unlocking-missing-middle/

^[3] Garcia, D., et al. (2022). Unlocking the Potential of Missing Middle Housing. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, University of California, Berkeley. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/unlocking-missing-middle/

^[4] Terner Center for Housing Innovation. (2026, June 4). “Permanent Supportive Housing at a Crossroads: Strengthening Resident Outcomes Amid Growing System Challenges.” webinar. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/blog/permanent-supportive-housing-at-a-crossroads-strengthening-resident-outcomes-amid-growing-system-challenges-date-time/

^[5] California Department of Health Care Services. (2025). Community Supports Policy Guide Volume 2: Community Supports to Support Members Experiencing or at Risk of Homelessness. California Department of Health Care Services. Retrieved from: https://www.dhcs.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/DHCS-Community-Supports-Policy-Guide-Volume-2.pdf

^[6] California Department of Health Care Services. (2025). Community Supports or In Lieu of Services, Annual Report. California Department of Health Care Services. Retrieved from: https://www.dhcs.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/10/DHCS-1915b-Annual-Report-on-ILOS-STC-B20-2025.pdf; Reid, C., and Nápoles, T. (2025). Supporting the Implementation of CalAIM within Permanent Supportive Housing. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/supporting-the-implementation-of-calaim-within-permanent-supportive-housing/

^[7] Joyce, D. (2025, October 3). How Massive Federal Cuts Will Create Unprecedented Challenges for Medi-Cal Patients and Providers. California Health Care Foundation. Retrieved from: https://www.chcf.org/resource/how-massive-federal-cuts-will-create-unprecedented-challenges-medi-cal-patients-providers/; Camacho, D. (2026, July 24). What the Data Tell Us About the 730,000 Californians Who Have Left Medi-Cal. California Health Care Foundation. Retrieved from: https://www.chcf.org/blog/2026/07/24/what-data-tell-us-about-730000-californians-who-have-left-medi-cal/; California Health and Human Services Agency. Health and Human Services Budget Summary 2026-27. Retrieved from: https://ebudget.ca.gov/2026-27/pdf/Revised/BudgetSummary/HealthandHumanServices.pdf; California Legislature’s Nonpartisan Fiscal and Policy Advisor. (2025, October 24). Considering Medi-Cal in the Midst of a Changing Fiscal and Policy Landscape. Retrieved from: https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/5083

^[8] California Department of Health Care Services. (n.d.). DHCS Stakeholder Advisory Committee. Retrieved from: https://www.dhcs.ca.gov/dhcs-stakeholder-advisory-committee/

^[9] Ramiller, A., Reid, C., & Metcalf, B. (2023). California’s Prohousing Designation Program: Rewarding City and County Policies that Boost Housing Supply. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from:  https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/prohousing-designation-program-evaluation/

^[10] Manji, S., & Ozer-Bearson, R. (2024). Pro-Housing Designation Programs: How States are Incentivizing Pro-Housing Reform. Terner Center for Housing Innnovation, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/pro-housing-designation-programs-how-states-are-incentivizing-pro-housing-reform/

^[11] Ramiller, A., Reid, C., & Metcalf, B. (2023). California’s Prohousing Designation Program: Rewarding City and County Policies that Boost Housing Supply. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley. Retrieved from: https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/research-and-policy/prohousing-designation-program-evaluation/

^[12] Ward, J., & Schlake, L. (2025). The High Cost of Producing Multifamily Housing in California. RAND. Retrieved from: https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_reports/RRA3743-1.html

^[13] Reid, C. (Forthcoming). Revisiting the Cost of Affordable Housing Production in California. Terner Center for Housing Innovation, UC Berkeley.

^[14] California Fire Chiefs Association. (2026). Cal Fire OSFM – Single Stair Exit Legislative Report. California Fire Chiefs Association. Retrieved from:   https://www.calchiefs.org/news/721411/Cal-Fire-OSFM—Single-Stair-Exit-Legislative-Report.htm