Walters: Newsom relaxed his pro-housing stance for certain liberal locales

"Describing housing as a fundamental human need, Newsom said the shortage breaks my heart and promised that as governor he would lead the effort to develop the 3.5 million new housing units we need by 2025, because our solutions must be as bold as the problem is big. The goal was impossible on its face, and he later backed away from it, terming it aspirational rather than achievable."

"Nevertheless, Newsom has championed policies to remove artificial barriers to new housing, particularly local rules that make development more difficult, or in some cases virtually impossible. His administration has cracked down on cities that ignore housing quotas when planning land use and supported legislation to encourage accessory dwelling units and multiple-family projects on land zoned for single-family homes. If a city resists higher-density projects, developers can invoke a builder's remedy allowing them to proceed without local approval."

"The interactions have shown a curious tendency. The state, dominated by Newsom and other Democrats, is tougher on Republican-leaning communities that resist pressure from Sacramento than on those full of Democratic voters, particularly affluent ones. For instance, Newsom has made an example of heavily Republican Huntington Beach, recently hailing the state Supreme Court's rejection of that city's contention that as a charter city it was partially exempt from pro-housing laws."

Gavin Newsom pledged an ambitious goal of 3.5 million new housing units by 2025, later calling the goal aspirational. The administration pursued policies to remove local barriers to housing, cracking down on cities that ignored housing quotas, promoting accessory dwelling units, and encouraging multifamily projects on single-family zoned land. A builder's remedy lets developers proceed without local approval when cities resist higher-density projects. These measures provoked controversy as local officials balance state pressure with constituent preferences. Enforcement patterns show stronger actions against Republican-leaning communities compared with more permissive treatment of affluent Democratic areas.

Read at www.mercurynews.com