California Assembly Passes Major Housing Density Bill AB 123
SACRAMENTO, CA – The California State Assembly took a significant step Friday, May 23rd, 2025, approving Assembly Bill 123, a measure designed to dramatically increase housing density across the state by preempting local zoning regulations near key public transit infrastructure. The controversial bill, a priority for housing advocates and state legislators seeking to address California’s deep-seated affordability crisis, garnered sufficient votes for passage, setting the stage for a robust debate in the upper legislative chamber.
Assembly Bill 123, championed by Assemblymember Sofia Garcia (D-Oakland), specifically targets areas within a defined distance of major transit stops, including rail stations, ferry terminals, and high-frequency bus routes. The core mechanism of the bill is its requirement for cities and counties to allow for increased residential density and streamlined project approvals in these transit-rich zones, effectively overriding more restrictive local zoning ordinances that currently limit building heights, unit counts, or parking requirements.
The vote on the Assembly floor concluded with 45 votes in favor and 28 against, demonstrating a clear partisan divide, with most ‘yes’ votes coming from Democrats and most ‘no’ votes from Republicans, joined by a contingent of Democrats representing districts with strong home rule sentiments.
Proponents Argue AB 123 is Crucial for Housing Crisis
Supporters of AB 123, led by Assemblymember Garcia, argue the bill represents a critical, albeit necessary, intervention into local land use authority to confront the state’s severe and persistent housing shortage. California consistently ranks among the least affordable states in the nation, with housing costs, both rental and ownership, far outpacing wage growth for many residents. Proponents contend that decades of restrictive zoning, often in desirable, transit-served locations, have artificially constrained housing supply, driving up prices and exacerbating inequality.
Assemblymember Garcia and her allies emphasize that building more housing, particularly in areas where residents can rely on public transit, is essential not only for affordability but also for meeting the state’s climate goals by reducing reliance on automobiles. They highlight that AB 123 could unlock development potential in areas already equipped with infrastructure, reducing pressure on greenfield development and potentially revitalizing urban cores.
“California’s housing crisis demands bold action,” stated a representative for Assemblymember Garcia during the floor debate. “For too long, exclusionary zoning has locked people out of opportunity, forcing them into long commutes and draining their pocketbooks. AB 123 is a targeted solution that leverages our transit investments to create the housing we desperately need, ensuring more Californians can live near where they work and where their children go to school.”
The bill’s proponents also suggest that increasing density near transit can foster more vibrant, walkable communities and support the ridership necessary to sustain and expand public transit systems.
Opponents Raise Concerns Over Local Control and Infrastructure
The passage of AB 123 was met with strong opposition from various groups, most notably the League of California Cities, which represents municipal governments across the state. Opponents voice significant concerns that the bill represents an unprecedented overreach by the state legislature into local planning authority, eroding the ability of cities and residents to shape their own communities.
The League of California Cities argues that while increasing housing supply is necessary, AB 123’s state-mandated approach bypasses essential local input and fails to adequately consider the unique characteristics and infrastructure limitations of individual communities. Critics contend that simply allowing more density without corresponding investments in water supply, sewer systems, roads, schools, and public safety could overwhelm existing infrastructure, degrading the quality of life for current residents.
“This bill is a direct assault on local control and the principles of community self-determination,” stated a spokesperson for the League of California Cities following the vote. “Our cities understand their local needs and infrastructure capabilities better than Sacramento does. AB 123 imposes a top-down mandate that ignores these realities and provides no funding or plan to address the significant infrastructure deficits it will create. Building housing is more than just changing zoning codes; it requires careful planning and investment that respects the local context.”
Some opponents also express fears about the potential for displacement of existing residents, particularly in lower-income communities, as new, higher-density development increases land values. They argue the bill lacks sufficient tenant protections or affordable housing requirements to ensure that the new units will be accessible to low- and middle-income families.
What’s Next for AB 123
With its passage in the Assembly, AB 123 now moves to the California State Senate. The bill will likely be referred to relevant policy committees, such as Transportation, Housing, and Local Government, where it will undergo further hearings and potential amendments. The debate in the Senate is expected to mirror the divisions seen in the Assembly, with fierce lobbying from both housing advocacy groups and local government associations.
The path through the Senate could be challenging, as similar density-focused bills have faced hurdles in the past due to concerns about local control and implementation logistics. If AB 123 successfully navigates the Senate committee process and passes a full floor vote in that chamber, it would then proceed to the Governor’s desk for signature or veto.
The bill’s journey through the legislature highlights the intense, ongoing struggle in California to reconcile the urgent need for housing production with long-standing traditions of local land use authority. All eyes are now on the State Senate as the next critical stage for this consequential piece of housing legislation.
