It’s no secret that San Francisco is falling short of its state-mandated housing goals, having permitted only 5% of what new state requirements demand. But many cities across the Bay Area are doing worse, and struggling to hit just 1% or 2%.

Under pressure from ambitious new state housing requirements, the city of San Francisco passed a 2023 Housing Element plan that purported it would create 82,000 new housing units by the year 2031. Now two-and-a-half years after the passage of that plan, SF is falling embarrassingly short on its progress, and has permitted only about 4,000 units. That’s roughly just 5% of what is required, more than a quarter of the way into an eight-year plan, so that is certainly not good progress.  

That 5% figure comes from a Chronicle analysis of Bay Area cities’ progress toward those same housing goals mandated by the California Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA). Oakland is doing slightly better (but still dismally!) at 6.9% of the required units permitted, and San Jose is at 8.3%. But that same Chronicle analysis found that many Bay Area cities are lagging even further behind on the number of units they’re legally required to permit by 2031.

How much further behind? Per the Chronicle's analysis, Brisbane, Moraga, and Foster City are all at less than 1% of their state-mandated goals for 2031. Clayton, Daly City, Fairfax, Hercules, Millbrae, and Walnut Creek are all at less than 2%. In all, 29 Bay Area cities are lagging further behind SF on meeting their housing goals.

State lawmakers in Sacramento have passed many laws in the last two years to streamline housing approvals and eliminate the appeals that can hold these projects up. But Walnut Creek community development director Erika Vandenbrande points out to the Chronicle that these efforts are “overshadowed by the economics of it all,” that is, developers simply are not building because of skyrocketing construction costs, high interest rates, and uncertainty over the Trump tariffs.

We will note that a couple standout municipalities are doing pretty well on their progress, and are well-positioned to meet their mandated goals. Santa Rosa is at 38% of its goal, American Canyon is at 56%, unincorporated Napa County has permitted nearly 70% of its required units. But that’s a short list, and cities who are not on that ‘good list’ are struggling to entice developers to build.

“I think that it’s absolutely true that cities are at the whim of whether developers choose to entitle projects within their jurisdictions,” UC Berkeley Terner Center for Housing Innovation director of research and policy Sarah Karlinsky told the Chronicle. “But there are also things that cities can do to make it more or less challenging to secure those entitlements.”

One thing meant to bolster SF’s housing production was state Senator Scott Wiener’s SB423 bill. That bill kicked in during July 2024, singling out San Francisco among all California cities, and mandating that any legally compliant proposed housing projects here be automatically rubber-stamped. (That is, no longer subject to SF Planning Commission review, and therefore, cannot be appealed to or rejected by the Board of Supervisors.) Wiener spiked the football over that one, but a year later, it has had dreadfully little effect.  

The Chronicle reports that “only a handful of SB423 projects were submitted” in 2024, though we do not have 2025 data. Still, looking at this entire Bay Area report on the progress toward meeting housing goals, it’s clear that efforts to supposedly “streamline approvals” and “cut red tape” might play well for lawmakers. But they are not spurring any notable increase in developers wanting to actually commit and build something.

Related: Newsom Signs Major Rollback of CEQA Reviews, With a Big Carve-Out for Big Tech [SFist]

Image: Daly City Government via Facebook