Can Prop. 1 Fix California’s Deepening Housing Crisis?

A California household needs to earn about $109,812 annually to afford a modest two-bedroom rental. And buying a median-priced, single-family home requires an annual income of $228,400, according to the National Low Income Housing Coalition’s 2026 Out of Reach report and the California Association of Realtors’ second-quarter 2026 Housing Affordability Index.

Just 19% of California households could afford a $916,750 median-priced home in the second quarter of this year, the Realtors association reported. Meanwhile, the rental estimate assumes a modest two-bedroom home costs about $2,745 a month, depending on the region.

In San Francisco — where rent and housing is the highest in the nation, driven by the AI tech boom — a family income of under $325,000 is considered low enough to receive subsidized day care, according to a report by The New York Times. Renting just a 1 bedroom in the Tenderloin — the lowest income portion of the City — requires an income of between $72,000 and $109,000, according to data by Renthop.

Bond revenue

Against that backdrop, California voters are currently weighing in on Prop. 1, on the state’s midterm ballot. Votes must be cast by Nov. 3.

Prop 1 would authorize $11.25 billion in bonds for affordable housing and veterans’ homeownership programs. Supporters say the investment could help build and preserve homes for lower-income families, but also acknowledged it would not resolve the state’s housing crisis on its own.

“I am not going to make the case that Prop 1 solves all of our housing problems,” said Chione Fleagle, executive director of Housing California, a statewide nonprofit supporting the measure. “This is a tremendous problem that is going to need many, many solutions.”

At an American Community Media briefing Oct. 13, Fleagle and three other housing advocates and researchers outlined the measure’s proposed uses, its potential benefits and the challenges that would remain even if voters approve the measure.

Housing challenges would remain

The bond would direct money toward affordable rental housing, homeownership assistance, farmworker and student housing, preservation of existing affordable homes, and housing-related infrastructure. A separate allocation would support veterans’ home loans.

The new funding could help move projects forward that have completed local planning and approval processes but remain stalled because developers cannot secure the financing needed to build, said Fleagle. She cited an estimated 40,000 affordable homes in a shovel-ready pipeline.

The measure would provide $5.1 billion for the Multifamily Housing Program, which finances affordable rental housing, including homes for extremely low-income households. Other allocations would support permanent supportive housing, farmworker housing, student housing and programs to help eligible households buy homes.

Rental housing

Jessica Hitchcock, managing director of research at the California Housing Partnership, said the bond could help address the gap between household incomes and home prices through down-payment and closing-cost assistance.

In Fresno County, for example, a four-person household earning $80,000 might afford a home priced at about $240,000, while the county’s median home price is around $400,000, Hitchcock said. Assistance could help bridge some of that difference, although it would not make homeownership accessible to everyone.

The partnership estimates the bond could help fast-track affordable rental housing and support homeownership for thousands of households. Those figures are projections from an organization supporting the measure, and the ultimate results would depend on how funds are allocated and whether projects secure additional financing.

Hitchcock also emphasized preserving existing affordable housing. Older properties may need significant repairs, while some homes face the expiration of affordability restrictions. Without investment, residents can face displacement as rents rise or buildings shift to market-rate housing.

Farmworkers, immigrants are rent burdened

Francisco Duenas, executive director of Housing Now, a statewide tenant and grassroots coalition, said housing instability affects communities differently. Farmworkers in expensive agricultural regions, immigrants, older adults living on fixed incomes and multigenerational families can face particular pressure from high housing costs.

When families spend a disproportionate share of their income on rent, Duenas said, they have less money for health care, education and other necessities. Preserving existing affordable homes, he added, can be less expensive than building new ones and can help prevent displacement.

Housing the unhoused

Ryan Smith, president and CEO of St. Joseph Center, a Los Angeles nonprofit providing housing and social services, said the bond could also help people move from homelessness into stable housing.

“Getting someone into housing is a major milestone and a first step, and keeping them there is just as important,” Smith said.

Permanent supportive housing combines an affordable home with services such as case management, mental health care, substance-use treatment and assistance accessing benefits. Smith said outreach workers can connect people living on the streets with services, but without an affordable place to live, many remain in shelters or outdoors.

“The solution to homelessness is housing,” Smith said, adding that Proposition 1 could help bridge the gap between outreach and permanent housing. His organization supports the measure.

Cost to state: 1/2 billion per year

The investment would come with a long-term fiscal commitment. The nonpartisan Legislative Analyst’s Office estimates the state would pay about $500 million to $600 million annually for roughly 25 years to repay the $10 billion housing portion of the bond, using general-fund revenue. The separate $1.25 billion veterans’ loan program is structured to be repaid through veterans’ payments. Voters would authorize borrowing, not a new tax, but the housing bond’s repayment costs would compete with other state spending priorities.

Fleagle said the measure should be viewed as an immediate source of funding, not a promise to make housing affordable for every Californian.

“This bond is not going to drive down housing prices for all Californians who are struggling to make ends meet,” she said. Achieving that broader goal, she added, “would require billions of dollars of investment every year over a 10-year cycle.”

Fleagle reiterated that Prop. 1 alone could not solve California’s housing crisis, but could be one step in a longer sustained solution. “We need Prop 1 today to just help hold the line, keep building new homes, keep people supported, and we need better rent control policies.

The state also needs longterm revenue fixes, and thinking about how to increase the supply of housing more efficiently, she said..

SUNITA SOHRABJI

ACoM Health Editor Sunita Sohrabji is a veteran reporter, most recently covering the Indian American community for India-West newspaper. She has received 15 local and national awards for excellence in journalism.