Editorial: Marin housing push not as easy as it may seem

That the county is lagging behind the state’s ambitious mandate to build 3,569 housing units by 2031 is not a surprise.

At least to people who have watched local building plans win approvals and founder, often because the financial conditions aren’t there to get them built.

Sacramento, in establishing unrealistic quotas and streamlining the local approval process, has blamed local political obstructions for Marin’s slow-growth poor record in meeting state-set regional housing numbers.

In an attempt to address California’s housing crisis, Sacramento has rewritten development rules undermining local restrictions and hurdles to spur the construction of new residences.

Local municipalities have approved housing plans to meet the state’s numbers, but that doesn’t mean the housing is getting built.

Developers have submitted plans, some calling for numbers and sizes that wouldn’t stand a chance for approval before the state’s housing push. Some have won local approval, clearing the now-lowered political hurdles. But finances – interest rates, real estate costs and the costs of building in Marin, including local government’s building fees – have hindered moving them from blueprints to construction.

That’s a reality that Sacramento’s quotas fail to reflect. The state’s intent to impose steep financial penalties on municipalities that fall short of meeting their quotas need to reflect that it is going to take more than governmental blessings to actually get housing built.

Countywide, the state’s quotas call for building a 12% increase in local housing by 2031.

That’s a huge change in Marin’s landscape.

In recent decades, Marin has earned a reputation as a slow-growth (if not no-growth) county, pushing housing needed here to surrounding counties, stretching workers’ commutes and driving up home prices.

Now, in order to meet the state’s mandate, the county needs to issue permits for 446 units, both affordable housing and market-rate homes, every year. Since 2023, it has issued permits for 226 residences.

Even the state’s relaxation of local restrictions on housing construction haven’t generated enough applications to meet its quotas.

That might be a case of developers catching up with the new rules.

But we’ve seen local affordable housing projects, the housing our county needs, run into financial hurdles even though they are underwritten by sizable government grants.

The state’s housing quotas may address getting projects through the local permit process, but they don’t address the local financial hurdles that may be standing in the way of developers’ interest in building here or factors that don’t make sense for them to build even after getting local approvals.

Before the state starts issuing penalties, such as further streamlining local planning approvals or disqualifying municipalities from state funding, lawmakers need to take a hard look at the realities of their housing initiatives and local economic hurdles over which the county and cities have little control.