Sacramento Sentinel Issue 3

AB 737 a $10 Billion Dollar Housing Bond for 2026

The Sacramento Sentinel is a civic intelligence system tracking California legislation. To receive future issues, subscribe below.

📡 Sacramento Sentinel — Issue 3

AB 736 — $10 Billion for Housing: Will It Reach the Middle?

California lawmakers are sending a big number to the ballot box.

AB 736—The Affordable Housing Bond Act of 2026—proposes a $10 billion general obligation bond, to be approved by voters in June 2026. It would fund a range of housing programs: rental subsidies, supportive housing, tribal and farmworker housing, and limited first-time homebuyer aid.

On the surface, this looks like a major investment in affordability.

But when you dig deeper, the question becomes:
Does this bill actually help the average Californian? Or just reinforce the two-tiered housing system already in place?

🏠 The Real Housing Crisis

The dominant narrative in Sacramento focuses on homelessness and “deep affordability”—important issues, no doubt. But there’s another crisis quietly hollowing out California’s future:

• Middle-class families are increasingly priced out of homeownership.

• Rents consume 40–60% of income, even for full-time workers.

• “Starter homes” are disappearing, replaced by luxury units or dense rental-only apartments.

• Working Californians: teachers, nurses, mechanics, small business owners are locked in permanent rental limbo with no path to ownership.

AB 736 does little to address this disappearing middle. That’s the real strategic oversight.

📊 Where the $10 Billion Goes

Breakdown of allocations in AB 736:

$5 billion → Multifamily Housing Program (low-income rentals)
$1.7 billion → Supportive housing (permanent housing for formerly unhoused)
$1 billion → First-time homebuyer assistance + CalHome
$800 million → Portfolio Reinvestment (rehab of older subsidized housing)
$500 million → Acquisition of market-rate housing to convert to affordable
$400 million → Infill Infrastructure Grants
$350 million → Farmworker Housing
$250 million → Tribal Housing Program
$200 million → Low-Income Weatherization Program

While these are legitimate needs, only 10% of the total ($1B) goes toward helping Californians buy homes.

And even that help is structured through programs like CalHome and shared equity models that don’t guarantee broad accessibility or long-term ownership.

📜 How This Gets to the Ballot
General obligation bonds like AB 736 must be approved by voters. Here's how it works:

1. The Legislature drafts and passes the bond bill with a two-thirds majority in both houses.

2. The bill specifies a future election date in this case, June 2, 2026.

3. If the Governor signs the bill, it becomes law pending voter approval.

4. The measure appears on the statewide ballot, where a simple majority of voters must say "yes" for the state to issue the bonds.

5. If passed, the state borrows the money (by selling bonds) and starts funding the programs listed in the bill.

So AB 736 isn’t law yet, it’s a proposed public borrowing plan, and you’ll vote on it directly in 2026.

🔍 The Middle is Still Missing

What’s not funded in AB 736:

• Construction of starter homes

• Development incentives for entry-level ownership units

• Regional strategies for middle class citizens

• Any serious attempt to lower ownership costs for the working class

Instead, AB 736 doubles down on rental-focused, developer-driven models—recycling a housing philosophy that may help some, but leaves most stranded.

It’s a bond to “build more housing” but not the kind that builds California’s future.

🕳️ The Oversight Gap: NDAs and Accountability

Issue 1 of the Sentinel covered AB 1370, the bill to ban NDAs in legislative negotiations. It included a major loophole: the ban doesn’t apply to lobbyists, staffers, or consultants. That matters here.

A $10 billion bond, possibly negotiated largely behind closed doors, now moves toward the ballot without full public clarity on how funds will be deployed, who will profit, or what deals were cut.

Until transparency is enforced across all players not just elected officials the public has no way to trace whether bond-funded developments serve real needs or private networks.

💭 Civic Takeaway

Californians are being asked to approve the largest housing bond in recent memory.

But before we vote “yes” on $10 billion, we must ask:

🧭 Will this bring back the starter home? Will it help working families build equity? Or will it reinforce a system that treats the middle like they don’t exist?

This isn’t about rejecting public investment.
It’s about demanding it actually serve the public.
The Sentinel will keep watching. Stay tuned. Stay sharp.

🛡️ Let the people see the game. 🛡️