Q&A with Senator Aisha Wahab
March 25, 2025
Senator Wahab can relate to the issues the community faces regarding affordable housing, because she has walked in their shoes. Placed in foster care at an early age, she was adopted by a young couple in the Bay Area, who gave her a warm and stable upbringing. Yet she knows what it feels like to have housing insecurity, as her self-employed parents lost their business and her home was foreclosed upon. That experience colors her work, and today, she is dedicated to addressing issues that include housing affordability, civic engagement, education and economic inequality.
Elected in 2022, Senator Wahab previously served as the Chair of the Alameda County Human Relations Commission and a Board Member for the nonprofits Afghan Coalition, Abode Services, and Tri-City Volunteers. She has served as an Alameda County Public Health Commissioner, speaker at the Bay Area Women’s March, and was selected to join the White House Roundtable of Afghan-American Leaders. Prior to her career in public service, Aisha worked at non-profits, community organizing, and technology.
You began advocating for affordable housing more than a decade ago, after your family home was foreclosed on during the 2011 financial crisis—and you moved to Hayward to find a more affordable place to live. You will be the new chair of the Senate Housing Committee in this legislative session. What made you seek out this role and what are your priorities for affordable housing in the year ahead?
My priorities as Chair of Senate Housing Committee are affordability and increasing opportunities for homeownership for residents. I have always said that the housing crisis is an affordability crisis. I’m a renter, and I experience first-hand how hard it is to save for a home when you are being financially squeezed on housing costs. I also want to be a homeowner someday. Homeownership is still the American Dream for both Republicans and Democrats alike. In fact, 94% of Americans believe ownership is the American Dream. I’m also very mindful that the area I represent is much different than San Francisco and Berkeley, which has taken up a lot of space in the conversation on how we address housing. I feel all those points of view give me a truly big picture of the housing landscape, where we need to course correct, and where we need to give more consideration.
Prior to your election to the Legislature, you served on the City Council in Hayward, a city with a long history of prioritizing affordable housing (and Eden’s hometown!). Can you share more about how your work on the Council shaped your views on affordable housing?
After serving in local government on Hayward City Council, I feel I bring a unique perspective to how the legislature has addressed housing these past few years. My constituents want housing that allows them to engage in the practicalities of life. Stocking up on groceries once a week is not feasible if we are building housing without parking. Multiple generations live in a single unit, with multiple people driving cars. While walkable neighborhoods are an ideal, they don’t make sense everywhere we build housing. Even in Hayward with two BART stations, the history of planning around those stations does not necessarily translate to being walkable neighborhoods nor everyone being able to walk such as the disabled, the elderly, and more. We need to get creative and think about what we’re building, where, and for whom. I believe in going green and walkability but I also want to ensure options for those not able to walk or with limited transit options. It’s important to consider whether we’re building in areas that truly have the resources people need. I’m really proud of how the City of Hayward has approached its responsibilities to building more housing. They are really pushing to get affordable units in the pipeline, and strong partnerships with organizations like Eden Housing make it easier to hit the numbers we need on affordable housing units. In fact, we built units 100% affordable in the Mission Hills.
After years of support in the state budget, this year’s January spending proposal from the Governor does not include any new funding for successful affordable housing programs, like the Low Income Housing Tax Credit or Multifamily Housing Program. How do you see the Legislature responding? Do you hope to see affordable housing funding restored?
In the January Budget hearing I was very clear about my expectations that we fund LIHTC as we have done the past few years. It is a critical funding source for affordable housing developers. I continue to have concerns about how for-profit developers are using these funds and what happens to units once the affordability covenants expire. I really want to see state subsidized housing be affordable in perpetuity. I know we’ve done work to extend the required years of affordability, but there’s still more we can do to ensure this continues to be mission-driven work.
One major opportunity this year to promote affordable housing are two newly introduced $10 billion housing bonds. These two bills—AB 736 (Wicks) and SB 417 (Cabaldon)—would allow voters to approve new funding for housing on the 2026 ballot. What are your views on these bond proposals and do you think the Legislature will support them?
I authored SB 555, the first social housing bill to be signed into law across the U.S. The state and local governments have the capacity to play a much larger role in our housing infrastructure, and we really need to examine what that looks like for California. I see that as a complement to the housing bonds. Our housing infrastructure clearly needs an infusion of capital funds to help meet our housing goals, and we need to look at how we preserve our existing housing stock. I would also say the bond should be higher to really address these issues. As a former foster youth, I’m also very mindful of prioritizing that population. Foster youth are disproportionately homeless and our dollars could stretch really far in stabilizing that community. I look forward to discussing these thoughts with the authors and find a path forward with them. I’m working to make the 4 actual competing bonds work in one final product that supports our needs across California. I will say that $10 billion for housing is actually very low but given the financial implications, that ballpark is more feasible.
You serve on several other key committees in the Senate, including Appropriations, Budget, Energy, Insurance, and Transportation—all of which oversee critical parts of affordable housing development. What opportunities do you see this year in these other policy areas to expand access to housing for lower-income Californians?
My priority this year is affordability and that’s the lens I’m using as I think about all policy this year. In insurance, are we instituting guardrails to keep insurance affordable? In energy, are we actively addressing the constantly increasing rates? I actually introduced SB 332—the Investor-Owned Utilities Accountability Act—to target this issue. I’m very mindful of how all these things—increased costs of housing, utilities, insurance—are making it harder and harder for everyday Californians. If we can rein in costs, I think that fundamentally changes the affordability landscape for low-income Californians. My goal has always been to help people first and foremost.
There is a lot of uncertainty at the federal level right now—from potential funding freezes and budget cuts to layoffs at HUD at other agencies. What else would you like to see the Legislature do this year to maintain the affordable housing pipeline in California?
The reality is that the budget cycles of the federal government and state government are in parallel. We are legally required to adopt a budget on a timeline and this is where it is risky. I tasked my staff with reading their respective issues areas within Project 2025 following the November election. Everything going on with our federal government right now is tumultuous, and we read the roadmap of what was going to happen. I think there is a lot of opportunity to increase collaboration right now. I’ve had really positive conversations with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority on how they operate and are adapting to the current climate. Funding is the question on everyone’s mind, and I think we have models across the state that we can learn from in order to make our housing systems more nimble while still protecting affordability. There needs to be a clear focus on protecting our most vulnerable communities and keeping people housed.