So they were looking to do something statewide, to put everyone on a level playing field.
For example, look at the reaction to Uber building a new HQ in Oakland, which they ultimately abandoned[1]
> Residents were not as thrilled. After watching the rapid gentrification and rising real estate costs in neighboring San Francisco, many feared Uber would accelerate similar trends in Oakland. The area was already struggling to hold onto its own history as a diverse, working-class area known for activism while absorbing a wave of wealthy new residents.
[1] https://money.cnn.com/2017/08/25/technology/business/uber-oa...
Boston University's Katherine Levine Einstein explains the dysfunctional politics behind America's housing crisis.
https://www.amazon.com/Neighborhood-Defenders-Participatory-...
"Since the collapse of the housing market in 2008, demand for housing has consistently outpaced supply in many US communities. The failure to construct sufficient housing - especially affordable housing - in desirable communities and neighborhoods comes with significant social, economic, and environmental costs. This book examines how local participatory land use institutions amplify the power of entrenched interests and privileged homeowners. The book draws on sweeping data to examine the dominance of land use politics by 'neighborhood defenders' - individuals who oppose new housing projects far more strongly than their broader communities and who are likely to be privileged on a variety of dimensions. "