A new law intended to boost housing production up and down the state has aroused worries that local governments may lose control over what gets built in their own cities—but it’s not yet clear whether the legislation will lead to a rush of new construction.

The law, S.B. 35, is on the books regardless of whatever Long Beach decides to do with its own land use policies. City planners have put forth a draft proposal that, among other things, seeks to accommodate population growth by allowing denser and taller buildings, but substantial opposition from Long Beach residents is likely to pressure City Hall into changes.

People attending recent town hall meetings related to Long Beach officials’ plans also expressed worries over the law, but S.B. 35 applies to all cities, not just Long Beach. The recently-signed law doesn’t alter California cities’ planning and zoning policies, but it does create a mechanism to fast-track approvals of infill multifamily housing developments in cities where construction is not keeping up with official projections of housing demand.

“Whether S.B. 35 makes a big difference on a city like Long Beach, it’s not really clear,” said Brian Ulaszewski, executive director of City Fabrick, a nonprofit design studio in Long Beach. “Part of it is to expedite the development process, and that can be really fast or really slow, depending on the community.”

Although it’s conceivable that S.B. 35 may accelerate approvals in jurisdictions where processes are slow, Ulaszewski observed that another aspect of S.B. 35 may give developers pause. The law also mandates developers commit to paying prevailing wage rates set by state government.

“You have to ask yourself, is the cost increase worth the time that you’re saving,?” Ulaszewski asked.

The recently-signed law also contains provisions supporting construction of housing to be offered at prices below market rates.

S.B. 35 is one of 15 housing-related bills that Gov. Jerry Brown signed in late September. In Long Beach, Government Affairs Manager Diana Tang and Planning Bureau Manager Linda Tatum had the task of analyzing the new legislation. The prevailing wage mandate, along with other complex requirements contained within S.B. 35, means Long Beach officials see a high threshold for developers to take advantage of a streamlined approval process.

Many California cities, including Lakewood, Paramount and Signal Hill, officially opposed S.B. 35.

“While the housing shortage in California is a real and complex problem that needs to be addressed in a variety of ways, S.B. 35 represents an overreach by the State that essentially preempts local land use authority,” Paramount spokesman Chris Callard said in an email. “If a developer were to invoke the provisions of SB 35, for example, there would be no public hearings or environmental review for their project, which would take away transparency and public discussion in the decision process.”

Artesia’s planning director, Okina Dor, is also convinced S.B. 35 is poor policy. He said in a telephone interview that the law gives unscrupulous developers a way to rush large projects or low-income housing without appropriate scrutiny.

“Can you imagine the impact of 50 units?,” he asked. “Traffic circulation, parking, noise, greenhouse gases and everything else that comes without the CEQA process review that we have to do.”

CEQA is the California Environmental Quality Act, a law that sometimes requires comprehensive environmental reviews to be conducted before new construction can go up.

S.B. 35’s streamlining process are tied to what’s called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, which involves attempting to figure out how many housing units a given locality may need. Southern California Associated Governments, a regional planning agency, develops the assessment, subject to state government approval, for most of Southern California. Official housing needs projections also contain forecasts for how much housing may be needed for residents of different income levels.

The current assessment covers the 2014-21 period. In a few cases, like Bellflower and Compton, the projections are in the single digits. Projections call for each city to add a mere two dwelling units during the planning period.

At the other extreme, projections call for Los Angeles to add about 82,000 residences during the planning period. Long Beach, the county’s second most-populous city, is expected to add 7,000-plus residences over the course of the same time frame. As of the end of 2016, Long Beach would need about 5,900 more dwelling units to keep up with the forecast.

Prior to S.B. 35, however, there hasn’t been much in the way of consequences for cities when actual development doesn’t keep up with projections. After the law goes into effect, if a city is falling behind on projected housing needs at a given income level, a developer would may be able to invoke the law’s streamlining provisions, according to a summary from the office of state Sen. Scott Wiener, D-San Francisco.

“We’re past the point where communities can choose whether to create housing or whether to opt out,” Wiener said in a statement issued in mid-September, after the Assembly passed his bill. “All communities need to participate in creating the housing we so desperately need.”

Among Long Beach area lawmakers, state Sens. Ricardo Lara, D-Bell Gardens, and Janet Nguyen, R-Garden Grove, voted to pass the bill. So did Assembly Speaker Anthony Rendon, D-Lakewood.

Assembly members Cristina Garcia, D-Bell Gardens, and Patrick O’Donnell, D-Long Beach, voted against the bill.

S.B. 35 begins to go into effect on Jan. 1, 2018. The law is scheduled to sunset on the first day of 2026.