Folsom homeowners and residents face a consequential choice this November that will directly affect neighborhood development, property values, and the city's approach to a mounting housing challenge. The 5th District race between incumbent Anna Rohrbough and challenger Justin Hurst centers on how Folsom should address a significant affordable housing shortfall—a policy debate with tangible implications for every property owner in the city.
The stakes are clear: State and regional officials determined Folsom needed approximately 2,200 very-low-income and 1,300 low-income housing units under its 2021 regional housing allocation. By August 2025, the city had built just 225 very-low-income units and 347 low-income units—roughly 10% and 27% of required totals, respectively. This gap isn't just a bureaucratic concern; it shapes where and how future development occurs, affecting infrastructure demands, school capacity, and neighborhood character across Folsom.
"We are mandated by the state to reach these housing needs," Rohrbough told The Sacramento Bee. The incumbent emphasizes that affordable housing development should proceed cautiously and be matched with adequate infrastructure, particularly transportation and other services. She points to practical constraints: "The thing is that we can't build affordable housing unless we have a developer willing to build affordable housing," she told The Sacramento Bee.
Rohrbough highlights the city's recent $7.1 million purchase of 6.69 acres near East Bidwell Street, Oak Avenue Parkway and Folsom Lake College as evidence of proactive planning. Folsom reportedly outbid 10 other affordable-multifamily developers to acquire the Lakeside-area property. The incumbent argues that city ownership gives Folsom control over a future workforce, student or other affordable-housing project, allowing officials to shape development rather than simply reacting to private proposals.
Hurst agrees that infrastructure and transportation should accompany new housing, especially projects south of Highway 50. But the challenger advocates for a more assertive development strategy. "I would also be in favor ... of possibly revisiting the structure of our in-lieu fees," Hurst told The Sacramento Bee, suggesting the city should examine whether current policies inadvertently discourage affordable construction.
The challenger supports working with developers to expand "missing middle" housing, including condominiums and other medium-density options for middle-income residents. "But I also think it's working proactively with developers to prioritize projects that really cater towards the missing middle," Hurst told The Sacramento Bee. He argues that affordable housing should be distributed throughout the city and has criticized repeatedly postponing it to future developments—a pattern he suggests has contributed to Folsom's current shortfall.
The housing debate reflects broader resident concerns. About 46% of 280 respondents in Folsom's 2021 Housing Element survey said housing was not affordable in the city. For homeowners, the candidates' differing approaches carry practical implications: Rohrbough's infrastructure-first stance may mean slower development but potentially less strain on roads and services, while Hurst's proactive developer engagement could accelerate construction but require careful planning to maintain neighborhood quality.
The Nov. 3, 2026, election gives Folsom voters direct influence over housing policy at a critical juncture. With the city facing state mandates and significant unmet housing targets, the next council member's approach will shape development patterns, infrastructure investments, and neighborhood growth for years. Property owners should consider how each candidate's housing philosophy aligns with their vision for Folsom's future—whether prioritizing measured growth with infrastructure safeguards or pursuing more aggressive development to close the affordability gap. The choice will affect not just housing statistics, but the lived experience of every Folsom neighborhood.