I've said this before, but here's the problem I have with California: it always chooses the most politically simple way to greener policy.
What's the best way to reduce emissions and increase state revenue? Move the workers to the work. Build high-density, low-income housing in employment centers. Reduce the necessity of cars in daily life. Increased concentration of people equals increased ridership of public transport, which means increased possibility of break-even or profitability. Modern construction means more efficient energy usage.
Ownership of the average car costs $0.619 per mile, using
BTS numbers for 2019. A low-income family with two jobs, two cars, and a commute may be spending upwards of $10k per year on automotive expenses- but if they live near their job and have reliable public transport, that money (minus the cost of public transportation) could be going into savings, towards healthcare, or into the local economy.
The only real problems are that we would have to admit that the American Dream is dead for some members of society (edit: although allowing low-income families to reduce their yearly costs may actually make it easier to own a home), and we would have to deal with lawsuits from the wealthy who are pissed their Hollywood Hills houses no longer have an ocean view.
Byproduct: houses get cheaper to the point that eminent domain might actually be viable to create public transport corridors that break-even. (Second edit: I fucking hate eminent domain but I fucking hate the shortsighted motherfuckers who laid out the state more.)