Arthur Goncalves is a 2025 Ronald O. Loveridge Summer Fellow and a political science major at the University of California, Riverside. He can be reached via LinkedIn.

Asm. Diane Papan’s political aspirations began at the local level on the San Mateo City Council. Like many city officials, she was drawn to local government because she wanted to make an immediate impact on her community. (Her first campaign tagline? “Make sewers sexy.”)

When Papan moved to state office, she found that her time in local government had served her well. She had a better understanding of the impact and unintended consequences that state-level actions could have on individual communities. She also found that things moved faster. A lot faster. We sat down with her to talk about why she ran for office, a key bill she’s been working on, and her advice for fellow elected officials during this unique political landscape.

Our conversation has been edited for length and clarity.

Arthur Goncalves: What inspired you to run for local office?

Asm. Diane Papan: I always wanted to run, but I was chicken. As I went on in life, I realized that I had a good skill set for the job, so I finally ran. What inspired me? The decisions you make really affect you and your neighbors. If you’re going to go into public service, why not do something where there can be an immediate impact on the people that you’re serving?

What was it like being mayor?

Being mayor is an opportunity to conduct the symphony of voices. You usually have some understanding of where your colleagues are going to be on an issue. As mayor, you can call on certain voices at just the right time, which can lower the temperature on a particular issue or create enough passion to get it over the finish line. Everyone gets an opportunity to speak, but it’s about what order you have them speak. The order of things can affect the outcome of a decision. And I felt like I made a difference with how I conducted the symphony.  

What made you want to jump from local government to state government?

When I first ran for office, my tagline was: “I’m going to make sewers sexy.” A lot of what we do in local government is the infrastructure that affects our everyday lives — whether it’s streets, the ability to flush the toilet, the park, the library — all those things come into one’s daily life. I thought that meshed nicely with my background and what I did in my past life as a public works lawyer. And now fast forward into the state Legislature. While one does not need a law degree to be a member of the Legislature, I felt like it was an opportunity to really impact laws. Oftentimes, when you’re litigating or implementing a state law at the local level, you might be stuck with a certain law that doesn’t work.  

Another thing that drew me to the state was how local governments are constantly being mandated by the state, without the assistance to effectuate those mandates. When I got to Sacramento, I could tell if someone served in local government without looking at their resumes. You tend to have a broader view of the impacts of what you’re doing if you’ve served in local government first. I think it’s served me well to understand what local governments go through when considering a piece of legislation. We need to be very careful about the unintended consequences of some of what we do at the state level.

How did local constituent engagement, which looks different than state-level politics to an extent, impact how you navigate the political dynamics in Sacramento?

One must always stay in tune with their district so as to effectively translate service to the district into action in Sacramento. I spend a lot of time having one-on-one conversations, which is a very different way of going about things. I do a lot of office hours, as it provides for one-on-one discussions. My very responsive local staff come to me with things that they are involved in. Local electeds will tell me what their communities are going through. I also have meetings with city managers and council members, and ask people at events, “What’s going on?” I do whatever I can to get information and stay informed.   

That feedback and connection inform my positions but also much of my office’s work, which is not always strictly legislative. Advocating with state agencies, resolving issues, and connecting stakeholders is a very big part of what we do. 

What is the one thing you wish that current city officials knew about politics and policymaking at the state level?

At the state level, it just goes a lot faster. I realized things move fast, but you learn to be very nimble. It’s very fluid, very quick. When local cities or other agencies are seeking legislative remedies to address local challenges, it is critical that they plan early, think through likely hurdles, build alliances, and have backup plans. The legislative process is fast and furious: Councils and local bodies that meet once or twice a month need to be equally nimble to meet the moment. 

How should city officials work with their state representatives in response to actions from the federal administration?

I admire my colleagues from Southern California for their efforts to collaborate with local stakeholders and develop legislation in response to the feds. We are working hand in hand to do whatever we can, and a lot of that is emanating from Southern California and what they’ve been going through.    

I am tremendously uncomfortable with what the federal government has done, and I am deeply concerned about the ongoing impacts to California in particular. So, it’s all-hands-on-deck. The fact that we’re even having this discussion about federal law enforcement is tremendously alarming. But that extends to healthcare, public education, immigration, emergency response. Everything. 

You’re currently working on AB 650, which would improve the housing element review process by encouraging cities to begin planning earlier and providing greater clarity to a difficult and complex process. What made you want to draft this bill?

The nightmare that is the housing element process is what made me want to draft the bill. What bothered me the most was that cities were spending an inordinate amount of money to feed the beast that is the Department of Housing and Community Development. Cities don’t have a lot of money lying around and are being crushed by having to hire private consultants to try to get the perfect housing element.

Also, cities don’t build housing. Yes, we have a housing element, but that’s a very fluid document that’s not set in stone. When I left city council, there were over 3,000 units that had been approved in San Mateo that still had not been built. Is that something the city did? Or is that due to interest rates? It’s interest rates.   

Housing is very complicated. I don’t know if we’re ever going to fully solve our housing challenges. I just felt like cities were bearing the brunt of the blame. Yes, we have bad actors, but the vast majority of cities are exceptional players in all of this.  

You mentioned previously that one of your goals in the Assembly was to build more affordable housing. Do you feel AB 650 will help you achieve that?

AB 650 is meant to help ensure that housing elements can be completed in a reasonable way. After years of wrangling, we still have many cities without approved elements, and the next cycle is just around the corner. This cannot be the way we do business. I want to see the process improved, housing elements approved in a timely manner, and then cities can focus their efforts on making housing happen, save the enormous amounts of money spent on consultants to process housing elements, and have the bandwidth and the resources to explore innovative approaches. Right now, the process isn’t working, and we’re not seeing new housing as a result.  

Is there anything else you’d like to say about the nexus of local and state politics?

All politics is local. The nexus between state legislative action and what happens on the ground is becoming ever more entangled. Much of my work is directly tied to that relationship — whether it be on housing, water, permitting, or state budget issues like the vehicle license fee backfill issue my county faces every year. That requires local residents and leaders to stay involved. I’m always impressed with what is done at the local level, and I do see a lot of my job at the state level is to help facilitate what happens in cities.