Several gubernatorial candidates participated in a live debate last Tuesday night, aired in California’s two largest media markets—the Bay Area and Los Angeles. The debate provided an early look at how candidates are approaching clean energy and transportation issues. Steve Hilton, political advisor and commentator, was the only Republican candidate to appear; his GOP rival, Chad Bianco, was unavailable due to a scheduling conflict. Other participants included Matt Mahan (D), Mayor of San Jose; Tom Steyer (D), investor and environmental advocate; Antonio Villaraigosa (D), former Mayor of Los Angeles; Tony Thurmond (D), California State Superintendent of Public Instruction; Xavier Becerra (D), former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services and California Attorney General; and Betty Yee (D), former California State Controller.
During the debate, candidates were asked two central issues on how to address California’s high gas prices and whether the state should proceed with plans to phase out gas‑powered vehicles. Below is a summary of their responses, along with feedback from the live audience poll.
All candidates acknowledged that high gas prices disproportionately impact low‑income and working households, though their proposed solutions varied.
Steve Hilton emphasized increasing in‑state oil and gas production and reducing environmental regulations that he said have contributed to refinery closures without achieving corresponding environmental benefits. He noted that California imports a substantial amount of its oil, increasing both costs and emissions, and argued the state should rely more on California‑produced products while oil and gas remain in demand.
Matt Mahan focused on holding utilities accountable, expanding the use of community choice aggregators, and requiring utilities to upgrade the electrical grid. He stressed that California cannot transition away from fossil fuels without affordable and reliable alternatives, calling for a balanced, long‑term energy plan.
Tom Steyer argued that a small number of companies are effectively holding the state hostage on gas prices. He acknowledged that lowering prices could involve increased imports in the short term but emphasized the benefits of a long‑term shift to zero‑emission vehicles, noting their lower lifetime costs once upfront prices are addressed.
Tony Thurmond proposed tax relief for working Californians to help offset rising fuel costs. At the same time, he supported keeping refineries open while rapidly expanding charging infrastructure to accelerate ZEV adoption, stating that “two things can be true at once.”
Antonio Villaraigosa said California has overregulated refineries, contributing to higher gas prices. While supportive of an electric future, he warned that the state lacks the necessary grid capacity and infrastructure today and advocated expanding the use of E‑15 fuel as a near‑term option.
Betty Yee supported income‑based tax credits to help address high gas prices and highlighted the disproportionate impact of current policies on low‑income communities. She emphasized the need for transitional fuels, like renewable diesel, noting that the energy transition will not happen overnight.
Xavier Becerra stressed that California’s energy transition must be stable, affordable, and paced to avoid leaving working families behind, calling for continued support of wind, solar, and a diverse mix of energy sources.
According to those who participated in the live audience poll, Hilton and Mahan were viewed as delivering the strongest answers on gas prices.
Candidates were also given a rapid‑response opportunity to state their position on whether California should continue its plan to phase out new gas‑powered vehicle sales by 2035. Becerra, Thurmond, Yee, and Steyer expressed support for continuing the policy. Hilton and Villaraigosa opposed the continued phase‑out, while Mahan took a conditional position, saying he would support it but the technology should be ready and affordable.
While many candidates expressed openness to a sustainable, clean energy transition that includes a mix of fuels and resources, none directly addressed heavy‑duty truck applications or the role of clean combustion technologies like renewable natural gas (RNG). This gap in focus is not surprising, given the nuisance of the issue, but nonetheless important given the impact of these solutions to California’s economy and emissions goals.