To achieve the greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction targets that are required by California's global warming legislation (AB32), the state of California has determined that recent growth trends in vehicle miles traveled (VMT) must be curtailed. In recognition of this, Senate Bill 375 (SB375) requires regional governments to develop land use and transportation plans or Sustainable Community Strategies (SCSs) that will achieve regional GHG targets largely though reduced VMT. Although the bill requires such a plan, it does not require local governments to adopt general plans that conform to this plan. In California, it is local, not regional, governments that have authority over land development decisions. Instead, SB375 relies on democratic participatory processes and relatively modest financial and regulatory incentives for SCS implementation. As a result, it is quite possible that some local governments within a region may decide not to conform to their SCS. In this study, a spatial economic model (PECAS) is applied in the Sacramento region (California, U.S.) to understand what the economic and equity consequences might be to jurisdictions that do and do not implement SCS land use plans in a region. An understanding of these consequences provides insight into jurisdictions' motivations for compliance and thus, strategies for more effective implementation of SB375.