Photo courtesy of newtimesslo.com

  On March 15, San Luis Obispo’s five county supervisors voted (4-1) to repeal the county’s inclusionary housing program, forming another obstacle for the county’s aim of creating more affordable housing for the families of low income San Luis Obispo High School students.

 “I disagree with the decision. Although it may not be accomplishing all that it hoped, to abolish a program that is making progress, whether that be much progress or not much, is not the best plan, especially without another option to employ,” said junior Kyran Blau.

  The ordinance created two sources of increased affordable housing: it forced developers to make a small number of affordable units within their projects or developers pay a set price per square foot, around eight dollars, that goes to affordable housing production. The second option created a stream of funds for nonprofit developers who want to make livable housing for low-income families in SLO County.

  The county’s report on the program’s benefits finds that the fees on developers have generated between $130,961 and $816,235 from 2017 to 2021. Though the amount of affordable housing created yearly varies, the program has shown success in increasing the supply of these housing units.

  Yet, the main complaint of opponents to the program is that it generates little revenue and only places a burden on developers. 

  “I think for the housing industry to carry the complete weight of all of this is something that’s unfair and I can’t support,” said District 3 Supervisor Dawn Ortiz-Legg who voted against the program.

  On the other hand, the program has provided for almost 2,200 affordable units and many are disappointed in the county’s decision.

   In order to replace the program, the county is now looking to other potentially viable solutions. Some have proposed another housing bond measure to finance cheap homes.

  “I think that it would be better to place the burden upon the buyers instead, like what was planned with the bond measure that faded during the early COVID crisis of 2020. Forcing developers to pay only helps a little, because the ones who can afford to expend that money are the ones who make large properties, of whom are already the only companies paying with the inclusionary housing act,” said Blau.

  As the county continues to try and solve problems of skyrocketing housing prices and homelessness, it will become imperative that the supervisors find an alternative whether that be another bond measure or not.