"It's More Than Money: The Democratic Side of Inclusionary Zoning"

by Andrea Potter, President, The Center for Democracy in Action

March 16, 2006

The public conversation about Inclusionary Zoning is troubling.

By now, most Madison residents know that Inclusionary Zoning is a 2 year-old ordinance that has been advanced as a way to simultaneously encourage the creation of affordable housing as well as to help the city achieve healthy and diversified neighborhoods. While still in its infancy in Madison, Inclusionary Zoning has shown great success in other U.S. cities that have adopted it as a means to creating better housing opportunities for people of moderate income and more integrated communities for all citizens.

Although Inclusionary Zoning as a concept didn't originate in Madison, it very well could have. The values under-girding Inclusionary Zoning are ones that Madisonians have always been proud of and indeed eager to embrace and advance: democratic values that include the common good, a recognition of diversity's benefits and the justness of creating expanded opportunities for citizens. Conversely, Inclusionary Zoning recognizes and works against those things which threaten Madison neighborhoods: segregation, isolation, class disparity in housing opportunity, economic balkanism, and the chaos and division that exclusivity can breed.

Madison has an enduring progressive tradition of balancing and even melding the common good with enlightened self-interest to find creative and innovative solutions to social, political and economic problems, and to advance the rights and abilities of all its citizens. Our city has an expansive and optimistic view of the future. Madison prides itself on its commitment to democratic and civic values: Inclusionary Zoning is an example of those values in action.

Unfortunately, the public dialogue about Inclusionary Zoning has been highjacked and steered away from a discussion of community values and policy and has instead been driven by a very narrowly defined concern of economic benefit. Some critics of Inclusionary Zoning would have us believe that the ordinance's success should be defined almost exclusively by construction markets and profit margins. This is a very partial picture which consequently frames an inadequate and incomplete debate on Inclusionary Zoning's future in Madison. The fact is, marketability and sales in a democratic society are tempered by our larger civic values. There are social and economic justice goals which cannot be achieved by relying solely upon a free market society. That is why we choose to live in a democratically governed society which supports policy directives and goals that enhance the lives of the general citizenry and the health of the community at large.

Madison's Inclusionary Zoning ordinance is not a static regulation and it can be revisited and refined by the Common Council as emerging community needs dictate: it is literally and metaphorically a "living ordinance."

A short-term view of the cost/benefit ratio for a 20+ month old ordinance can be terribly misleading. Not very many ordinances could hold up to such narrow scrutiny or be deemed successful when viewed through such a selective prism. To limit our understanding of Inclusionary Zoning's potential by focusing on transitory market indicators eclipses the much larger and much, much more important considerations of how Inclusionary Zoning can represent and advance what is best about life in Madison. Madison has a long history of encouraging cooperative engagement among government offices, business, civic groups, non-profit agencies, educational institutions, philanthropic organization and others to fashion responsible and responsive public policy. Affordable housing is an issue that is fundamental to every citizen, rich and poor, because it has huge effects in almost every other area of public and private life, including the political, economic, social and cultural. In short, when you control where people can live, you indirectly control almost every other aspect of their lives, including employment, access to education, health care options, recreation, transportation, civic involvement and more. Inclusionary Zoning uses the talents and good will of many different actors - local government, citizens, building and property developers, non-profit community development groups, financial institutions, housing advocates, to name just some - to help make Madison a place where everyone can afford to live, regardless of their means. There is a fundamental point of justice about the school teacher, the social worker, the police officer, and many others, being able to live in the very community they work so hard to support and make good for us all.

It is no secret that the faster that Madison grows, the more expensive our housing becomes and the wider the gap between income and shelter cost becomes. What affordable housing currently exists is outstripped by rising demand. Madison has neighborhoods that are increasingly economically marginalized and segregated, which exacerbates problems of poverty. And it is not just economic poverty that threatens only low income neighborhoods. Without forward thinking policies on affordable housing, like Inclusionary Zoning, all Madison neighborhoods are threatened by a much more damaging poverty of value, culture, understanding and diversity.

Inclusionary Zoning asks us to act on our democratic and civic values, to look around our neighborhoods and ask "Who is missing from the community and why aren't they here?"

Inclusionary Zoning is not an act of charity; it is the recognition of how universally important it is to support affordable housing. It is no accident that diversity, desegregation, and expanded resident opportunities are the hallmarks of stable and strong neighborhoods.

What is missing from the public conversation about Inclusionary Zoning are the voices of people who have found their homes through the support of IZ construction and financing. One of these voices belongs to Bridget Rogers, a social worker who has invested 8 years of her professional and personal life in Madison, specifically in the Willy Street neighborhood, working directly with high-risk teens to provide them basic support, education and vocational training opportunities. Bridget's long-term commitment to the community has surely helped to make Willy Street an attractive site for housing development, although without Inclusionary Zoning she never could have afforded her home there.

Bridget's thoughts are:

"As a social worker, you can invest most of your life in a community, yet have to physically live outside of it because of no affordable housing. Being able to live in a community where I have invested 'sweat equity' means I can do an even better job for children and families as well as the community at-large."

"Different people bring different skills and unique qualities to their home communities. IZ goes a long way to insure a diversity which supports the sustainability and overall viability of a community."

"We have to show a genuine and meaningful commitment to workers in our city, not just to social workers, but teachers, civil servants, skilled labor and others, especially in matters of housing. These are the people who keep our communities vibrant, and we need their abilities and their devotion."

"Does a teacher who is forced to drive to and from Madison everyday, living in a different 'home city,' have the same connection and attachment as a teacher who can live and intellectually and emotionally 'invest' in the community where he or she teaches?"

"The people who are being priced out of the Willy Street neighborhood are the folks who made it such a great place to live and work in the first place. They brought the 'electricity' and the vibrancy to the community. We risk losing livability everywhere when we price people out of the communities they love and have worked for. Inclusionary Zoning is helping to reverse that tide."

"My neighbors in the Livingston Street housing units where I secured my IZ home include a middle school teacher, who works with many of the same children and families as I do, and another social worker. It's really hard to argue against encouraging folks who are underpaid, perhaps undervalued but performing extremely important community functions, from residing in the community. We need each other, and each other's differences, to make our communities whole."

There are many more voices that need to enter the community conversation about Inclusionary Zoning. The people who would be our neighbors are ready to speak.