Debate surrounding inclusionary zoning (IZ) continues to heat up as the District 4 Court of Appeals decided earlier this month that the rental portion of the ordinance violates Madison's rent control laws.

George Twigg, communications director for Mayor Dave Cieslewicz, said IZ is an affordable housing plan which should apply to both rent-controlled and owner-occupied housing. It requires developments to set aside 15 percent of their units for residents making less than 80 percent of the county's median income.

Yet the appeals court ruled the city's IZ laws ultimately amounted to rent control, which is illegal in the state of Wisconsin, Twigg added.

"The mayor does feel affordable housing is important for rental and owner-occupied housing," Twigg said. "It is our intention to appeal this decision."

Twigg also noted if the decision is not reversed, the city will need to look for other ways to achieve affordable housing.

The court's recent decision only applies to the rental portion of IZ because there is a specific state law about controlling rent that is not applicable to owner-occupied developments.

"It is important to note that today's decision only impacts the rental portion of inclusionary zoning, and the remainder of the ordinance remains in effect," Cieslewicz said in a release. "Given the recent improvements we have made to the ordinance, I am confident that it will play an increasingly important role in keeping housing affordable for all Madison families."

Ald. Jed Sanborn, District 1, however, said affordable housing has already been addressed without IZ. According to Sanborn, there are already several policies at the federal, state and city levels to help ensure affordable housing, as well as several nonprofit organizations.

"The idea that IZ is the only thing out there for people to afford housing is absurd," he said.

Sanborn also said the court's decision will have a positive impact on renters, including students looking for affordable housing. Under IZ, approval of new rental properties was difficult and discouraged developers from building units, he explained, and over time would result in a shortage for renters.

"In my opinion, [the court's decision] will have a good impact because it will allow for more housing to be available for lower rent," Sanborn said. "IZ law so far has been a disaster for rental property, and in the long run [the new decision] will help students."

But Twigg maintains IZ laws are helping residents, including students, and if the court's decision stays it will have a large impact on all renters.

"People who rent pay a greater share of their disposable income," he added. "We want to encourage people to be able to save [money] and move into home ownership."

Sanborn said despite his skepticism of the ordinance, the legal questions of IZ are separate from policy issues and personal preferences. According to Sanborn, the bottom line for the IZ ordinance is legality.

"It is not my wish to see my policy preference put in place by the courts," he explained. "I just want to see the law followed."