There are a lot of things in this world that people wish could happen. Some wish for world peace, others for inclusionary zoning in Madison. In both scenarios, the results are not easily obtained. Inclusionary Zoning in Madison is a promising idea, but the law needs extensive repair and is at risk for total annihilation.

At first glance, the law is a good idea and may appear realistic. It was designed to offer a full range of housing choices for people of all income levels. By doing so, Madison would promote diverse and thriving neighborhoods, schools and communities in all areas of the city. It also claims that this housing change will endorse "the recruitment and retention of local businesses and their workforce, which are essential to the economic welfare of the city."

True, local businesses and the workforce are essential to Madison, but lower-income housing will not assist them. There is already lower cost housing here, it is not necessary for builders to waste plots of valuable land to build a smaller scale model of their original intention. Builders realize this and are looking to build in cities neighboring Madison for a greater profit. Kent Disch, government affairs director of the Madison Area Builders Association, supports this claim and said, "At this point, I think IZ is irreparably broken. There are just too many problems."

Earlier this week, Ald. Jed Sanborn, District 1, proposed to repeal Madison's new law that makes developers include lower-cost housing in projects, since, "The costs to the city greatly outweigh any benefits." His proposal to repeal this law is because the law is not living up to its true intent to help lower income people. All it is being productive at is just wasting taxpayers' money. He said, "I think we can accomplish a heck of a lot more by trying to empower individuals who are low-income."

There are many other problems with the law, homeowner equity being just one of those being addressed. Mayor Dave Cieselwicz and Ald. Brenda Konkel, District 2, were the first to rebuke Jed's request. They admit that the policy has some flaws, but are certain that after further consideration the policy could work.

This law was passed in January 2004 and went into action the following month. Three months short of the legislation hitting two years, little progress has been made. Inclusionary Zoning requires builders allow 15 percent lower cost units in neighborhood that also have price limitations.

For example, a two-bedroom unit for a three-person family will be sold for $168,795 or less. The problem is, since the units of IZ must be sold to a family making less than 80 percent of the country median income, the average yearly salary must range from $35,000 to $55,000 per year adjusted accordingly to the size of the household.

Planning Director Brad Murphy cited statistics for the first 18 months as 359 IZ units among 2,366 total units approved around in 24 projects. These numbers may seem promising, but only six of the 50 units on the market right now have been bid on and none of them are currently inhabited.

Sanborn related these statistics to the fact that these units deter people from buying them since the owner cannot retain more than half the appreciated value of the home and will experience aggravations to make improvements or refinance their homes. The city has already spent a large amount of tax incremental financing and will continue to do so to maintain these units without occupancy.

Although the Inclusionary Zoning Proposal is what society needs, utopia is far from our reach. Maybe with a lot of provisions and a boost in lower income families' interest in this particular type of accommodation in a different Madison community, it is possible. But maybe Jed Sanborn is right and IZ should be tabled for now to save taxpayers' dollars in order to assist lower income people and give them the opportunity to utilize it in for factors other than housing in more prominent areas.

Joelle Parks ([email protected]) is a sophomore intending to major in journalism.