Ramona’s Community Planning Group is not exactly rolling out the welcome mat for a new San Diego County affordable housing proposal that would require developers to include, or pay for, below-market units in new projects. At a May 7 presentation in Ramona, local officials warned that the draft ordinance could pile new steps onto already long approval processes, weaken local control and make builders think twice about starting projects in the area. The pushback comes as county planners prepare to take the draft on a broader roadshow to other community groups, ahead of a Board of Supervisors hearing set for June 24, 2026.
County staff lays out alternatives and incentives
County planners say the proposal is aimed at expanding affordable housing options in unincorporated communities while testing how far they can go without breaking project finances or running afoul of state law. According to the County of San Diego, staff presentations and the accompanying economic analysis look at multiple ways builders could comply, including on-site affordable units, off-site construction, land donations, accessory dwelling units and in-lieu fees. The draft also advertises carrots such as density bonuses and priority permit review for projects that deliver extra affordable homes. Outreach materials pitch the ordinance as one element of a larger housing strategy and explicitly invite public feedback as staff fine-tune the rules.
Ramona planners warn the rule could stall projects
Locally, the sales job is proving tough. At the Ramona meeting, planning group members told county staff they fear the ordinance will stretch permit timelines even further and scare off would-be developers. Paul Stykel warned the proposal could add more time to an already drawn-out permit process, while Basil Aruin argued that inclusionary requirements have at times been used as a tool to block development, as reported by the San Diego Union-Tribune. Jonas Dyer told the paper he plans to vote against the ordinance and urged the county to “allow builders to build and do it quickly,” according to the report.
Economic analysis tests where rules might be feasible
The county’s Inclusionary Housing Study tries to answer the big question: where do affordability requirements pencil out, and where do they tip a project into the red. Per the Inclusionary Housing Study, consultants modeled different mixes of very low, low and moderate income set-asides, then measured how each scenario affected residual land value and return-on-cost thresholds. The analysis identifies where density bonuses, phased implementation or alternative compliance options would likely be needed to keep projects viable. It also lays out methods for calculating in-lieu fees and accounts for geographic differences, so any eventual program can be calibrated to local market conditions.
Staff used local projects to illustrate impacts
To make the numbers a little less abstract, county staff walked through examples of how various set-aside options might have affected past developments. The reporting describes a potential requirement range that could land somewhere around 5 percent to 20 percent of units in a project, depending on the scenario. As reported by the San Diego Union-Tribune, staff said that if a 10 percent low-income requirement had been in place for certain 2017 projects, it would have produced only a handful of deed-restricted units, three at Village Place Apartments and three at Paseo Village. Developers under the draft framework could instead choose to pay a per-square-foot in-lieu fee, donate land or build the affordable units at a different site. According to the paper, staff defined “affordable” in the standard way, housing that costs roughly no more than 30 percent of a household’s income, and displayed income bands for very low, low and moderate income levels during the presentation.
Where this fits into the county’s housing push
County leaders are not treating the inclusionary ordinance as a stand-alone move. They have tied the work to a broader housing agenda that also includes budget allocations and production targets for unincorporated areas. The County News Center highlights recent Board of Supervisors actions, along with Fiscal Year 2026–27 planning discussions, that steer funding toward affordable housing and set up incentives meant to speed up construction. That bigger picture, a bid to increase the number of deed-restricted units while still keeping projects financially feasible, is what supervisors are expected to weigh when the ordinance comes to the board in late June.
For Ramona planners, the tradeoff is straightforward and not especially comfortable: push the county to deliver more affordable homes across multiple communities, or double down on local control and faster approvals that they say keep projects moving. With the Board of Supervisors scheduled to take up the proposal on June 24, 2026, the coming months are likely to bring more presentations, more public comment and a live test of whether a countywide requirement can be written in a way that does not chill new housing in places like Ramona.
