The Santa Barbara County Board of Supervisors met the week of October 20, 2026, and set a November 10 hearing on amendments to County Code Chapter 46A – Inclusionary Housing. The chapter contains the county’s rules requiring builders of new homes to set aside some units at below-market prices or pay a fee instead. These rules apply in unincorporated areas, the parts of the county outside city limits, such as Isla Vista, Montecito, Orcutt and the Goleta Valley. They do not apply inside the City of Santa Barbara, which has its own housing rules.

The board will hold a first reading of the ordinance on November 10. A first reading is the initial presentation and vote, and a second, final vote is required before a law takes effect. The board scheduled 45 minutes for the item, a longer slot than most agenda items receive, which suggests the board expects substantial discussion. The agenda summary did not describe the proposed changes.

Inclusionary rules shape what gets built and who can afford it. Raising requirements can produce more price-restricted homes for moderate- and lower-income households, but developers often argue that higher requirements make some projects too costly to build. Lowering requirements or fees can encourage construction while producing fewer affordable units. Anyone hoping to buy or rent a below-market home in the unincorporated county, or planning to build there, has a stake in the outcome.

Affordability deals and state funding

The board considered an Agreement to Provide Affordable Housing and Rental Restrictive Covenant for a development by Mission Isla Vista Partners, LP. A restrictive covenant is a legal condition recorded on the property’s title that keeps certain units rent-restricted for a set period, usually decades, even if the property is sold. The agreement turns a developer’s affordability promises into binding obligations. For renters, it means some apartments in the project should stay within reach of lower-income households for the long term.

The project is listed under case numbers for a development plan, a coastal development permit and a revised development plan. A development plan is the county’s approval of a project’s design and layout. A coastal development permit is required for building in the state-protected coastal zone. The agenda listed the project in the Second District. The summary did not state the number of units or how many would be affordable.

The supervisors also took up a resolution allowing the county to apply for and accept state money from two programs. The first is the Transitional Housing Program (THP) Round 8. The second is the Housing Navigation and Maintenance Program (HNMP) Round 5. Both are state grants aimed mainly at young adults who have aged out of foster care. THP helps pay for temporary housing. HNMP pays for staff who help these young people find housing and keep it. The round numbers show that the county has received this funding repeatedly in past years. Dollar amounts were not included in the agenda summary.

Land-use change requests head to hearings

The board set a hearing for the Constellation Land Development, LLC Hotel and Residential Development Project in the Fourth District, which covers part of the northern county. The developer is asking for a General Plan Amendment. The General Plan is the county’s long-range blueprint for land use, and an amendment changes what the blueprint allows on specific property. The developer is also seeking a rezone, which changes the zoning designation that controls what can be built. In addition, the request includes a tentative parcel map, a preliminary approval to divide land into separate lots, and two development plans. A request combining all of these approvals usually signals a significant project that the current rules would not allow. The hearing date and the number of homes proposed were not included in the agenda summary.

The board also scheduled a November 10 hearing on the Malkin General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Lot Line Adjustment in the First District, which includes the South Coast area east of the City of Santa Barbara. A lot line adjustment moves the boundary between neighboring parcels without creating new lots. Together, the three requests would change how the affected land may be used. The agenda summary did not say whether new housing is planned.

Litigation and meeting access

In closed session, a private meeting with attorneys that is allowed under state law for pending lawsuits, the board discussed Hal Pedersen and Ming Yi v. County of Santa Barbara (Superior Court Case No. 24CV06085). The agenda did not describe the subject of the case.

Board meetings remain open both in person at the County Administration Building and remotely, so residents can comment without traveling to the hearing room.

What’s coming up

November 10 is the key date. On that day the board is scheduled to hear the inclusionary housing changes and the Malkin land-use requests. The Constellation project hearing is also pending. Residents who want to weigh in can submit comments in person or remotely when those items come before the board.