YA is against the inclusionary housing requirement _as implemented by SF_. It is often used as a type of extortion to outright dissuade new construction.
More broadly, in my experience, Yimbys have mixed-to-negative opinion on inclusionary zoning since it is essentially a tax on new construction, though there are a non-trivial amount of Yimbys who think its a good way to produce subsidized housing.
I personally think we should not be taxing new projects implicitly or explicitly at all, and instead we should use property taxes (especially land value taxes) to subsidize housing either via vouchers or via publicly built housing.
The reality of the CA political system makes all of this very hard to achieve and we often find ourselves settling on taking small but achievable steps.
More broadly, in my experience, Yimbys have mixed-to-negative opinion on inclusionary zoning since it is essentially a tax on new construction, though there are a non-trivial amount of Yimbys who think its a good way to produce subsidized housing.
I personally think we should not be taxing new projects implicitly or explicitly at all, and instead we should use property taxes (especially land value taxes) to subsidize housing either via vouchers or via publicly built housing.
The reality of the CA political system makes all of this very hard to achieve and we often find ourselves settling on taking small but achievable steps.