Salisbury’s housing landscape may soon undergo a significant transformation as city officials reconsider a controversial ordinance that limits unrelated adults from sharing rental homes. The regulation, commonly referred to as the “4-2 ordinance,” has sparked debate about housing accessibility during a time of increasing costs and limited availability.
Housing restriction under scrutiny in Salisbury
The longstanding “4-2 ordinance” in Salisbury currently restricts rental properties to a maximum of two unrelated adults per home in most cases. This regulation was initially implemented to prevent neighborhoods from being overwhelmed by Salisbury University students seeking off-campus housing. While some exceptions allow for three or four unrelated occupants, the overall impact has been a limitation on housing options.
City Council President D’Shawn Doughty has become a vocal advocate for change, questioning the ordinance’s relevance in today’s housing climate. The restriction has become increasingly problematic as housing costs continue to rise throughout the region, making shared living arrangements more financially necessary for many residents.
“The question we need to ask ourselves is whether government should dictate living arrangements, especially when we’re facing both housing shortages and affordability challenges,” Doughty remarked. His concerns reflect a growing sentiment that outdated regulations may be exacerbating Salisbury’s housing challenges rather than solving them.
The city’s approach to housing development has evolved significantly in recent years, with increased focus on community input. Salisbury’s Neighbourhood Development Plan has received praise for its community-driven urban strategy, suggesting a shift toward more inclusive planning processes.
Impact on affordable housing initiatives
Local housing organizations have encountered significant barriers due to the current ordinance. Molly Hilligoss of Habitat for Humanity of Wicomico County highlighted a specific example that demonstrates the practical limitations:
“We have a three-bedroom home in the Church Street neighborhood that would be perfect for three single individuals in need of affordable housing. The current ordinance prevents us from providing this solution simply because these potential residents aren’t related to each other,” Hilligoss explained.
This scenario illustrates how the regulation directly impacts affordable housing availability in Salisbury. The organization’s inability to maximize existing housing resources affects both their operational efficiency and their mission to serve those in need.
The effects of the ordinance extend beyond just Habitat for Humanity’s work. Housing experts have identified several consequences:
- Reduced housing options for single adults with limited incomes
- Underutilization of existing multi-bedroom properties
- Increased housing costs as fewer people can share expenses
- Potential legal concerns regarding discrimination
Legal considerations and fair housing compliance
Questions have emerged about whether Salisbury’s roommate limitations potentially violate the Fair Housing Act, particularly regarding familial status protections. Legal experts have noted that ordinances restricting unrelated individuals from sharing housing may face increasing scrutiny under federal housing regulations.
The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination based on several protected classes, and some interpretations suggest that ordinances like Salisbury’s could be viewed as creating discriminatory impacts, even if that wasn’t the original intent.
| Housing Regulation Concern | Potential Legal Issue |
|---|---|
| Limits on unrelated adults | Possible familial status discrimination |
| Original intent (limiting student housing) | Disparate impact on other demographics |
| Enforcement methods | Equal protection concerns |
Cities across the country have faced similar challenges, with some revising or eliminating comparable ordinances after legal reviews. Salisbury’s leadership appears to be taking a proactive approach by reexamining the regulation before potential legal challenges arise.
Timeline for potential changes
According to Council President Doughty, the city council plans to address the ordinance this summer as part of broader housing policy discussions. The review will consider both complete removal of the restriction and potential revisions that might better balance neighborhood concerns with housing accessibility needs.
The timing aligns with Salisbury’s comprehensive planning initiatives, which aim to address multiple aspects of the city’s housing challenges. Officials recognize that the ordinance represents just one piece of a complex housing ecosystem that requires holistic solutions.
Community input will play a crucial role in the upcoming discussions. Residents with varied perspectives—from university administrators to neighborhood associations to housing advocates—will likely participate in the deliberation process.
- Initial council discussions scheduled for early summer
- Public forums to gather community feedback
- Analysis of impacts on affordable housing availability
- Legal review of potential Fair Housing Act implications
- Final decision expected by late summer 2025
As Salisbury confronts changing demographics, economic pressures, and housing needs, the reconsideration of this ordinance represents a significant shift in how the city approaches residential regulations. The outcome may establish new precedents for how Salisbury balances neighborhood character with housing accessibility in the years ahead.
- Summer solstice 2025 : when and how to celebrate the longest day of the year - November 10, 2025
- Thunderstorm warning : Map shows areas affected across UK this weekend - November 8, 2025
- Attention required ! Essential security alert strategies to protect your digital accounts - November 7, 2025
