Stop state plan to redefine ‘affordable’
Some House Republicans in Connecticut have a novel idea for solving the state’s real and growing housing crisis. They want to pretend it doesn’t exist. It goes like this. Think of an issue like the poverty line. What if, instead of setting the poverty line for a family of four’s average annual income at around $30,000 ( as it was federally in 2022), we set the bar at $15,000, which was the line for an individual? Suddenly, a lot fewer people are in poverty. Problem solved! It doesn’t do anything for people’s ability to pay for dinner or a roof over their heads. But by changing some numbers around and shifting lines here and there, the government can pretend that fewer people fall below some arbitrary cutoff, and suddenly there is less of a concern. It’s a solution that solves nothing other than to take potentially difficult answers off the table.
A group of state lawmakers wants to do that for housing. The idea is straightforward. Towns that have less than 10 percent of their housing deemed affordable are subject to a state law that gives developers some leverage that isn’t otherwise available. If a multifamily development is proposed that would include an affordable component, towns must have a serious concern involving safety or something equally weighty to turn it down. Many town officials hate this law, and have worked to have it overturned or loosened. But without it, many of the state’s suburbs would have built little or nothing in the way of affordable housing. The law hasn’t solved the state’s problems, but it’s about the only thing making a dent in the crisis right now. This latest push, then, is a move to redefine “affordable.”
The Republicans’ proposal, said to be a work in progress, would include as affordable any housing that is not deed restricted but is available to people whose income is up to 80 percent of the area median income. It sounds straightforward, but the deed restriction is key to ongoing affordability. If there is no deed restriction, then the cost of living there is at the mercy of the market and therefore not affordable over any time frame beyond the immediate future. It does nothing for the needs of the state. The push is being led by Fairfield County representatives, where the issue has generated the most attention. But there is concern that Democrats, too, could support such a measure, because the resistance to housing is bipartisan in Connecticut. Only urban representatives, where housing is most likely to be available, are consistently supportive of housing initiatives. This plan must not move forward. It does nothing to help the state, and instead actively hurts the economy. We’re short thousands of workers in this state to fill available jobs, and a huge reason why is a lack of places to live. A plan that halts development in the places it’s most needed is exactly the wrong idea. That doesn’t mean it won’t happen. Leadership will be essential to ensure that bills that hurt our economic competitiveness are not allowed to become law just because too many in the state are averse to change.
A plan that halts development in the places it’s most needed is exactly the wrong idea.