What’s ‘affordable’? Housing debate hangs on definitions

Affordable housing is one of the buzziest subjects in Connecticut politics, at the center of election campaigns, policy debates and legislative hearings. It generates fierce opinions across the political spectrum, even as nearly everyone acknowledges it as one of the state’s biggest needs.

Why, then, can no one agree exactly what it means?

In some contexts — and to some people — affordable housing might refer to housing that typical residents can comfortably afford to live in. In other contexts, it might mean housing that’s affordable to whoever happens to live there. And under one oft-debated law, it describes something more specific: housing required to be affordable under certain legal mechanisms.

“It is very contextual,” said Michael Santoro, director of policy, research and housing support at Connecticut’s housing department. “Depending on the audience or the topic, the phrase will mean different things.”

Based on the latter definition, one recent report found, only 29 Connecticut towns and cities have at least 10 percent affordable housing, while 93 towns have less than 5 percent. These figures, and others like them, have driven housing advocates, as well as many state and local officials, to appeal for construction of new affordable housing, as well as measures to maintain existing units as affordable.

Some argue the affordable housing crisis is even worse than the data suggests, as some units classified as “affordable” remain inaccessible to the state’s poorest residents. Others say this definition of “affordable housing” is overly narrow, omitting certain types of units.

Might reaching consensus on what affordable housing means be key to addressing it? Easier said than done.

Affordable housing is frequently defined, including by the federal government and some Connecticut statutes, as housing for which a household does not pay more than 30 percent of its income. Under this definition, affordable housing for a family earning $50,000 annually would cost $1,250 or less per month.

“It’s a very generic concept,” Santoro said. “If you’re contributing 30 percent or less, then that housing that you are living in is considered affordable to you.”

In a healthy housing market, affordable housing by this definition would be plentiful. People at all income levels would be able to find housing that fit both their needs and their budget.

The problem, Santoro says, is that affordable housing in this general sense is difficult to count precisely — though one recent survey from the nonprofit DataHaven found that more than half of residents in some Connecticut cities report paying at least 30 percent of their income to housing.

“It’s statistical in nature,” Santoro said. “It cannot be tested.”

This general definition can also lead to confusing, almost paradoxical places. Looked at this way, a $2 million mansion would qualify as “affordable housing” if owned by a multi-millionaire who could easily afford the mortgage, while a small apartment with a $1,000 monthly rent would be “unaffordable” if occupied by someone making minimum wage.

Sometimes, policymakers solve for this problem by narrowing the definition slightly, to include only housing that costs less than 30 percent of a family’s income provided the family earns below a certain income threshold.

In other cases, though, they have taken a different, more complex (but also more easily measurable) approach. That is where things get tricky.

One of Connecticut’s most consequential (and controversial) housing statutes is known as 8-30g. Under this law, passed in 1989, developers may challenge communities that reject proposals for affordable housing, as defined by the law, forcing towns to defend their decisions in court.

Crucially, towns and cities are exempt from this appeals process if they have at least 10 percent affordable housing, which is defined in this context as:

Housing subsidized by the government, whether through development subsidies or rental assistance programs

Units specifically set aside to be rented at less than 30 percent of a family’s annual income (for families earning less than 80 percent of the state or area median income)

Housing financed by the Connecticut Housing Finance Authority, which offers below-market interest rates to first-time home-buyers and those purchasing homes in target areas

Certain mobile homes and accessory apartments for which households pay less than 30 percent of their income

The definition of “affordable housing” in 8-30g refers specifically to what Anika Singh Lemar, an attorney and Yale law professor, calls “capital-a affordable housing,” or units that are required by law to be affordable.

“Capital-a affordable housing is required by some legal rubric to be affordable to the people who live there,” Singh Lemar said. “And typically, it’s a combination of: People can only live here if they make less than a certain amount of money, and they can only be charged a rent that is equal to 30 percent of their income.”

Like many other state statutes, 8-30g does not account for what Singh Lemar calls “lowercase-a affordable housing,” referring to market-rate units that are affordable for most families. This might include, say, a subdivided home whose market-rate rent comes to less than 30 percent of a typical family’s income.

As some 8-30g critics see it, the omission of “naturally occurring” affordable housing from the law’s definition leads to under-counting of affordable units. Last year, Republican lawmakers proposed a tweak that would have included some market-rate affordable housing within the 8-30g definition, but the measure did not gain momentum in the Democratic-controlled legislature.

Kathryn Braun, a Republican on Fairfield’s planning and zoning commission, wants to see naturally occurring affordable housing counted for 8-30g purposes, which she says the state could accomplish by tracking rents in communities statewide.

“The only reason it wasn’t [counted] was to make it easier to implement the law,” Braun said. “Well, if that’s the only reason, let’s make it happen now. Thirty years hence, we should have computer programs that can track naturally occurring affordable housing and give towns credit for it.”

Defenders of 8-30g argue that including naturally occurring affordable housing in its definition would drastically weaken the law and eliminate a key incentive for towns to promote affordable housing — unless the change also came with a drastically higher threshold for exemptions.