Affordable Housing In California – Which Definition Are You Using?

silhouettes of five people jumping for joy in front of a two and a half storey house
This scene was created by affordablehousingaction.org and is licensed under CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication
Buying a home. It's something that will never happen for a great many families.

A few short years ago, the term ‘Affordable Housing’ had one meaning securely anchored to the pocketbook of a householder. When housing cost more than 30% of gross income, it was unaffordable.

Today, things are quite different. Various actors in the housing business have been able to shake that iron-clad definition of ‘affordable housing.’ More flexibility is highly inconvenient to all levels of government, all sizes of landlord, the homebuilding industry and others.

The definition of ‘affordable housing’ has become a growth industry in itself, where those involved in ‘affordable housing’ construction push for a definition that suits their pocketbook, but not necessarily the pocketbook of the people who will live there.

The following article provides a collection of terms that have the audacity to shelter themselves under the term ‘affordable.’ The article is published in California where housing is notoriously expensive. It’s a good place for multiple definitions to flourish. Currently, California uses five definitions:

    • Public housing
    • LIHTC-funded housing
    • Inclusionary housing
    • Incentivized affordability
    • Section 8 Housing Vouchers

These definitions may not be in use other states and nations, but they hint at the breadth of descriptions that service the desires of housing suppliers of every kind1.

Read more in SiliconValley.com The ‘A’ word: Affordability in housing has become a muddled term

Footnotes

  1. California is not alone. Canada’s National Housing Strategy has five definitions in play. Try: Perspectives On Housing Rights In Canada – Experts Weigh In