Housing policy in Connecticut can be confusing. It’s no wonder there are frequent misunderstandings.

A recent news story out of Litchfield County is a good case in point. “Towns in Connecticut's Northwest Corner are struggling with affordable housing mandate,” the headline reads. The story talks about how small towns with limited infrastructure are having a hard time seeing construction of the kind of affordable housing the state says it needs.

One problem with all that? There is no affordable housing mandate.

The story makes reference to “Connecticut’s law passed in 1989 requiring that 10 percent of municipalities’ housing be affordable.” This is a reference to Connecticut Statutes Sec. 8-30g, which comes up frequently in discussions of housing in this state. But the statute does not require that 10 percent of any community’s housing be affordably priced. 

What it does is specify conditions that apply only in towns that have less than 10 percent affordable housing, either as a result of government subsidies or a deed restriction on the property. In those towns, developers have more leeway in proposing developments with an affordable component.

It doesn’t give developers freedom to do whatever they want. They still need to follow environmental guidelines and building codes. Projects can be turned down if they pose a threat to public health or safety.

It does put the burden on municipalities to show why their potential objections to a proposal outweigh the need for affordable housing. It’s been in effect for more than 35 years, and today 8-30g is one of the only ways that affordable housing can be built in some towns with exclusionary zoning. 

It’s not a mandate to get to 10 percent affordable housing, but it is one tool for the generation of affordable housing. But we need other tools as well. Ten percent affordable housing in every town would still not be enough to meet the state’s needs.

To opponents of housing, this is a distinction without a difference. But it’s important to be specific when talking about policies, including those that can be unpopular. We can’t find housing solutions that work for everyone if we’re not on the same page in terms of basic definitions. 

The 8-30g process also gives towns plenty of leeway. With affordable housing growth representing as little as 2 percent of a municipality’s overall stock, it can earn points toward a moratorium, at which point it can make plans about what kind of development it would like to see and how the town can best support new housing. Municipalities can earn multiple moratoria. The key is, in theory, to promote sound planning and responsible growth.

Whatever else that might be, it’s not a mandate.