Perspectives on Social Housing: Initial Insights from the California Social Housing Study

As California’s affordability crisis has deepened, interest has grown in scaling social housing—nonspeculative, permanently affordable housing for Californians across income levels that struggle to afford market rents. Two reports highlight initial insights from the California Social Housing Study, a research initiative established through Senate Bill 555 to examine barriers, resources, and opportunities for the creation of social housing at scale statewide. 

Produced in collaboration with Liberation in a Generation and the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD), these reports share key takeaways from the study’s public engagement process. 

The legislation defines social housing as having five key characteristics:

1. Ownership and management by mission-driven actors, including public agencies, nonprofits, and limited-equity housing cooperatives
2. Developments that serve a mix of household incomes, ranging from extremely low-income to moderate-income Californians
3. Residents protected from eviction without due process or just cause
4. Units, and the associated land, remain affordable permanently
5. Residents meaningfully engage in decision making about their homes

As HCD research partners, the Terner Center and Liberation in a Generation engaged over 300 lower and moderate-income Californians and 73 affordable housing practitioners, including representatives from public agencies, nonprofit housing developers, community land trusts, financial institutions and advocacy organizations. 

Participants shared perspectives on the potential of social housing to help address the state’s need for affordable homes. Discussions captured a wide range of perspectives on the five core principles of social housing, as well as the challenges and opportunities involved in translating them into practice. 

Several themes emerged, reflecting the diverse experiences and priorities of stakeholders across California:

• Social housing has the potential to provide stability and security for Californians across income levels. Residents expressed enthusiasm and relief at the prospect of rents that are affordable based on their income, and want social housing to prioritize protections against sudden rent increases and arbitrary evictions, alongside safe, quality homes. Practitioners emphasized the importance of permanent affordability as a way to prevent displacement and preserve the value of public investments, while identifying the need for ongoing operating assistance to maintain affordability long-term.
• Mixed-income housing presents both opportunities and challenges. Practitioners generally viewed mixed-income approaches as a way to promote socioeconomic integration, resident stability, and economic mobility, as well as broader political and financial support for social housing. At the same time, they raised concerns about allocating scarce public resources to moderate-income households, rather than prioritizing those with the greatest need. Residents also expressed mixed views, with some welcoming income diversity and others raising concerns about the deprioritization of lower-income households and the potential for class conflict and discrimination.
• Residents want meaningful power in decisions affecting their homes. Residents expressed a desire for substantive over performative decision-making roles, rather than simply providing opportunities to share input. Practitioners and residents both raised questions about appropriate governance structures, support, and oversight from professional property management, as well as the resources needed to support effective resident participation.
• Building public trust will be essential for realizing social housing’s potential. Residents expressed skepticism about government and housing providers, shaped by past experiences with housing precarity, administrative burdens, and chronically underfunded housing programs. Practitioners similarly identified the stigma associated with public housing and mistrust in government as barriers to implementation, emphasizing the importance of adequately resourced, high-quality homes.
• Scaling social housing will require sustained public investment and greater institutional capacity. Practitioners stressed the need for dedicated, flexible public funds; long-term operating subsidies; and technical assistance and capacity building for public agencies and resident-driven organizations to develop, manage, and scale social housing projects. Residents similarly underscored the importance of making funds and social housing available at scale to address the scarcity of safe, affordable homes.

These reports—one summarizing insights from residents, and the other focused on practitioner insights—are the first published works from the California Social Housing Study. Learnings from this public engagement process have been foundational to the study’s ongoing analysis of what it would take to advance the development of social housing statewide. The broader study, which has yet to be released, will include a review of domestic and international social housing models, further engagement with residents and practitioners, and analysis of potential models and tools for advancing the goals of SB 555.

Read the reports:
Practitioner Engagement Insights (Terner Center) 
Resident Engagement Insights (Liberation in a Generation)