For years, Jersey City was absurdly generous in handing out tax breaks to rich developers, yet when it came to affordable housing, totally derelict.

Unlike Newark or Hoboken, it still has no policy that requires developers to include a certain number of affordable homes.

As a result, luxury towers sprouted on blocks that were considered poor until only recently, enticing people fleeing high-priced Manhattan and Brooklyn with hundreds of new apartments, zero of which are affordable.

More are set to go up in the next few years. And in the next wave of gentrification, nothing protects poorer families from being forced out while the affluent reap all the benefits of the new investment.

This problem predates Mayor Steve Fulop, and the good news is, he finally has a plan to address it. The bad news is, it does not appear to be a serious plan to deal with gentrification in Jersey City.

Fulop’s proposal would allow developers to build housing for a family of four earning more than $100,000 annually and call it “affordable.” And they could avoid including any “affordable” apartments at all, by paying off the city instead.

This is helpful for greasing political deals, as City Hall negotiates for something other than affordable housing -- like a new fire station, courtesy of a Kushner brother. It is not helpful for poor people being priced out of their neighborhoods.

Few or no affordable homes will be developed for them. The city would be much better off adopting a rule that requires new projects to set aside 20 percent of apartments as affordable, with no escape hatches or scams.

And since the poor have the hardest time finding new housing in Jersey City, these affordable homes should go to families earning between $24,000 to $60,000 annually.

That’s the alternative plan on the city council’s agenda Wednesday, endorsed by Council President Rolando Lavarro, Councilwoman Joyce Watterman and Fair Share Housing advocates. It’s the sort of policy that towns all over the state are adopting.

Typically, of their affordable homes, half go to low or very low-income families, and half go to moderate income people. But Fulop would designate only one quarter for low income families, one quarter for moderate income households, and a full half for those earning close to -- and over -- 100 grand.

Nowhere else in the state, including Hoboken, does that count as affordable housing. Someone who can afford to pay $3,000 per month in rent isn’t really in need of affordable housing, even in Jersey City.

The mayor’s defense is that such people are being forced out of the city’s priciest areas. “Regular middle income families are being displaced downtown,” Fulop’s spokeswoman notes. True.

But this policy isn’t just for downtown. It will apply everywhere. Back in 2013, Councilman Lavarro paid $1,200 a month for a large two bedroom in the less affluent area of Greenville. Today, renters there might pay $2,000.

“We need to be looking at the rest of the city at this point,” he said. “We need to make every effort to not repeat the mistakes of the past that allowed downtown Jersey City to be completely gentrified.”

According to a housing plan Jersey City released in 2015, the greatest need is for families earning less than $50,000. So its policy should be written with them in mind, instead of better-off people in a hot neighborhood.

And rich developers shouldn’t be allowed to wriggle out. Fulop’s office notes that New York City, San Francisco, Seattle and Newark all allow for some pay-outs by developers. But Newark has a much more limited loophole than what he’s proposing, and a weaker housing market.

The rest of those places aren’t in New Jersey, which has stronger laws that permit a more aggressive response to gentrification. So why won’t the mayor use them?

His market-rate rents in luxury towers, dressed up as “affordable housing,” will only lure more gentrifiers.

Bookmark NJ.com/Opinion. Follow on Twitter @NJ_Opinion and find NJ.com Opinion on Facebook.