Study Group Recap - April
Topic: Right to Counsel (RTC)
Readings:
Context:
When evictions go to court, tenants do not have the right to a public attorney because they are classified as civil cases, not criminal cases. Nationwide, roughly 90% of landlords trying to evict their tenants are represented by legal counsel in the courtroom, while fewer than 10% of these tenants have a lawyer. Right to counsel legislation, which has been passed in seven U.S. cities in the past few years, mandates that the government provide legal counsel to some or all tenants facing eviction. In New York, 86% of tenants who had representation through NYC’s right to counsel program won their case. These measures work to keep people in their homes when faced with the threat of eviction.
Discussion Questions:
If you didn’t know about Right To Counsel before, how do you feel about it not being in place already?
If you did know about Right To Counsel already, how would you describe it to tenants who aren’t yet aware?
What do you think the immediate benefits of Right To Counsel should be?
What different “types” or “methods” do you see being used to create RTC measures?
How do you envision, or how would you like to see, Right To Counsel get implemented? And WHERE?
Do you think there are any challenges to Right To Counsel implementation specific to Portland or Oregon that aren’t covered in readings?
Takeaways:
Our discussion focused on 1) how passing RTC measures benefit tenants, and 2) how to organize for RTC in our local area. One participant noted that eviction cases often start because tenants are facing other traumatic experiences in their lives that are compounded by a landlord threatening to take away their home. Having guaranteed representation would help to alleviate some of the stress that tenants encounter in facing a legal system that is structurally designed to favor landlords over tenants. We also discussed how landlords often initiate eviction proceedings knowing that tenants are unlikely to have representation, and that having RTC in place might force landlords to be more reasonable and negotiate with tenants. Some participants argued that RTC is a ‘non-reformist reform,’ by which they meant it shifts the balance of power between landlords and tenants. By potentially limiting the number of evictions occurring, RTC measures could also free up organizing capacity and let tenants and their advocates shift away from crisis support and focus on longer-term strategies for structural change in housing issues.
In thinking through how to create RTC in the local area, we started by discussing whether it would be best to try to focus on the state, county, or city level. For example, if Portland passed an RTC measure, then tenants in eastern Multnomah County would be unprotected. However, trying to get RTC passed at a larger scale requires a lot more organizing effort. We all believed that RTC legislation would be popular at any scale, the issue is getting it in front of people for them to vote on it. The rest of our conversation focused on some of the details of creating a local RTC measure, ranging from how to fund it, who would be the primary supporters and opposition, and how to ensure that tenants would know that it is an available resource if it existed here. We concluded by talking about how a coalition would be necessary to get RTC in place, and came up with the following guiding questions for this process: What is the scope of RTC? Who are the key players? What are their relationships? What’s the broader landscape of organizing on tenancy issues at different scales (city, county, state)? Who might be a definite ally, potential ally, or opponent? What are the different organizations that would be interested or have a stake in for
