STAGE 2, CONCEPT 1 | Table of Contents

Building a lasting RTC coalition 

Eviction RTC will happen more quickly and effectively if there is a broad and diverse coalition of people and organizations to build trust, collectively decide what the policy looks like in the law/practice (with tenants and tenant organizers centered in that conversation), and then advocate for it.

Anchor

Look before you leap. Is there already a conversation happening around eviction RTC in your area? If you’re not sure or need help finding active efforts in your jurisdiction, contact us! Also, make sure to review the material in Stage 1, which can help you convince various kinds of stakeholders to get involved.

Building a coalition doesn’t require everyone to agree that eviction RTC is the top priority. In Massachusetts, for example, there is a broad coalition in support of eviction RTC, which has successfully obtained state funding for a pilot project. While the members and organizations within the coalition have a variety of top priorities, including many outside of housing altogether, the coalition members all agree that an eviction RTC is a necessary piece of what’s needed.

Why do people begin to support eviction RTC?

There are many reasons people come together in support of eviction RTC. Based on interviews we conducted with people in eviction RTC jurisdictions and our experience providing technical assistance, here are some of the reasons people get involved:

  • They've been personally impacted by eviction. Some tenants come to support eviction RTC because they've lived through an eviction(s) or supported their family, friends, neighbors through one. We’ve also heard from lawyers, judges, and other professionals directly and indirectly that they support eviction RTC because their work puts them face to face with the unfairness of eviction proceedings and/or how impactful legal representation can be. 

  • While they may be seeking broader reform, they see the need to make the existing systems better in the meantime. Many organizers want to abolish evictions altogether,, but also recognize that eviction RTC in the interim helps reduce harm, improves tenant experiences and outcomes, and helps to shift existing landlord tenant power dynamics, while also building a base of organizing power that can work towards larger reforms like eviction abolition. 

  • They gravitate towards convincing data. Some people have been drawn in because the evidence from eviction RTC cities and states powerfully shows that the policy is really working. 

  • They are reacting to the urgency of the moment. News coverage of an eviction or repairs crisis at a large apartment complex, a pandemic like COVID-19, a housing affordability crisis, or a homelessness epidemic can prompt people to get behind eviction RTC campaigns.  

  • They have been inspired by neighbors. Some advocates are inspired by the efforts and successes of RTC advocates in cities similar to theirs, or close in proximity.

  • They can see its viability. Eviction RTC is no longer theoretical: it's an enacted policy working in cities and states around the country. Some advocates are drawn to eviction RTC specifically because other places already have it and it’s working. Alternatively, some are inspired to pursue the policy because they've identified an achievable, sustainable funding source or a strong and powerful policymaker that can successfully champion the policy through the legislative body. 

  • They see it as one of the policies needed to advance racial and health equity in housing. Some people come to eviction RTC advocacy because of localized reports/data about housing injustice and its impact on a wide range of groups. Others are drawn to eviction RTC because it can positively impact the lives of Black women and children who, due to enduring racism in housing and related policies, continue to be disproportionately involved with the eviction machine. Some advocates specifically support eviction RTC when the messaging is specific to advancing health equity rather than focused on poverty.

Who are key eviction RTC stakeholders?

As you think about stakeholder engagement, the words of one advocate ring true: “Make sure you have different stakeholders advocating for the RTC so it does not just seem like it is one group.”

Below is a list of some types of stakeholders we have identified as key to the successful enactment and implementation of eviction RTC. We have crafted each stakeholder description for the benefit of those readers who are not a part of that group but that would like to have the group involved (i.e., the section about tenant organizers and leaders is written for non-tenant organizers/leaders).

Think about the timing and nature of engagement with your stakeholders.

If you are not a tenant organizer or tenant, such stakeholders should be engaged with as soon as possible and offered the opportunity to lead the coalition. For policymaker, governmental agency, or court stakeholders, tenant organizers or other coalition members may prefer to approach them later after plans are more developed, or prefer to work with them as partners rather than as full-fledged coalition members.  You might also want to think about when you’re ready for your campaign to be more public, the chances of which increase as you reach out to more and more stakeholders.  For example, Denver advocates worked with legislators who chose to enact a version of eviction RTC that was different than what advocates wanted (as it had an income limit).  This required Denver advocates to then (unsuccessfully) pursue a ballot initiative to get the law they wanted. In NYC, policymakers were not invited to every coalition meeting about eviction RTC but were strategically included.

Tenants, Tenant Leaders, Tenant Organizers

Tenants and tenant organizers must be involved and centered from the start to the degree they desire to be.

Eviction RTC must be a tenant-led movement wherever possible. Legal aid programs have an important role to play: they provide the data about how representation improves outcomes and saves money, and they are the only ones who can figure out details such as how much representation will cost and how quickly the program can be rolled out. Supportive policymakers also play an important role: they help a proposed law get across the finish line. 

But tenants and tenant organizers must be centered in the campaign and be the ones to decide what the eviction RTC looks like (such as which tenants and which kinds of proceedings are covered, and how the rollout will work over the years if all the eligible tenants will not receive counsel in year 1) because:

  • Tenants and organizers are in the best position to understand the needs and wants of the community when it comes to policies like eviction RTC that directly affect them,

  • Legal aid programs also are not the ideal leaders because a) it may raise concerns if the main force behind the legislation will also financially benefit from it; and b) some legal aid programs have limits on lobbying that hamper their ability to be effective campaign leaders.

  • Cornell Professor Jamila Michener, who conducted a qualitative analysis looking at the community organizing supporting the eviction RTC policies in New York City and San Francisco, found that “people power” was a crucial factor in the successful enactment of those policies. By building a strong base and increasing support and trust in eviction RTC, tenant leadership paves the way for successful implementation by raising awareness and engagement among the very tenants that eviction RTC is designed to support. Eviction RTC organizing can also help spark a new tenant organizing surge in the area. 

    Check out this quote from “Sandy,” who was interviewed for Professor Michener’s recent study.

    “We started really thinking about the root causes of why housing court is the way that it is, and how do we really—understanding that it’s a center of displacement—how do we really interrupt that cycle and reclaim it? [The housing court] has really been a tool. It’s been weaponized, and how do we take it out of the landlord’s arsenal? So, we’re really rooted in building tenant power. Folks were leaving that court not wanting to organize. A big deterrent to organizing in buildings was people’s fear of being evicted and retaliation and knowing that generally landlords won because that’s how shit works. So that was the impetus for the campaign. [To start] we did a participatory action research project …tenants developed and ran a survey campaign that collected a thousand surveys of tenants’ experience in housing court . . . it was a huge base building tool. People really developed an incredible sense of ownership over the campaign because tenant leaders wrote the surveys, conducted the surveys, were trained on how to do focus groups, facilitated the focus groups and really just literally did everything . . . it was an awesome beginning…”

Community organizing is associated with a lower eviction filing rate.

A recent national study found, in part, that increased community organizing has a tangible impact on the eviction filing rate. The study, which looked at 75 large cities over 16 years, found that “an addition of ten community nonprofits in a city of 100,000 residents is associated with a ten percent reduction in eviction filing rate."

Tips for engaging with organizers

  • Reach out to tenants/organizers right away to explore eviction RTC.  If you approach them with an already-developed plan for the eviction RTC, they may feel you are not open to their ideas or leadership, even if you tell them the plan is still a draft.

  • Identify organizers and organizing groups that are interested in eviction RTC. Not all organizers that are interested in working on eviction RTC are necessarily already organizing around (or only around) tenant protections. Chapters of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) in Denver, Boulder, and Jersey City organized for eviction RTC. In Kansas City MO, labor organizers from the Missouri Workers Centers/Stand Up KC were vital in passing eviction RTC. In Washington State, Black Lives Matter was involved in the eviction RTC campaign. 

  • Understand where eviction RTC fits within organizer priorities. Tenant and community organizing groups may not be prioritizing eviction RTC at the moment. In certain circumstances, eviction RTC may even be viewed as competing with other reforms. Even if they embrace eviction RTC as a policy, different organizing groups may prioritize it differently. If tenant organizing efforts have not prioritized eviction RTC, it is for a reason. Learning later in the process that eviction RTC isn't a priority for organizers in your community can really hurt your efforts. 

  • To increase engagement with organizing groups and impacted tenants, evaluate whether your campaign is designed to be accessible to them.  Be inclusive of different/changing work schedules, stipends for transportation, providing food and childcare, etc.  Also, try a variety of types of events: advocates in Washington State used listening sessions, focus groups, webinars, and community meetings to gather community input.

  • If there are multiple organizing groups in your area, know that they may have differing views on strategy and in some cases may have had difficulty working with each other in the past.  The RTCNYC Coalition’s RTC Toolkit has information on setting up a structure for a multi-organizational coalition.

The Right to Counsel Toolkit, a project of the Right to Counsel NYC Coalition (RTCNYC) and Community Development Project, is a thorough primer from the organizing perspective of how to build and sustain a right to counsel campaign.

Legal aid providers

In nearly every jurisdiction, legal aid programs are the only attorneys that represent tenants facing eviction and are almost always the ones called upon to be the designated providers when a community has enacted eviction RTC. Legal aid support early on is therefore essential because without them, there can be no eviction RTC program.  Additionally, these providers have data to show the impact of representation and experience in estimating the costs of representation.

While legal aid programs need to be early members of the campaign, they may voice concerns about eviction RTC. While many legal aid programs are fully supportive of eviction RTC, some have concerns.  Here are commonly voiced concerns you might come across and how you can try to address them. 

Common concerns from legal aid providers and potential responses

Eviction RTC will impact their organizational priorities.

Some providers may feel that taking on a big eviction caseload will make it impossible for them to do systemic/impact work.

___________

First and foremost, no legal aid program can be forced to participate in eviction RTC: they will only become a provider if they wish to, and they can take on as many or as few cases as they desire so as to shape their work as they see fit. But also, as described throughout Section 1.4, eviction RTC is impact/systemic work: dramatically increasing the number of represented tenants results in more systemic harms identified and addressed, stronger relationships developed between courts, governments, and providers, and tenant power increased. Some examples:

  • In San Francisco, eviction RTC providers were asked to weigh in on the emergency rental assistance program and permanent housing policies, and quarterly meetings were set up between providers and courts to address common issues/patterns witnessed by attorneys. 

  • In NYC, after eviction RTC was enacted, judges started meeting regularly with tenant and landlord attorneys to address identified issues. And eviction records have become more public, which has helped to organize tenants. The RTC NYC Coalition now publishes a "Worst Evictors" list.

TIP: In a Washington State case brought by the U.S. Department of Justice against a landlord for fraudulently claiming rental assistance, a DOJ attorney noted in the press release, “Importantly, this case came out of Washington’s right-to-counsel program for indigent renters facing eviction.  Equal access to justice in eviction defense is helping shine a light on these fraudulent practices in ways that was [sic] not possible before this important program existed.”

TIP: Check out the video, Beyond the Courtroom: Tenant Right to Counsel’s Broader Impacts, to get points for advocacy with legal aid. 

They don’t want to provide full representation to every eligible tenant, preferring instead to provide the level of service that they think each case deserves.

___________

Full representation is at the core of eviction RTC for the reasons described in Section 1.2.  Also, once tenant organizers understand the difference between full representation and limited services, they repeatedly express that full representation is what they want, even if it means having to fight for more funding.

TIP: Discuss the data from eviction RTC programs that demonstrates the significant impact (see Section 4.1), as those programs all provide full representation. 

They already face challenges in hiring and retaining attorneys even without eviction RTC.

___________

To lessen hiring concerns, an implementation plan can include a slower scale-up in alignment with provider capacity. Additionally, legal aid programs need to be assured that the amount of funding available will be enough so that they can hire enough attorneys to keep individual attorney caseloads reasonable.

TIP: Consider discussing this Guide’s sections on capacity and roll out with the legal aid provider to provide examples of the work being done around the country to address these issues.

They receive funding from the Legal Services Corporation (LSC) and cannot participate in eviction RTC campaigns due to LSC restrictions around lobbying.

___________

Even providers funded by LSC have found ways to contribute to eviction RTC campaigns in a fashion that adheres to the restrictions. Even if they can’t be an active campaign member, legal aid providers have and may be willing to share information you’ll need to estimate the cost and scale-up model for eviction RTC.

TIP: Both the NCCRC and NLADA have information about how LSC programs can engage in eviction RTC within the restrictions.

Legal aid programs need to start getting ready early: Eviction RTC programs dramatically change legal services provider organizations and their culture. Programs have to be ready not only to assist the pre-enactment advocacy efforts, but also to engage in the hard and continual work of implementation, including shifting from a service model focused more on brief services to one providing full representation, hiring more attorneys, and ensuring sustained and permanent funding. Executive directors should be prepared to ask themselves and their staff whether they are ready for the immense changes that eviction RTC brings. 

Legal aid programs and organizers may not have worked together before, or may have had difficulty doing so.  In some situations, organizers and legal aid programs have very different ideas about how to effectively bring about reform, and this can lead to problems with collaboration. In our view, organizers should be centered in the campaign and therefore making the strategic decisions about how the campaign proceeds.  To further explore this, we co-hosted a webinar in 2019 with the Right to Counsel NYC Coalition called Winning the Right to Counsel in Eviction Cases: Organizing and the Role of Lawyers (you can also check out RTCNYC’s slides and the NCCRC ‘s slides).

Landlords

If they’re not supportive, try to find out why; don’t assume you know.  They may have a mistaken belief as to what you’re actually trying to achieve, how quickly, or how you’re going to pay for it.  

It’s a misconception that all landlords oppose eviction RTC: there are landlords, landlord attorneys, and landlord advocacy groups that support eviction RTC, those who are neutral, and those who oppose any changes to the status quo. Landlords can be key stakeholders, if not partners, because they often wield a lot of power with policymakers, can wield a lot of power in courts where they frequently appear, and are often associated with large lobbying groups such as the National Apartment Association that are commonly tapped for input by the press.  

In Section 1.4, we articulated some of the reasons why eviction RTC benefits landlords. Here are some additional tips on how to approach them:

Some small landlords may argue that if tenants get free attorneys, then small landlords should as well.  However, most of the eviction RTC programs have an indigency requirement that most small landlords wouldn’t meet.  Also,  eviction RTC is about preserving housing stability but most small landlords don’t have their own housing on the line if they lose the eviction case.

If you do find supportive landlord voices, know that they may not be speaking for their entire organization or community.  As with the courts, consider how far you want to bring them into your coalition, and the timing for doing so.  In Boulder, advocates did involve landlords but it was later in the campaign.

Court personnel (active and retired judges, clerks, and court administration staff) will be critical stakeholders at some point in your efforts for a number of reasons.

Court Personnel

Eviction RTC can be easier to implement if key court personnel understand early on the law’s requirements and timeline for implementation:

  • They can (or must, if they are required to) alert the tenant about the eviction RTC; 

  • They can create room for legal services providers to connect with tenants; 

  • They can (or must, if they are required to) issue continuances (adjournments) when tenants show up for eviction hearings without a lawyer.   

  • Court personnel may have data your campaign needs to estimate the cost of eviction RTC, such as eviction filing rates.

Court personnel may be full coalition members, particularly if they are retired judges or administrative staff. Other court staff, including active judges, may work in support of eviction RTC to provide data, procedural information, connections, and other important advice for implementing eviction RTC effectively. 

When court personnel are not involved in eviction RTC efforts from an early stage, you may not know whether they have objections, and the nature of those objections, and they may share those concerns in a forum where you’re not present.  Most courts handling evictions process many cases (sometimes hundreds) in a single day. Since eviction RTC can slow processing time down, courts may have concerns about their dockets. In addition, some court personnel may hold the view that most if not all evictions are justified.  

As covered in Section 1.4, there are arguments that can persuade court personnel to become involved in RTC campaigns. But consider the best time for doing so, like whether you want them to be involved in decision making and whether their awareness of the campaign will help or hinder your efforts.

Sheriffs/Constables

In our experience, some sheriffs / constables do not like having to carry out evictions and would welcome a reduction in the number of warrants of execution, making them TRTC allies. However, it is also possible that in some jurisdictions these tenant removals are a source of income for that office.  

Policymakers

Unless you’re pursuing eviction RTC via ballot initiative, you’ll need at least one policymaker to sponsor or introduce your legislation (and in some situations, policymakers can actually develop a ballot initiative that is provided to the voters). Policymakers may have ideas about the timing and funding, and it is good to get this information reasonably early in the process.  

However, as with courts and landlords, consider how early you involve them.  Policymakers may not be necessary at all parts of your efforts to advance eviction RTC, and you may not want to have them as full coalition members. In NYC, for example, policymakers could join only specific coalition meetings.

Some things to know about policymakers:

  • They may not be as bold as advocates or organizers.  Solid, tenant-led campaigns have, at times, been able to accomplish more than policymakers thought possible.

  • They are likely to ask about the way eviction RTC works with other eviction interventions and tenant protections. For instance, policymakers often ask about how eviction RTC relates to rental assistance programs or mediation. 

  • Policymakers may be thinking about how eviction RTC can help them politically.  For example, in Baltimore, elected officials picked up the eviction RTC quickly because it was being proposed at the same time as a local mayoral election. In NYC, Mayor de Blasio got behind eviction RTC in part because he wanted to demonstrate in the wake of the first Trump Administration that he was a national leader of the progressive response.

Here are some tips in approaching them to get involved:

  • Make sure you know what kinds of data influences your particular legislators. Don’t assume you know.  It is true that policymakers often are highly interested in the cost/benefit analysis, and might benefit from reviewing some of the cost/benefit studies that have already been generated for other jurisdictions.  But even cost savings data might not be at the top of their mind.  Other kinds of data they may care about include RTC’s impact on certain demographic groups (families with children, people with disabilities, minority communities, etc), the impacts of eviction on certain secondary issues like foster care or employment, etc. For example, in New Jersey, policymakers were known to be specifically concerned about homelessness and the impact on seniors and those needing mental health services. After RTC was enacted and implemented there, there are a large number of referrals that come for RTC through policymaker offices in that state. 

  • Find a true champion or champions. You want someone who is a real believer and actively works to advance eviction RTC, not someone who just files the legislation and lets it sit. 

  • Turn to CityHealth if you are in one of the cities in their cohort.  CityHealth issues gold, silver, and bronze medals to 75 cities based on a specific set of policies, one of which is Legal Support for Renters (their term for right to counsel). Cities really care about these medals, and if your city is one of CityHealth’s 75 cities, your policymakers may want to gain a medal (or earn a better medal).

Other Potential Stakeholders

There are lots of other types of stakeholders who have expressed support for eviction RTC over the years, such as United Way, and ACLU chapters, national housing groups, and a variety of NGOs.  Some might not be actively involved in your coalition but may be willing to lend their name to support your campaign. For instance, the KC Tenants supporter statement included endorsements from: 

  • Social service agencies that serve tenants and individuals experiencing homelessness;

  • Social workers; 

  • Health professionals; 

  • Local United Way or Salvation Army chapters (many have been involved in eviction RTC);

  • Bar associations;

  • Educators (due to witnessing the impact of eviction on their students); 

  • Academics who have written about or studied evictions;

  • Housing law clinics;

  • Agencies within the government that focus on housing or health; and

  • Business leaders who recognize the impact that evictions can have on local communities.

Examples of strong and diverse eviction RTC coalitions

NYC

benefited from powerful tenant organizing, first from CASA-NYC and then the RTC NYC Coalition. The Coalition comprises “tenant organizing groups, tenant advocates, homeless advocates, senior advocates, disability advocates, academics, legal services organizations, and more.”

BALTIMORE

had a large coalition including tenants, legal aid and services providers, Healthcare for the Homeless, parts of Johns Hopkins University, Organizers, Jews United for Justice, Right to Housing Alliances, Baltimore Renters United, United workers, The Democratic Socialists of America, Maryland School of Social Work, and local legislators.

BOULDER

built up a coalition of renters working with the Democratic Socialists of America and 9 to 5 Colorado. There was limited participation by the local legal services organization because of limitations on lobbying and endorsing legislation. Some individual landlords were brought in at the end of the campaign, although there was an extensive (and ultimately unsuccessful) opposition campaign by both the Colorado Apartment Association and the Denver Apartment Association.

KANSAS CITY

had a substantial coalition that included KC public schools, developers in the non-profit space, mainstream organizations, landlord attorneys,  labor unions, community organizations, Missouri Workers Center, Stand UP KC, KCTenants, and councilmembers. 

SAN FRANCISCO

had a strong core coalition of anti-displacement groups, tenant rights organizations, the legal community, and the DSA. On top of one well-known attorney who helped spread the word about the campaign, there was support for the right to counsel from the bar association, eviction defense organizations, public defenders, and even “bigger downtown lawyers.”

TOLEDO

had involvement from the NAACP, mental health provider organizations, a disability rights group, the Medical-Legal Partnership for Children, and a tenant protection group that formed out of the pandemic and that consisted of a number of legal aid providers, city councilmembers, local public housing authority, among others. 

WASHINGTON STATE

had the Black Lives Matter Chapter as a major driver. The coalition included many other groups including the legal aid community, tenants unions, professionals, the Chamber of Commerce, the Sierra Club, AARP, the Washington State Council of Firefighters, AARP, labor unions, trade associations, the Build Black Alliance (which houses 16 civil rights organizations), Habitat for Humanity, and housing authorities.

General coalition-building tips

  • Consider how race, ability and disability, class, gender, sex, immigration status, and other aspects of identity might affect trust amongst members of your coalition. In our interviews with jurisdictions who passed eviction RTC, one tenant organizer noted that “the opposition will use racial and power dynamics against those who struggle to increase renter rights through RTC --- our duty is the listen and check ourselves to ensure we are not doing our opponent's work for us by dividing ourselves,” and “tension will arise, but generative tension is a good thing, and could lead to positive unforeseen outcomes.” Trust is critical not only for the purpose of advancing eviction RTC, but for creating a coalition that can ultimately use the passage of eviction RTC to propel other necessary systemic changes. 

  • Don’t expect consensus right away. Members of your coalition may approach the eviction crisis (and the connected issues you’re seeking to address) from different vantage points. People, even those within the same organization, may have different views on how to, when to, or even whether to work on enacting and implementing eviction RTC.  One RTC advocate observed that when putting resources into a campaign like this it means you're likely not going to be able to put resources into or be successful in some other avenue of housing rights and housing advocacy because of the nature of politics. This may lead to some disagreements and possibly some stakeholders to decide to be “supporters” rather than active participants.