Eviction moratorium doesn’t fix flawed housing process
We are in uncharted territory. The COVID -19 global pandemic has infected millions, and already taken the lives of more than 210,000 Americans. This tragedy has also created immense fear among the public. Out of that fear, there have been calls for the government to take dramatic steps.
Late last month, Gov. Andrew Cuomo extended moratoriums on commercial evictions until October 20 and residential evictions until January 1. Both moratoriums began March 20, and there’s no reason to believe he won’t extend them again.
On face value, this may make sense. You don’t want people being removed from their homes in a pandemic, because it is a health risk for everyone. But a blanket policy ignores all the nuance and complications that come with enforcing contracts surrounding housing. It triggers a chain of events that has consequences.
In pre-pandemic New York City, for example, more than 200,000 eviction notices were filed each year. Of those, the vast majority, more than 75 percent, are for nonpayment of
rent. Of those notices filed, only about 1 percent end in the actual eviction of a tenant. But what the New York City government does not tell you is that of that 1 percent of evictions executed, less than 1/10th of them involve the actual physical removal of a family or their possessions. In short, the system protects tenants at risk.
The eviction process is not a Dickensian scheme to make people homeless. Property owners don’t like to evict people. But it is the only legal option available to housing providers when a tenant doesn’t pay rent. Owners cannot just forgive their tenants’ rent, because they have bills to pay — the biggest of which is property taxes, which have skyrocketed in the past decade.
The current eviction process is a policy that so-called progressive elected leaders have implemented. It is the system they wanted. Housing providers like ourselves universally would prefer something that was more fair to tenants, providing renters in need with vouchers up front so they have stability in their homes.
When a tenant doesn’t pay rent, the burden falls on the property owner, not the government. Sometimes it can take six to nine months to evict someone, which means the owner loses thousands of dollars that they never recover. That lost revenue has an impact on paying tenants. It’s why their rents are higher. It’s why buildings may not be as clean or repairs may not happen as quickly. This is particularly true for small-property owners where lost rent revenue can literally bankrupt them in a matter of months.
This system is a failure of the government to provide an adequate social safety net that provides housing vouchers to those who need it, or mental health services and shelter for the homeless. This is why implementing eviction moratoriums is not a solution. It is an admission of defeat by elected officials. They are stating that they don’t know how to help renters in need, so they do the politically expedient thing — make property owners bear the burden.
This policy has larger consequences, too. Eventually housing providers will be losing too much money to pay their property taxes. This will lead to a huge budget gap, possibly $2 billion in New York City alone come January. That will lead to more cuts to essential services like education, sanitation and public health.
We are in the middle of a crisis and we need solutions. An eviction moratorium is not a solution. It is simply stalling for time. If we stall any longer, the consequences of the inaction will be dire for both renters and their housing providers.