Page 29 - Impact: Collected Essays on Expanding Access to Justice

surveys . Upon analyzing the data, members concluded that we lacked two things: a description of the courtroom experience itself and narratives from tenants . Members therefore created focus group questions and an observation survey . After being trained in both courtroom observation protocol and facilitating focus groups, members conducted 15 judge observations and facilitated three focus groups with 25 participants .
Our data revealed four main findings:
1 . Housing Court is confusing and difficult to navigate for most tenants .
2 . The vast majority of Bronx tenants do not have legal representation to help them navigate the system .
3 . Pro se tenants are at a huge disadvantage in housing court .
4 . Judges have the ability to do more to even the playing field for tenants .
Policy recommendations
Initially, as members began to outline what they would change in housing court if they could, almost everything centered on how they were treated . People described being yelled at, being talked to like they were less than human, not being able to find anyone who could speak their language in a dialect and form that make them feel comfortable (not all Spanish is the same), being threatened by their landlord’s attorney with immigration, with eviction, and so much more . Members felt like if they were just treated better, their outcomes would have been different .
As we began to analyze how decisions are made in the housing court and who has control over how it functions, we began to focus on the systems of power within the court, instead of individual people’s behavior . We understood that individual court personnel’s attitudes and behavior would be hard to change unless the conditions change . The people who work at housing court, who are mostly people of color themselves, have an overwhelming caseload and work under incredibly stressful conditions . As tenants pour out their hearts, tell their stories, voice frustration and anger, it’s the court personnel, not the landlords, who hear and receive all of this . Tellingly, when we were talking to the union that represents the court staff about one of our demands––to require the court personnel to wear visible identification as a court employee so that tenants don’t mistakenly think the landlord’s attorney they are negotiating with works for the courts (which happens more often than you would think)––the union said court staff didn’t want the tenants to know their names for fear that they would follow them out of court, and attack them . We were able to compromise to get the employees to wear IDs that don’t state their names, but this is an incredible reflection of how inhumane and dire the relations are in housing court . Anyone who can come to work on a daily basis under these conditions and be compassionate, patient and kind for years on end, is a remarkable person . Eventually the most kind-hearted, well-intentioned people will lose their patience . Changing systems and structures that create such a hostile environment, would benefit the people who work in the courts as well as the tenants who are facing eviction .
CASA members worked with an Advisory Committee of attorneys, policy experts and advocates to help turn our findings into concrete policy recommendations to change these systems and structures . After an intense process of analysis and prioritization, members narrowed it down to 23 recommendations and released our report in March of 2013 .13
13 See new seTTlemenT aParTmenTs’ communiTy acTion for safe aParTmenTs (casa) & communiTy deVeloPmenT ProJecT (cdP) aT The urban JusTice cenTer, supra note 9.
Specific Areas for Reform: Housing
27