The Cost of Eviction
The impact of eviction goes beyond having to leave your home; it is a disruptive event capable of forcing an individual or family into a cycle of financial and emotional turmoil. An eviction record also hinders the immediate and future ability to secure stable housing and extends its influence to many other areas of life. Housing instability exposes millions of Americans to job loss, forced relocation to unsafe areas, disruption in childhood education, loss of possessions, and a lack of food security. In Evicted, Matthew Desmond accentuates how "[…] eviction can unravel the fabric of a community, helping to ensure that neighbors remain strangers and that their collective capacity to combat crime and promote civic engagement remains untapped."
Recent efforts to reduce the number of evictions have focused on rental assistance – alleviating an immediate need and allowing an individual or family to remain housed for the moment. However, an increased focus on eviction prevention, as a whole, could result in declining rates of homelessness and economic advantages for the entire community. Evictions are the source of millions of dollars in unnecessary taxpayer costs without beneficial outcomes, imposing unsustainable costs that further strain already underfunded and overburdened community resources.
The Cost of Eviction Calculator developed by The University of Arizona uses national data to approximate the cost of providing social services to those displaced through eviction. In July, of the 1,593 evictions filed in Oklahoma County, 754 of those cases received a judgment resulting in eviction. Taking into account this specific number of rulings and combining it with broader national data, the projected outcome is a financial burden on taxpayers amounting to $3,055,038 on shelter alone. This sum surpasses the $1,099,892.10 in rent owed by those receiving judgment by almost two million dollars. When factoring in the costs for medical care and the increased rate of children from displaced families interacting with the Department of Human Services (DHS) and the juvenile court system, taxpayers could face an additional cost of $3,919,540. Based on these numbers, the estimated economic impact from the 754 judgments alone could amount to $6,974,578.
These consequences demonstrate that eviction is not merely an isolated problem between individual tenants and landlords; rather, it comprises a societal issue imposing a substantial fiscal burden on the community. While many factors contribute to the current eviction crisis, achievable solutions exist to improve the problem. Introducing pre-filing mediation, expanding the availability and accessibility of affordable housing, and raising the minimum wage would substantially alleviate the eviction issue in Oklahoma.
Mediation is a collaborative process involving a trained and impartial third party known as a mediator, who confidentially listens to both parties, guiding them in clarifying and discussing their concerns, identifying areas of agreement, and exploring potential solutions. Pre-filing mediation moves these services upstream, allowing both parties to address their concerns without incurring the expense of a court hearing. The landlord can avoid having to pay filing and attorney fees, while the tenant can prevent the adverse consequence of having an eviction filing on their record. Resolving a case outside of court also gives the parties greater control over the outcome, empowering them to find solutions tailored to their needs.
The undeniable success of pre-filing mediation is clear from the eviction statistics in Philadelphia, attributable to the creation of their Eviction Diversion Program that requires pre-filing mediation before initiating a court proceeding. Since the start of this initiative, there has been a striking reduction of 74% in eviction filings when compared to pre-pandemic levels. However, in contrast, Oklahoma has experienced a reverse pattern, with eviction filings rising beyond levels seen before the pandemic. This trend emphasizes the necessity of enacting eviction prevention strategies, prompting Shelterwell to launch a pre-filing mediation initiative crafted to facilitate communication between tenants and landlords, ultimately attempting to resolve cases before they advance to a court hearing.
In addition to pre-filing mediation, expanding access to affordable and supportive housing is a compelling remedy for reducing evictions and homelessness. However, the United States faces a systemic issue related to affordable housing, characterized by a shortage of accessible housing units and inflated rental prices, causing many Oklahomans to be heavily burdened by housing costs. Research from the Oklahoma Policy Institute shows that in Oklahoma, there are only 46 homes available for every 100 extremely low-income renter households. The National Low Income Housing Coalition also reports that Oklahoma lacks approximately 81,000 affordable homes for extremely low-income individuals.
Many advantages are tied to an increased supply of affordable housing, most significantly seen in preventing housing instability and strengthening local economies. A larger supply of affordable housing would reduce evictions and lessen the burden on low-income communities, making the social and economic return well worth the investment. For most people, rent is their most significant monthly expense; thus, lowering rent would allow for more discretionary spending in the community to stimulate the local economy. Generally, housing is considered affordable when no more than 30 percent of a household’s income goes toward the cost of housing. The City of Oklahoma City’s recent Housing Affordability Study states that a single person working full-time at minimum wage should have a housing cost of less than $403 per month. However, Rent.com estimates the average price of a one-bedroom apartment in Oklahoma City to be $920.
This discrepancy is the primary reason many households are cost-burdened, thus at a higher risk of missed rent payments. Another contributing reason is that Oklahoma’s critically low minimum wage has not been raised since 2009. During the past decade, the earnings of low-income Oklahomans have either decreased or remained stagnant, while housing expenses have surged, and efforts in policymaking have yet to be successful in narrowing this divide. According to research by the Oklahoma Policy Institute, a minimum-wage worker earning $7.25 per hour would have to work 73 hours per week to afford a one-bedroom home. For a two-bedroom house or apartment, they would need to work 92 hours per week, equivalent to holding down more than two full-time jobs. Advocating for increasing the minimum wage can serve a dual purpose: reducing poverty and increasing housing stability, enabling people to afford their living expenses without the economic strain caused by eviction
The complex nature of Oklahoma’s eviction crisis requires unified action, where community members, organizations, and policymakers collaborate to find practical solutions. Only through a combined commitment to understanding the challenges tenants and landlords face can we alleviate the burden of eviction, protect vulnerable populations, and create a more secure and prosperous future for Oklahomans. Initiatives, including pre-filing mediation, expanding access to affordable housing, and raising the minimum wage, will create a comprehensive approach that not only lessens the immediate impact of eviction but also fosters a more equitable and resilient community where housing stability is attainable for all.