FIRST WORD

IDEAS THAT
CUT THROUGH
THE BS




Seattle City Council Elections --
Views from the Trenches

During the fall election season, real issues and candidates' records often get lost in the fog of campaign rhetoric. We asked two representatives of organizations that are working tirelessly for a fair and just city to put the upcoming elections into context, and to give us their views both on some candidates, and on the critical issues which need to be addressed if Seattle is to remain livable for everyone. John Fox is the head of the Seattle Displacement Coalition. Lisa Herbold is an organizer with the Seattle Tenant's Union.

Who Says Seattle Is A Progressive Town?

by John Fox

This fall, I will be casting my vote against all City Council incumbents, and here's why. In my 20 years as a housing and community activist in Seattle, I do not recall a time when city politics has been at such a low ebb. While we are awash with truly reactionary politicians at the national and state level, at least we know where they stand. In such a climate, it's easy for our Mayor and City Council to masquerade as "progressives," even though none of them seems to understand or care about economic justice. These are local "leaders" who can express great concern for global human rights, passing several resolutions over the years condemning third world oppression, yet continue to take a direct hand in creating oppressive conditions for poor people and people of color in our own community.
Without exception, all of our current councilmembers and Mayor are "corporate" liberals - liberal on social issues, and corporate on economic and distributive issues. Yes, thank heavens, they do vote for policies to end discrimination against gays, women, and people of color in the workplace and they adhere to affirmative action guidelines in city hiring. But those same officials will not hesitate to implement zoning and development policies that feed the fat cats while accentuating poverty, unemployment, and homelessness in our inner- city. We desperately need resources for the Southend, Central Area, and the rest of our neighborhoods - for housing, jobs, and services that directly serve low income people, working people and communities of color. Instead, our "leaders" routinely allocate limited public tax dollars for big ticket items like the Convention Center, Seattle Commons, and the Nordstrom Project - three developments costing over 400 million in subsidies that by themselves will displace more than 1000 residents from the Cascade and Downtown area.
In effect, Seattle officials have vigorously promoted growth that serves corporate interests while refusing to implement legally defensible proposals that could have protected low cost housing from demolition, abandonment, and increased rents caused by growth. Over 4000 households have been displaced since 1980 in downtown while thousands of other households have been displaced from our neighborhoods. That's why there are over 4000 homeless on our streets, and another 40,000 low income households at risk of becoming homeless. Even if the voters do pass a 60 million dollar housing levy this fall, the dollars our elected officials commit to meet human needs pales compared to what we spend to promote the office boom, and to what is needed to assist those who are displaced by the City's policies.
It's bad enough that our "leaders" have directly contributed to the rising number of homeless on our streets, but it is a moral outrage when they follow that with laws aimed at sweeping the poor off those streets. Increasingly, our elected officials will not hesitate to pass unconstitutional laws that deny basic civil rights to people of color and the homeless - laws that criminalize the simple acts of sitting, panhandling, just sleeping in a city park, or hanging out on a street corner (now automatically defined as "drug loitering," especially if you are young and black). According to a recent nation-wide survey of the nation's cities, Seattle is one of the five "meanest" towns in the country when it comes to its treatment of the homeless.
And by approving these laws that are inherently discriminatory, our "leaders" also have given the green light to an increased incidence of police abuse in our city. Cases of harassment reported by the homeless - especially homeless youth, Black youth, Latinos and Native Americans - have reached epidemic proportion, yet remain a non-issue to elected officials such as Councilwoman Margaret Pageler, head of the Council's public safety committee. In fact, no elected official supports any kind of outside "citizens" review of police misconduct.
While I cast my vote against the incumbents, I'll probably vote for Pat Strosahl in the race for the one open seat, mindful however that in the last City Council election Margaret Pageler also ran as a neighborhood activist and catered to low income housing advocates as Strosahl has done. Once elected, however, she quickly joined the Mayor and City Attorney Mark Sidran in authoring the no-sitting law and other measures aimed at driving the poor out of town. Strosahl is running against Tina Podlowski, who identifies herself as a gay rights activist. Podlowski has virtually no record of experience or apparent interest in other issues - let alone matters of racial and economic justice. No matter - by garnering the stamp of approval from the corporate liberal establishment, the mainstream press has anointed her as the frontrunner.
In sum, there really are no candidates who have made economic justice and fairness a hallmark of their campaign. This is no surprise in a town like ours where it literally is not possible to get elected unless you get the endorsement of the major dailies, and the Muni League, and draw thousands of dollars in support from big business - which can only occur if you are irrevocably wedded to the status quo. What is needed is a restructuring of city politics - a move to district elections or proportional representation. This could enable low income communities and communities of color to at least have some chance at electing their own representatives.
We also need more issue-based initiative campaigns that could force the City to adopt aggressive housing policies and reallocate resources from downtown to our neighborhoods. Pursuing any progressive strategy, however, will depend upon more active involvement from those who are not represented by the status quo - young people, working class people, communities of color, poor and homeless people, and senior citizens. We need more of these constituencies willing to press their case not just at the ballot box but in the form of good old fashioned protest.

To contact The Seattle Displacement Coalition, call: (206) 523-2569.

Sherry Harris: People's Candidate or Landlord Lackey?

by Lisa Herbold

When Sherry Harris ran for City Council in 1991 she presented herself as a candidate for all citizens of Seattle. Many non-profit and community-based organizations endorsed and supported her candidacy. Whether or not Councilmember Harris has lived up to the expectations of her supporters is questionable in the light of the legislation she has sponsored, as well as her voting record.
Since Councilmember Harris took office in 1992 she has made numerous efforts to forge a relationship with the propertied classes of Seattle, often betraying her community supporters in the process. Her betrayal of Seattle's housing movement has been especially acute. In 1993, instead of taking leadership and sponsoring initiatives to strengthen the rights of tenants, she sponsored a Landlord-Tenant Workgroup in an attempt to have us "just work together." But increasingly, she is working only for landlords. Last year, Harris sponsored and voted for changes to Seattle's Relocation Assistance Regulation Ordinance, which suspended the owner's requirement to contribute financial assistance to low-income tenants displaced due to renovation, demolition, or change of use. Harris's latest act of back stabbing is displayed by her efforts to add new "just causes," or reasons for eviction, to Seattle's Just Cause Eviction Ordinance.
Seattle's Just Cause Eviction Ordinance (JCEO) is the law that requires landlords to give tenants a good reason for eviction. This law is solid eviction protection that renters outside of the city limits do not have. If you are on a month-to-month tenancy and you live north of N. 145th or south of S. 100th your landlord can require you to uproot your home, yank your kids out of school and move, for no reason with only twenty days prior notice. These notices to terminate tenancy are frequently given in illegal retaliation against tenants who have exercised their legal rights. No-cause terminations are also often used to discriminate against tenants because of their race, sexual preference, age, gender, family size, or disability.
Landlords are using their influence with Harris to weaken the law. If they are successful the number of reasons for eviction will be increased from 14 to 22. One proposed "just cause" for eviction will be allegation of criminal activity. Instead of going to court to prove that the tenant is doing something wrong, the landlord can simply give a 20 day notice to vacate. This change, if approved, will make it much easier for landlords to ask tenants they perceive as "troublemakers" or those they wish to discriminate against to move based upon the allegation, but not proof of criminal activity.
The one thing Harris has successfully accomplished over the last four years is positioning herself for reelection. Harris has gained the support of those with deep pockets to replace the broader support she has lost. A comparison of Sherry's campaign contributions makes evident that shift of support. In 1991 Harris received campaign contributions from organizations such as NOW, the Lesbian Political Caucus, the Women's Political Caucus, and the Seattle Firefighters Guild, as well as unions and community activists. This time around her campaign contributions come increasingly from interests such as Boeing, Philip Morris, US West, Burlington Resources (an oil and gas PAC), Sabey Corporation (a commercial real estate PAC), as well as a handful of Seattle's landlords. The landlords who have contributed to her campaign are part of the Apartment Association of Seattle and King County (AASK), a lobby of landlords who have been instrumental in pressuring the city to dismantle, one by one, the good laws that protect Seattle's renter community.
Fifty-two percent of Seattle's residents are tenants. When at the polls, make sure that you vote for a candidate who is supporting your, as well as the majority of the city's, interests.

To contact the Seattle Tenants' Union call (206) 722-6848.



[Home] [This Issue's Directory] [WFP Index] [WFP Back Issues] [E-Mail WFP]

Contents on this page were published in the August/September, 1995 edition of the Washington Free Press.
WFP, 1463 E. Republican #178, Seattle, WA -USA, 98112. -- WAfreepress@gmail.com
Copyright © 1995 WFP Collective, Inc.