"He was the strongest pro-tenant candidate," Fox says, referring to Steinbrueck's run for city council two years ago. "But he has been a disappointment. Now, he's the number one obstacle. It fries me to see him talking about being the most progressive guy on the city council."
For Fox, the upcoming September 8 city council meeting serves as a case in point. At the meeting, Steinbrueck -- chair of the housing committee -- will put two items up for a vote. Steinbrueck will ask his colleagues to place real estate developer Jennifer Potter on the Seattle Housing Authority board (SHA). He will also ask the council to sign off on changes to SHA's Holly Park development plan. For Fox, both proposals demonstrate that Steinbrueck has abandoned the battle to save -- not to mention expand -- housing options for the poor.
On July 28, Fox, director of the 20-year-old Seattle Displacement Coalition, sent a letter to the council members on Steinbrueck's housing committee -- lobbying them to reject Potter.
Fox points out that Potter is a partner in Wallingford Center, a retail development that includes HUD-funded apartments. Fox believes it is "wholly inappropriate" to have someone sitting on the SHA board -- funneling HUD money to the city -- who also has a financial relationship with HUD. Fox's concerns about conflicts of interest are heightened because Potter was a partner with Bruce Lorig at Lorig and Associates. Lorig is currently being investigated by HUD for funneling contracts to business associates through his position as a consultant to SHA on the Holly Park project.
More galling to Fox, however, are comments Potter reportedly made during her interview process. Potter defined "low-income" as "80 percent of median income." According to the latest available data, the median income in King County is $47,000. Potter's definition puts low-income at $37,600 -- making $939 an acceptable rent (according to the traditional "30 percent of monthly income" equation).
Steinbrueck has zero patience for Fox's complaints about Potter. First of all, Steinbrueck points out, Mayor Schell picks the nominees. "Potter was sent to me," he says. Steinbrueck merely says yea or nay, then passes his recommendation on to the city council.
"[Potter] doesn't exactly meet my values and interests either," he acknowledges, "but if I'm going to reject a mayoral appointment, I'd better have a damn good reason. [Fox's] strongest criticism is cronyism. But that's not a factor unless there's some sort of financial gain going on. Is there personal gain or wrongdoing? No. There is nothing."
As for Potter's definition of "low-income": "I agree with John [Fox] that SHA's mission is to focus on the poorest of the poor," Steinbrueck says, "but I can't say that any of the nominees I've interviewed understood that."
In all fairness to Potter, the federal definition of "low-income" is 80 percent of median income. However, SHA -- whose mission is to cater to the poorest of the poor -- has long recognized the need to do better. The 871 low-income units at SHA's Holly Park development, for example, are slated for affordability to renters at 30 percent of median income.
Fox's letter elicited a four-page response from Potter, which she also sent to Steinbrueck, on August 17. Her letter points out that she hasn't worked with Lorig since 1988.
Potter did not return our call.
Holly Park is a SHA project in South Rainier Valley. Two years ago -- with $48 million in federal money and additional city funding -- SHA began demolishing the 870 low-income units there, with a plan to build a mixed-income community.
The original three-phase plan for "New Holly" was approved in a Memorandum of Agreement between SHA and Seattle's Office of Housing in 1997. Fox says that last week Steinbrueck signed off on changes to the MOA that sacrifice the number of low-income rental units for poor families. Indeed, according to Rick Hooper at the Office of Housing, the revised MOA calls for 60 low-income rentals in Phase Two, a 51 percent drop-off from the original plan. However, Hooper is quick to point out that Phase Three restores the loss.
SHA dropped the number of low-income family rentals in Phase Two thanks to a $6 million HUD grant they managed to get for building senior rentals. SHA wanted to take advantage of the HUD money
Steinbrueck says simply: "We need elderly housing. We need lots of it. Does that mean we've betrayed the city [on the low-income family units]? I don't think so. I don't think the city has backpedaled. They have not reduced numbers."
Fox ain't so sure. "Who says they're going to make up the loss of public housing in Phase Three? What's to prevent them from amending the unit counts again?" Fox isn't only concerned about the precedent, he's concerned about the here and now. "When you push back our obligation of replacing the family units at Holly Park, we've got a longer waiting period... and more homeless in this city. Peter should be pointing a finger saying, 'No, you signed this contract and you have an obligation to build those units.'"
Steinbrueck, however, points his finger at Fox. "There are broader views than John's view of housing. And he needs to understand that."
