If you live in the City of Seattle, you probably think that if Sybil L. (for Louise?) Bailey, the mayor's 65 year old, wheelchair bound, crusty nominee as the tenant representative on the Seattle Housing Authority's Board of Commissioners gets appointed, it won't have an effect on you.
You may be mistaken.
At the Seattle City Council Housing Committee meeting on August 1st which I attended, nearly a dozen SHA tenants said they didn't want Bailey, speaking for them on the board. That would be like a dozen union members saying they didn't want their union representing them.
Tenant and low-income activist John Fox pointed out that she had opposed the seat she is now seeking in testimony before the Senate in 1998 (see http://www.leg.wa.gov/pub/billinfo/1997-98/house/2450-2474/2459-s_sbr_022598.txt). I find this ironic and filled with Chutzpah.
Rick Harrison, a Cedarvale residence noted how Ms. Bailey also helped SHA management write a new SHA Quisling like rule last year that prohibited public housing tenants from putting posters or decorations on the outside of their front doors. Last October, after Resident Action Council (RAC) members who represent tenant interests balked at the rule (later suing SHA on free-speech grounds and winning in King County Superior Court), Bailey resigned from RAC on short notice.
Another example offered was how Ms. Bailey between 2000 and 2003 put RAC on hiatus by refusing to call meetings, hardly the example of leadership for someone wanting to serve on the Board of Commissioners for a professionally run, tenant-oriented business.
One tenant, a former apartment and property manager and architectural firm executive said that she had no business or management experience to be on such a board and that he knew of one Hispanic male executive who was never even called in for an interview in spite of a long history of public service.
Others pointed out that the process in selecting applicants was flawed in that out of the five members of the selection panel, only one represented SHA tenants and the rest were from the mayor's office even though the Council makes the final decision.
Out of the 16 recruited applicants, only six were interviewed, a mere 37.5 %. There are no Hispanics on the Board and the Board is currently out of balance in terms of the number of men to women [2 to 5].)
The major issue seemed to be that Ms. Bailey rewrote a set of bylaws that stopped the Resident Action Council (RAC) from representing all tenants including the agency's garden, senior, and scattered site communities and other properties, all without residents voting on the change (see Real Change News, http://www.realchangenews.org/2006/2006_07_26/2006/2006_07_26/strongvoice.html !Strong Voice or Rubber Stamp?" July 26).
I also checked into the corporate status of the RAC and discovered that it has not been legally incorporated which makes me wonder how the alleged new bylaws ever got ratified.
When Council member Nick Licata asked if there had been a vote, Bailey snorted in reply that in essence, it didn't matter. "They weren't really represented anyway in the Resident Action Council," she said.
Ms. Bailey's comments make me wonder how she would behave on the board. Would she vote to strip existing union contracts or not recognize new unions because SHA staff isn't represented on the Board of Commissioners? Or respect neighborhood wishes where future SHA housing would be located because there wasn't a neighborhood representative on the Board? Would she obey the law regarding public meetings and the procedure for making impartial decisions? Would she vote to subcontract out union jobs to the lowest bidder? Would she protect staff pensions or pull a United Airlines and let the public pay for them? If management wanted to gut the employee health plan or pull a Sprawl-Mart, would she go along and let the rest of us pay via Basic Health? Would she sell the Yesler Terrace properties to the highest bidder and not get anything for the tenants in return?
Fortunately, no one seconded Councilmember McIver's motion to approve her. Committee Chair Tom Rasmussen has deferred a vote to this Tuesday, Aug. 15th.
So if you don't feel comfortable having an unqualified person be appointed to set policy and make important decisions for a business with a 350 million dollar budget in FY 2007; 6,443 housing units; 24,500 customers; and 628 employees and make critical decisions that could make a difference on the increasing value of your housing, the quality and quantity of housing in our neighborhoods, and where more affordable housing gets built in Seattle, then I urge you to contact the following Councilmembers and urge them to vote no on Ms. Bailey's appointment by 8 a.m. Tuesday morning:
Tom Rasmussen, Housing Committee Chair Tom.Rasmussen@seattle.gov (206) 684-8808
Sally J. Clark sally.clark@seattle.gov (206) 684-8802
Richard J. McIver Richard.mciver@seattle.gov (206) 684-8800
And a cc: to
Nick Licata, Council President nick.licata@seattle.gov (206) 684-8803,
Mayor Greg Nickels http://www.cityofseattle.net/mayor/citizen_response.htm (206) 684-4000, and
Claudia Arana, Boards and Commissions Coordinator claudia.arana@seattle.gov (206) 615-0958
/S/ Keith Gormezano