Friday, September 11, 2009

Air Out of the Bubble

For the past decade, Seattle, Bellevue, and the ex-urban area surrounding these two cities have been dominated by hulking construction cranes. The whole Puget Sound region looked like one massive heron rookery. While a portion of this construction frenzy was residential glass skyscraper condominium projects (hello! Is there an original architect in this region?) a substantial portion of the new projects were commercial real estate.

Just this week, a local investment firm, seeking larger headquarters, left Tacoma and purchased the former Washington Mutual headquarters building in downtown Seattle for about 125 million, or $120 per square foot. The building had been recently appraised at $250 per square foot. Gulp. That is a huge huge reduction (the building is currently owned by JP Morgan Chase and/or the US taxpayers).

So it is not surprising in today's news a local developer filed for bankruptcy. A guy who has been in business for a long time. He now apparently has over $500 million in liabilities and around $200 million in assets (which, of course, are probably buildings that may actually be over appraised). While there are several banks holding onto liens secured with real estate, this developer also, apparently, borrowed heavily from "family and friends," and up until July of this year, paid them a consistent 9% return (does this sound vaguely similar to Bernie Madoff?). To add to this man's woes, the State of Washington has opened an investigation on him over the appeals made to the individual investors. He did not register the "sales" of the "investments" as stocks.

There are still dozens of cranes in the Puget Sound region horizon. The glut of residential housing, mostly in the form of condos, also brought commercial space. The chic thing in urban planning, now, is multi-use, so that ground floors on most condo projects are retail spaces. And just a drive-by assessment says much of that space remains unleased (making me wonder whether condominium homeowner associations are left holding the bag on the empty space?). All of this empty square footage portends another bubble about to burst. Despite the Federal Reserve's somewhat cherry outlook earlier this week, there is still an awful lot of air that has to be squeezed out of the bubble before the real estate markets, at least, begin to recover.

Hopefully the ever optimistic real estate agents, developers, and civic boosters will think long and hard before trying to "sell" us on an other unsustainable ride on the real estate roller coaster.

Thursday, September 10, 2009

So Whose Economy Is Getting Better?

The most disturbing news today isn't that some Congressman yelled at the President during his speech last night. It's that the number of poor people in this country has increased. By a whole percentage point.

That is not good.

Of course, the media, enjoying a little fluff-up between a Congressman no one has ever heard of and President Obama, would rather focus on the 15 minutes of infamy.

But this, this increase in poverty. It's big news. But didn't we know it was coming? Wait till we see the numbers for 2009.

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

Finally! And A Walk Off Home Run Speech

Finally, President Obama presented his plan, or his idea for health care.

Walk off home run speech.

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Flap Over Van Jones

Apparently for a number of weeks, Fox News commentator, Glenn Beck, has been ranting about Obama Administration hire (working in the White House) Van Jones. Mr. Jones, a well known West Coast activist, was "recruited" to work on "green jobs," which is something he has worked on, along with prison reform and environmental justice campaigns.

Glenn Beck, known as an extremely conservative commentator (in the style of Rush Limbaugh) picked up on several issues about Jones: the fact Jones called Republicans assholes, that he talked about white polluters and white environmentalists harming black communities, that Jones belonged to a group in the mid-1990s that advocated Marxist solutions to economic injustices, and maybe because Jones had been arrested in San Francisco in post-Rodney King riots and for the rioting and property destruction in Seattle during the World Trade Organization meetings in 1999 (Beck linked Jones with the anarchists who took "credit" for the Seattle riots).

Jones was hired by the White House, who, this weekend, distanced themselves from him by saying the hire did not go through the normal "vetting" process. It seems to me that an Administration that says it wants change should have taken more care to vet their hires. But more importantly, change also means not doing the usual Washington, DC shuffle. In other words, not ditching people when something about their pasts become controversial. Like so many other Administrations, particularly the Clinton one, loyalty to staff seems rather thin with the Obama Administration. This was a good moment, a teaching moment, for Obama, to talk about how people evolve in their thinking, how we tend to moderate our wild ideas as we grow older, but from those pasts, many good things can grow.

Prior to this weekend, Jones was a hero of many in the progressive movement, and seemingly could do no wrong among the newly minted environmental/social justice opinion makers. He was loved by everyone from Arianna Huffington to Rachel Maddow. He was feted by corporate American, seeming to fit their idea of having Van Jones around will fulfill environmental justice concerns. Check.

Now of course, since his resignation, attributed by the anti-Beck crowd as being hounded out of the White House, Jones stock is soaring. He is a martyr to the cause of being against Fox News and conservative political commentators.

And many in the Washington, DC establishment are wondering whether the "new" political atmosphere is being held accountable for comments made (and refuted) in your past. I think about Senator Ted Kennedy's eloquence when he talked about how none of us are defined by one incident, one or two moments in time. We are vastly more complicated than that. Jones should not be judged, least of all by a hyperbolic, bombastic commentator, for things he said or petitions he signed. He was hired by the Obama Administration because many many people in the business sector, including Meg Whitman, the former CEO (and Republican candidate for California governor) thinks Jones is a catalyst for change when it comes to jobs, the environment, and social justice.

On one list serv that I am a member, which caters to journalism, the emails have been flying over Glenn Beck's irresponsibility and how he was unjust to Jones.

Here is how I look at it. There is no doubt that Van Jones is a charismatic and charming leader of a many pronged movement to link social justice, environmental issues, and economic class. There have been many who have toiled in these trenches for decades before Van Jones swept onto the scene, and many who will continue the work long after Van Jones moves onto other issues. His leadership skills, however, are far far better off in the advocacy arena than the political milieu where caution and extraordinary care with words and actions are the norm. In the advocacy arena, hyperbole and pushing caution to the side are keys to success. In the White House, his particular skills, are stifled.

Also, if Jones is as a sophisticated leader as has been advertised, surely he can understand the delicacy of the Obama Administration. President Obama must, at all times, appear to be the president of all Americans (including Glenn Beck). While there is no doubt that issues of environmental justice (as in pollution affecting poorer communities) impact people of color far more than others, increasingly issues of desperate impacts are based on economic class rather than color of skin. Jones should not be held accountable for his prior advocacy comments, but on the other hand surely Jones knew his prior comments and beliefs would haunt the Obama Administration if and when someone cared to spend the time looking at them. A simple Google or Bing search will reveal Jones and his prior comments (as well as a view of Breaking the Chain a video done by Eugene anarchists about the Seattle WTO protests/riots will show an energetic Jones) and hopefully he knew someday, someone would check him out.

It's sad to see the bifurcation of advocacy and politics. In other words, that making the transition from advocacy work to politics is harder and harder. This difficulty in the transition also makes politics less interesting, more driven toward the cautious and easy resolution, rather than tackling large picture issues with zeal and energy. But, the silver lining to this is that perhaps people who are in advocacy will not be inclined to join the government, but rather be far more effective standing on the outside lobbing bombshells, pushing the slow moving political process to take heed or we'll take it to the streets.

Thursday, September 3, 2009

Redemption

Excerpts of Ted Kennedy's memoir are being leaked by the New York Times. In his book, completed apparently, several months before his death, Kennedy discusses the despair and depression he endured subsequent to the series of family tragedies beginning with older brother Joe's disappearance during World War II to Bobby Kennedy's assassination in 1968.

But it's the revelation of his own mistakes and troubles that is far more interesting. Why? Because Kennedy demonstrates a rather wise, sage, and vastly different understanding of human character than what most people express. In essence, he accepts that no person is defined by any single act or even acts. We are far more complicated beings than that. In other words, Kennedy is not some boozy, womanizing, galavanting politician, but rather, as we have heard over the past week, he is a loving husband, devoted father and uncle, avid historian, jovial singer, passionate outdoorsman and sailor, accepting friend, compassionate statesman. I would suspect that he could look at anyone and find the good in them.

And that is a redeeming character.

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Puget Sound Energy's Clout

Ok, I am going to admit right off, this is a personal rant. But I happen to know there are several thousand people in Seattle with my same situation.

Several years ago I called Puget Sound Energy, our local, privately owned, gas utility. Most people in Seattle are customers of the public electrical utility. But, I have an oil furnace and the price of oil per barrel was going through the roof. Natural gas was not. So I wanted to have a gas line installed in my house, then convert to gas for heating and cooking.

The call was going along smoothly until I gave the customer service person my address. "Uh-oh," she said, "you're on an arterial." Apparently my city government makes me replace the whole concrete panel on my street for a 4' x 3' hole. The worse case came true in the gas main is across the street, making my problem doubly expensive. I would have to replace two concrete street panels to the tune of $15,000. I didn't and don't have that kind of money laying around. I appealed to the city, and they agreed that I didn't have to replace the whole panels, just most of it, reducing my cost a whopping $2,000.

As I type this, Puget Sound Energy's contractor is outside, on the main arterial, replacing a gas line for my next door neighbor. It's their maintenance, not the neighbor's request. They have dug their 4' x 3' hole. And they will patch it, not replace the concrete panel (which, by the way was replaced by the city last year, but not close enough for me to connect with the gas main). And what really upsets me is Puget Sound Energy is reducing their rates by 17% while my oil bill continues to sky rocket, and the City of Seattle just raised my electrical rates (I use electricity to cook) again!

I guess if you're a large monopoly you have much more clout with government than a solo citizen, and rules don't seem to matter. But why am I surprised?

Tuesday, September 1, 2009

Disintegrating Conversations on Health Care

It's been said time and time again, the national conversation over health care seems to be disintegrating rather than arriving at resolution.

I thought this piece by Mark Penn was spot-on. The Obama Administration, as great a messenger as it was during the campaign, seems to be muddled. There is no uplifting message on what they see as their vision for Americans through any changes to the current systems that provide health care and health insurance in this country (remember, health care and health insurance are two different things).

Maybe I'd be moved to contact legislators if I knew what, exactly, this Administration is for, not against. Before anything else, we need some clarity and leadership from the President.