Economic Development in American Cities: The Pursuit of an Equity Agenda

4. SEATTLE’S BEST PRACTICES IN THE 1990S: MUNICIPAL-LED ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT

CHAPTER FOUR SEATTLE’S BEST PRACTICES IN THE 1990S: MUNICIPAL-LED ECONOMIC AND WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT Bob Watrus and Jodi Haavig INTRODUCTION Seattle in the 1990s sought to link economic and workforce development to benefit low-income communities and communities of color. The city’s efforts built on the region’s strong, growing economy, which created tight labor markets for much of the decade and, as a result, provided an opportunity to strengthen low-income communities by connecting them to living-wage jobs. Seattle’s progressive political culture is very process-oriented, engaging diverse and often competing interests in decision making and concerned with social equity, environmental quality, and economic opportunity. Within this context, during his eight years in office, Mayor Norman Rice provided strong leadership in pursuit of a social equity agenda. Rice was determined that Seattle’s prosperity be broadly shared. With this vision, he created the Office of Economic Development (OED), which became the vehicle for linking economic and workforce development. OED then put the mayor’s social equity vision to work through the Seattle Jobs Initiative (SJI), which connects low-income community residents to living-wage jobs and other efforts. As a result of the city’s efforts, thousands of low-income community residents were connected to living-wage jobs during the 1990s. 111 112 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN AMERICAN CITIES Larger regional trends, however, challenged Seattle’s social equity agenda. For example, the economic growth that enabled the accomplishments also drove up the cost of living, especially housing costs. As result, many lowincome Seattle residents have had to move to surrounding areas, where the cost of living is lower. This outcome speaks to the need to take a broad view of social equity that encompasses growth, housing, transportation, and other issues, along with economic and workforce development. This chapter is about a strong and visionary mayor who attempted to join a commitment to social equity with an economic development strategy focusing on high technology and enhancing urban amenities. Pursuing social equity led to redesigning government agencies, allocating general fund resources , and launching new initiatives. But, for the above reasons, Seattle is also a cautionary tale about the challenges of linking growth and equity, mayoral transitions, and overcoming the fragmentation and competition that may come with sustained prosperity over time. The City Seattle is the Northwest’s largest city, home to Boeing, Microsoft, Starbucks, Nordstrom, REI (Recreational Equipment Inc.), the University of Washington , research institutes such as the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center , and the Port of Seattle. In addition to a diversified economy, Seattle is also a city of neighborhoods, each with its own distinct identity. Strong economic growth during much of the 1990s, combined with an enviable natural environment and quality of life, led to recognition of Seattle as a “most livable city” and Washington state as having the nation’s best economy (City of Seattle, City of Renton, and Metropolitan King County, 1998). During the 1990s, Seattle’s population grew significantly, from 516,259 to 563,374, for a growth rate of 9 percent. At the same time, the rest of the Seattle metro area grew at more than twice that rate, 22 percent (Brookings Institution, 2003). Seattle’s population also became more diverse, with people of color comprising almost a third of the population by the decade’s end. Asians/Pacific Islanders constituted 14 percent of the population, followed by blacks/African Americans, 8 percent; and Hispanics/Latinos, 5 percent. Seattle’s immigrant population grew by 40 percent, accounting for one in six residents. Increases for all racial and ethnic groups, however, were much larger in the rest of the Seattle metropolitan area (Brookings Institution, 2003). At the end of the decade, Seattle’s population was also relatively young, with people in their late twenties and early thirties making up the city’s largest age groups. Furthermore, nearly a third of Seattle residents had arrived within the last five years. Seattle residents also had high levels of education, with nearly half of the city’s adults having a bachelor’s degree, and nine in ten having a high school diploma. However, there were racial differences in educational attainment. For example, 54 percent of whites had 113 SEATTLE’S BEST PRACTICES IN THE 1990S at least a bachelor’s degree, compared to 20 percent of blacks/African Americans , 26 percent of Hispanics/Latinos, and 37 percent of Asians/Pacific Islanders (Brookings Institution, 2003...