Forterra should go back to basics of preserving open space

For an environmental organization accustomed to basking in the glow of community admiration, Forterra NW’s fall from grace has been particularly abrupt, steep and potentially fatal.

Now, Forterra’s board of directors is reviewing its practices and mission. This self-examination is necessary for the nonprofit to regain trust and continue the important conservation work that has made it a major environmental player.

Forterra should go back to basics and reset its focus on finding and preserving open space. Its forays into real estate development have largely failed to meet expectations. Its recent debacle with the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe shows an organization beset with hubris, arrogance and incompetence.

Founded in 1989 as the Seattle King County Land Trust and renamed the Cascade Land Conservancy, it initially sought to help property owners with forests and farms retain green space. Sometimes that meant buying development rights, or purchasing properties later sold to governments for permanent protection. In 2021, the nonprofit listed net assets of $45 million.

It earned a well-deserved reputation for finding and saving precious lands. But in 2006, the organization updated its mission statement to include community development.

Rebranded as Forterra in 2011, its logo includes an ampersand as the letter “e” — reflecting its added scope. It got involved in urban development projects in Seattle’s Central Area and Rainier Beach among other locations.

Earlier this year, it embarked on its most ambitious project. Called “Forest to Home,” Forterra intended to partner with the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe to harvest timber on its land, use the wood to create prefabricated housing units in Darrington and build affordable housing in underserved communities, including Tacoma’s Hilltop neighborhood — all with the help of a $35.7 million grant from the federal government.

To say the deal went south is an understatement.

The Snoqualmie Indian Tribe accused Forterra of misleading it and the federal government. The Greater Tacoma Community Foundation, which put money into Forterra’s investment arm to fund the Hilltop project, charged Forterra with misrepresenting its plans. In a letter to the Forterra board that was also signed by the president of the Seattle Foundation, Greater Tacoma Community Foundation President Kathi Littmann wrote they had no confidence in Forterra’s executive team.

Last month, a group of 80 former Forterra staffers wrote an open letter criticizing its dealings with the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe. They wanted to “defend the organization from its current mismanagement and dearth of leadership at the executive level and implore a drastic change in direction to preserve Forterra’s valuable legacy …”

In response, the Forterra board hired a law firm to investigate the tribe’s concerns. It found Forterra’s missteps “did not appear to have resulted from any malicious or deceptive intent.” For an organization once heralded as “a catalytic force” for good, this is a low bar indeed.

The law firm found many areas of concern, and its recommendations for future government funding applications — get input from the leadership team, involve the appropriate technical experts, fact check — read like Grant Writing 101. By now, Forterra should have known better.

Forterra fired the executive who oversaw real estate transactions. The Times reported that the executive, Tobias Levey, settled a civil lawsuit accusing him of fraud, embezzlement and self-dealing in 2017 in a New York project that involved property acquisition, housing development and logging.

In an email, the tribe’s governmental affairs director Jaime Martin said Levey’s history “makes ridiculous” the notion that Forterra acted in good faith.

In an interview last week, Forterra board chair Beth Birnbaum said the board is currently considering the organization’s governance and oversight. Of the “Forest to Home” project, Birnbaum said, “It’s a complicated vision, but it’s one that I think all aspects of it fit nicely together and are attainable.”

Birnbaum said Forterra was a “learning organization” that pushes boundaries but said part of the internal conversations have been around whether Forterra should scale back. “This is making us think about what do we do ourselves, versus what do we accomplish through partnerships.”

There are many groups that develop low-income housing. Good intentions aside, Forterra should get out of that business. It should also actively engage with partners, critics and employees who believe the organization has lost its way.

On Election Day, King County voters approved a property tax increase to pay for more open space acquisition. For decades, Forterra has partnered on land conservation with King County — 35% of its income comes from government grants and contracts. Expect Forterra, if it still exists, to be heavily involved in how this new tax money is spent. That adds urgency to the board’s musings.

Forterra can build on its long legacy of effective conservation, but only if leadership accurately self-assesses its weaknesses, admits where it went wrong, makes the appropriate staff changes and recalibrates back to its historical mission.