An elegy for straight-shooting Charlie Chong

As a Seattle City Council member and community activist, he said things others wouldn't – the things that were true but were uncomfortable to hear.

Charlie Chong, 1926-2007.

Charlie Chong, 1926-2007.

The young and the restless and Seattle newcomers won't have known Charlie Chong. He was one of those rare birds who believed as an American he was obligated to get involved and tend to the process of government. He may have believed that government was a little like growing tomatoes – a little water and fertilizer would do wonders, and Charlie was prepared to supply both. Charlie spent a large measure of his life in battle. Most often it was for honesty and openness in public debate, but on Thursday afternoon, April 26, Charlie Chong, at 80, trying his very best, didn't win his last and biggest battle against failing health. Charlie was many years past his prime when he ran for Seattle City Council, but you couldn't tell it. He set the tone for his tour in public office by immediately hiring two young men as aides: one a political activist, the other a musician with long hair. He wanted their energy, their intelligence, their young ideas, but mostly their ability to see with fresh eyes. Maybe, Charlie speculated, he could guess what old folks were thinking, but what he wanted to know was what the new generation was thinking. Besides, he trusted them. The old guard was frosty about his choices as aides and speculated that neither owned a suit, the uniform for City Council offices. But worse, just to embarrass Charlie, they proposed his new aids take a drug test. Charlie responded that if that was the plan, the whole council should pee in a cup. I suspect that when Charlie was a kid he just couldn't walk by a hornets nest without poking it with a stick, just to get the little critters awake in the morning. He also poked some council meetings and hearings, just to get their attention. Instead of looking wise and offering knowing nods and platitudes, Charlie would ask deliciously difficult questions. Like, "Why?" Some of his questions had never been asked. One that made the press was his asking why it wouldn't be smarter to buy used snowplows for Seattle when they were only used every three of four years. It would save hundreds of thousands of dollars. Charlie, a civil servant much of his career, knew that unless the hard questions were asked, sensible, affordable, and practical decisions wouldn't be made. Charlie cared deeply about Seattle neighborhoods and was our knight, our champion, our Sir Lancelot on some days and Don Quixote on others. Charlie was a warrior in what was often a battle between the establishment and the public. Because Charlie said what others were afraid to say, he was often the single voice of reason in a bureaucratic web. But candor in politically correct Seattle would upset the establishment. Charlie had a knack for creating one-line responses to the press. Sometimes he was outright sassy and yanked their chain, a no-no for a politician. The press frequently retaliated and twisted his dry humor of offhand statements into newspaper-selling but unfair quotes. Charlie didn't walk on water and could be cantankerous if cornered. He had strong opinions and made enemies, but his style was always truthful and open. He never told people their ideas were great then voted against them. Pure honesty in politics is so rare that few knew how to deal with a guy who was so candid he would tell them up front that he thought their idea stinks. One of his greatest gifts to this community was his challenge of group think, a contagious disease among Seattle elected officials. Charlie just plain didn't believe he should vote along with everyone if he wasn't sure their idea was best. Even though he voted with others countless times, he is known best for the rare and courageous ability to stand alone. Charlie didn't leave it to others. At an age when some went fishing, Charlie rolled up his sleeves and became involved in countless struggles after leaving the City Council, where his dedication to public service counted for so much. Even those who never heard of Charlie Chong might someday discover that we all owe Charlie Chong, big time. Damn it Charlie, we still need you.

About the Author

Kent Kammerer is the unofficial leader and official scribe of the informal, non-partisan Seattle Neighborhood Coalition, which meets over breakfast once a month to discuss Seattle policy and politics.

Like what you just read? Support high quality local journalism. Become a member of Crosscut today!

Comments:

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 7:05 a.m. Inappropriate

CHAMPION CHONG: Mr. Kent Kammerer writes an excellent tribute to Charlie Chong that has also been superbly edited. Charlie also was wise enough to forgo golf in his latter years; 'golf' not being one of his favorite 4 letter words.

animalal

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 10:49 a.m. Inappropriate

Thanks, Charlie: Without you, we would have had a beautiful public park in South Lake Union instead of acres of condominiums.

Sean

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 11:19 a.m. Inappropriate

Our kind of guy!: Charlie championed the local citizen. He was a neighborhood guy who thought government ought to be ought taking care of neighborhood issues like potholes and burnt out street lights. He fought for the average guy, someone the current city "fathers" are doing their best to have driven from town.

Most of the crap going on in city government today was grist for Charlie's mill. It's too bad there isn't a single solitary elected official in Seattle - almost in all of King County, for that matter, Kathy Lambert, Mark Lamb, and John Chelminiak to be excepted - who really give a rip for the average man or woman.

Charlie was Seattle the way it used to be...the Seattle that people think of...the Seattle that's long since disappeared into a cesspool of political correctness and rigid ideological orthodoxy.

Anybody got a For Sale sign?

The Piper

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 2:59 p.m. Inappropriate

A legacy of courage and common sense: Many thanks to Kent Kammerer for his warm and compassionate words about Charlie and his legacy.

Charlie was that rare elected official whose stated purpose was, as he put it, "to stand up for the little guy" - and not only meant it, but did it.

He walked the talk in fighting for the disenfranchised and disadvantaged; from his days as a community organizer in the civil rights era South (at great hazard to his safety), to helping form VISTA, from ensuring that Federal anti poverty programs did the jobs they were charged, culminating in years of public surface in his adopted home of Seattle.

Charlie was one of the first in town to lead a neighhood fight to preserve a local greenbelt, was the former head of the Admiral Community Council, served on a Parks advisory board, and led efforts opposing overbearing efforts by the City government and bureaucracy to run roughshod over n'hoods while basic civic services and social programs were ignored.

He was a voice for the neighborhoods, for sensible civic priorities and for the everyday citizen who actually has to live with the costly social engineering schemes and wasteful "vanity projects" of self appointed - and self serving - "urban visionaries" who themselves are often little more than shills and fronts for developers and other diners at the table of the public trough.

And a defender of the spirit, history and traditions of the craftspeople and farmers of the Pike Place Market from an inept Market management and its ceaseless efforts to "gentrify" our Seattle institution.

You're right Kent, we need him now more than ever.

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 3 p.m. Inappropriate

A correction for "Sean": As for "Sean", your comment is inaccurate.

Charlie had little more to do with the Commons well deserved defeats than the overwhelming majority of voters who wisely shot it down - twice.

Charlie, as I, opposed the Commons, spoke out against it as a citizen and in debate during his losing Council campaign with Margaret Pagler in 1995.

However, like the voters, his only say in the outcome was with his own citizen's ballot. He wasn't elected to Council until 1996, long after the last Commons vote in May of that year.

Elected by a citizenry who agreed we needed our finite taxes spent on more important, critical needs: Like maintaining the many neglected parks through out the city we already had (they still are), instead of on publicly funded vanity projects for private developer profit.

Again, you're right, Kent. Needed more than ever.

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 4:35 p.m. Inappropriate

The little guy complex: Ah, yes, "the little guy".

I'd love to meet this little guy. I'm guessing the little guy has neither the time nor means to read this not-a-blog, but if you see him, please give him this message.

Hey, little guy, do yourself a favor and get over your little guy complex. I know the big guys make you feel insecure and, well, little, but an idea isn't necessarily bad just because it happens to be a big idea proposed by a big guy.

I suspect you vote against big ideas because you imagine you are sticking your little thumb in the eye of the big guy, and that makes you feel bigger. The irony is that by voting for little guys with little ideas, it is the really big guys who almost always benefit.

Take the Bush presidency, for example. Yes, your little guy vote showed that high falutin' Gore with his fancy big words who not to mess with. Yet just about everything Bush has done since you put him in office has screwed over little guys around the world and greatly enriched the big guys.

With respect to The Commons, yes, you told that big guy Paul Allen where he can stick his big donation of land and money. And stick it he did, right into a bunch of development projects on what would have been a park. Thanks to you, the big guys will get even richer, and the little guys moving into their little condominiums are left with nowhere to take their little dogs and little kids.

Scary as this big new world may be, little guy, it will be a better place once you grow up.
Sean

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 6:06 p.m. Inappropriate

And I'll huff and I'll puff and I'll blow your house down...: Sean...

To set your mind at ease...George W. Bush was responsible for the Peloponnesian Wars. He fomented the Mutiny on the Bounty, and he, not Mrs. O'Leary's cow, kicked over the lantern resulting in the Great Chicago Fire.

Look...the Commons was a bust...So sayeth the people. You wrongly tagged Charlie for that; you got caught with your Chong down! Simply admit it instead of getting on a typically Seattle rant about Dubya or trying to nominate for sainthood that gasbag Gore.

Win a few...lose a few...

The Piper

Posted Mon, Apr 30, 7:17 p.m. Inappropriate

Speaks for itself: I won't dignify "Sean's" comments with any further reply. I think he quite effectively, and revealing, speaks for himself.

Posted Tue, May 1, 7:19 a.m. Inappropriate

Chong and Fox, Fox and Chong: Ok, I admit it, Chong didn't personally kill The Commons. If anyone deserves credit for that, it was Chong's campaign manager, Matthew Fox. Perhaps he's the little guy?

Sean

Posted Tue, May 1, 7:25 a.m. Inappropriate

RE: A correction for "Sean": What's with the quotes, "Geof Logan"?

Sean

Posted Tue, May 1, 7:33 a.m. Inappropriate

Little guys still matter: It's interesting to see from Sean's arrogant rant that revisionist history on the Seattle Commons is already underway just a decade after the fact.

Simply because the Commons was a "big idea" doesn't mean it was a good idea. I opposed the Commons project and, like a majority of Seattleites voted against it twice. As a result, instead of an sterile developers' paradise, I can now look down at a developing South Lake Union that is a mix of buildings of different ages, types and functions, with a mix of housing and business, new jobs and new residents.

The properties these new projects are sited on were purchased in fair negotiations from their longtime owners, not taken by the government through eminent domain. They still produce taxes to benefit the entire community. Many little guys have benefitted from this transition. I'm fine with that.

There are even plenty of luxury condos that only Sean and his trust funder cronies can afford. They can sit on their rooftop decks and stew about the cookie-cutter neighborhood that might have been.

For your information, Charlie Chong didn't stop the Commons. In fact, you could argue that the immense fanny-patting society of politicians, venture capitalists, developers, and civic do-gooders that coalesced to support the Commons made Charlie's career. This government by groupthink was appalling enough to the little people (that phrase again) that they put a maverick troublemaker like Charlie into office so there would at least be two sides to the argument.

Don't worry, Sean. Paul Allen did just fine, even though he had to forgo the government subsidy of the Commons Park and pay fair market value for the properties he is now redeveloping.

And Seattle did good by electing Charlie Chong, an honest man who cared about people more than he cared about money. We'll miss Charlie long after Paul Allen and his fellow techno-tycoons are forgotten.
J.R.

Posted Tue, May 1, 7:50 a.m. Inappropriate

Who's revising history?: J.R.: "Don't worry, Sean. Paul Allen did just fine, even though he had to forgo the government subsidy of the Commons Park and pay fair market value for the properties he is now redeveloping."

What? To refresh your memory, Paul Allen already owned a huge chunk of land in South Lake Union, which he had purchased at fair market prices before The Commons was hatched. He offered to donate that land to the city to turn it into a park, not the other way around. The little guy said no, so he is now turning that land into condos instead.

So, yes, Paul Allen is doing just fine thanks to the little guy - that was the whole point of my so called "rant".
Sean

Posted Tue, May 1, 8:49 a.m. Inappropriate

Do your homework, Sean: Paul Allen was systematically buying land at South Lake Union both inside and outside the boundaries of the proposed Commons Park. The land he donated to the city would have been an investment to increase the value of his other property. Rich guys don't get rich by giving things away.

J.R.

Posted Fri, May 11, 3:46 a.m. Inappropriate

Charlie Chong timetable: After the second defeat by Seattle voters of the 'Commons' on May, 21, 1996, a council member named Tom Weeks resigned. Charlie Chong emerged through a special election primary of 10 candidates and a general election victory over Bob Rohan in November, 1996. He chose to run for mayor in 1997; surviving the primary but losing to Paul Schell in November, 1997. Moving forward through time, Paul Allen's 'Vulcans' have paid numerous 'little guys' millions more for their South Lake Union properties than would have been paid under the 'Commons eminent domain/condemnation land grab schemes. And, that is a good thing.

animalal

Posted Mon, Jul 23, 12:13 a.m. Inappropriate

rest: Just because people want to say something nice about Charlie and comment on his politics doesn't mean you have to say anything about him Sean. Especially now; even if you disagreed with him; though you were inaccurate. Thankfully friends and colleagues defend him (though you were inaccurate). If you don't know who the "little guy" is fyi: the little guy is a citizen, nothing more or less. Each citizen thinks differently. I am pleased to be a beautiful lily of the field, nothing more. I just knew Charlie from work at the Market - he was a gracious, intelligent man.

elizaja

Login or register to add your voice to the conversation.

Join Crosscut now!
Subscribe to our Newsletter

Follow Us »