The conference room at Forterra’s King County office at 5101 14th Ave NW in Seattle’s Ballard neighborhood once buzzed with celebration. In September 2022, the organization had just secured a $20 million USDA grant for its ambitious Forest to Home project—sustainable timber harvesting from tribal lands, manufacturing in Darrington, affordable housing in Tacoma and Tukwila. Partners included the Snoqualmie Tribe, Snohomish County, the City of Tacoma, Amazon, and Microsoft. Total projected investment: $500 million over 10 years. Michelle Connor, Forterra’s President and CEO, framed it as equity-focused climate solution: “This grant will allow us to have climate-smart commodities that tie together our most rural communities and Indigenous and traditional environmental knowledge with the heart and soul of neighborhoods like Hilltop.”
By October, that celebration had collapsed into crisis. The Snoqualmie Tribe withdrew support, accusing Forterra of misleading both the tribe and the federal government. Eighty former staffers signed open letter describing “toxic, volatile and retaliatory workplace” and demanding leadership change. The Greater Tacoma Community Foundation and Seattle Foundation—major investors in Forterra’s community development work—expressed no confidence in the executive team. Forterra fired its Vice President of Real Estate Transactions. The Seattle Times editorial board published scathing assessment: “Its recent debacle with the Snoqualmie Indian Tribe shows an organization beset with hubris, arrogance and incompetence.”
The Forest to Home controversy exposed fundamental questions about Forterra’s evolution from focused land conservancy to ambitious community development organization. Founded in 1989 as Seattle King County Land Trust, the organization earned national reputation for innovative conservation, protecting 275,000 acres across Washington through 450 transactions. But mission expansion into affordable housing development, market creation, and complex multi-stakeholder initiatives stretched the organization beyond its conservation expertise, alienated partners and staff, and threatened the credibility built over decades.
Two years later, in 2024, Forterra’s annual report strikes notably different tone. The organization completed six land purchases and conservation easements protecting 240 acres. It launched Forterra Nature Discovery program offering free guided nature walks. It transferred Strong Communities Fund projects to intended recipients. The language emphasizes core conservation work—forests that stand, habitat that nurtures wildlife, communities that thrive. The ambition remains, but the approach has recalibrated.
Understanding Forterra requires examining both its conservation achievements and its community development failures, recognizing that nonprofit mission creep can undermine exactly the values organizations seek to advance.
The Duvernoy Era: Redefining Conservation Through Innovation
Gene Duvernoy transformed Seattle-area land conservation from peripheral concern to central policy priority during his nearly 30-year leadership (1989-2018). His background—environmental engineering and law degrees, director of King County’s Office of Open Space, architect of successful $117.6 million open space levy campaign—positioned him to broker complex deals between developers, governments, environmentalists, and landowners.
The Land Conservancy of Seattle and King County began modestly in 1991, co-founded by Duvernoy with Gerry Johnson, Carol James, and Frank Pritchard. The founding moment reflected growing concern that King County’s open spaces faced development sprawl threatening farms, wetlands, and forests. Traditional conservation relied on outright land purchase and government ownership. Duvernoy pioneered more flexible tools: conservation easements restricting development while allowing continued private ownership, development rights transfers allowing density to shift from environmentally sensitive areas to appropriate locations, and innovative financing structures making conservation economically viable.
Early projects demonstrated the approach. The Land Conservancy bought 11 miles of abandoned Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway trackbed in 1997, selling it to King County to create East Lake Sammamish Trail linking existing paths into continuous 45-mile paved route. Adjacent property owners fought the plan for years, but the trail finally opened in 2006, demonstrating how former industrial corridors could become recreational assets.
The organization’s reach expanded beyond King County by 2000, prompting name change to Cascade Land Conservancy reflecting statewide scope. Major conservation achievements followed: negotiating purchase of Weyerhaeuser’s 90,000-acre Snoqualmie Tree Farm, acquiring 89-acre Wayne Golf Course in Bothell for conversion to city park with mile of Sammamish River frontage, completing final 1,500 acres of Port Gamble Forest protection on Kitsap Peninsula.
The Snoqualmie Tree Farm deal exemplified Duvernoy’s approach at scale. Weyerhaeuser wanted to liquidate the massive holding. Development would have destroyed critical habitat, fragmented forests, and eliminated public access. But few entities could afford $350 million purchase. Cascade Land Conservancy orchestrated complex transaction involving federal Forest Legacy Program funds, state matching funds, King County Conservation Futures tax revenue, and private philanthropy. The property transferred to Washington Department of Natural Resources and King County, preserving working forest while ensuring sustainable timber harvest, protecting habitat, and guaranteeing public recreation access.
National recognition followed. Land Trust Alliance Executive Vice President Wendy Jackson praised Duvernoy for “changing the traditional meaning of conservation.” The shift from pure acreage preservation to “community conservation” integrating land protection with public access, community engagement, and equitable outcomes influenced land trust practice nationwide.
When Duvernoy stepped down in 2018, the organization had conserved more than 275,000 acres through 450 transactions across 83 Washington communities—impressive by any measure. His successor would inherit both that legacy and pressure to match it.
The Mission Creep: From Land Conservation to Community Development
In 2006, Cascade Land Conservancy updated its mission statement to include community development alongside land conservation. The rationale seemed compelling: conserving land without addressing community needs—affordable housing, economic opportunity, cultural preservation—created incomplete solutions. What good were protected forests if people lacked homes? Why preserve farmland if farmers couldn’t afford to farm? How could conservation serve equity if it primarily benefited wealthy communities able to fund land protection?
The organization rebranded as Forterra in 2011—the name meaning “for the earth,” the logo featuring ampersand as the letter “e” symbolizing expanded scope connecting conservation and community. The ambition was noble: addressing interconnected challenges rather than pursuing narrow conservation goals.
Initial community development projects showed promise. In 2018, Forterra paid $4.5 million for old motel in Tukwila’s Somali immigrant community with help from Seattle venture capitalists. The plan: create Wadajir International Market for local vendors, eventually helping the community purchase land and build residential-commercial development. The project recognized that conservation work couldn’t ignore displacement pressures affecting immigrant communities.
But complexity escalated. Forterra’s revenue more than tripled from 2015 to 2020, reaching $18 million annually. The organization created for-profit arm (Strong Communities Fund) to pursue real estate development distinct from traditional nonprofit conservation work. Board membership included King County Executive Dow Constantine. Contracts with King County reached $12 million over three years, mostly through Conservation Futures program. The organization’s political connections, rapid growth, and ambitious vision generated momentum—and vulnerability.
The 2019 purchase of old Rite Aid building in Tacoma’s Hilltop neighborhood illustrated growing problems. Forterra bought the property with investor funds from Greater Tacoma Community Foundation and Seattle Foundation, promising affordable housing development serving longtime residents facing displacement from rising costs. Construction delays followed—first pandemic, then supply chain issues, then interest rate increases. Other Hilltop housing projects moved forward. Forterra’s sat undeveloped for years.
Greater Tacoma Community Foundation President Kathi Littmann’s October 2022 letter captured investor frustration: while acknowledging legitimate challenges, Littmann noted other projects progressed despite same obstacles. She questioned whether Forterra possessed expertise to execute complex affordable housing development, urged board to hand the project to experienced developers, and demanded leadership replacement “with a team that can restore trust.” Her devastating assessment: “Hilltop has had a long history of broken promises and this needs to not be one.”
The Hilltop delay alone wouldn’t have triggered crisis. But combined with Forest to Home controversy and former staff allegations, it revealed pattern: ambitious promises exceeding organizational capacity, insufficient expertise in new domains, poor stakeholder communication, and leadership unwilling to acknowledge limitations.
The Forest to Home Debacle: When Ambition Meets Indigenous Rights
The Forest to Home project represented Forterra’s most ambitious community development initiative—and its most spectacular failure. The concept: sustainable timber harvesting on partner lands (especially Snoqualmie Tribe’s 12,000-acre ancestral forest), manufacturing cross-laminated timber panels at new facility in Darrington, building affordable housing in Tacoma and Tukwila using those panels. Projected cost: $500 million over 10 years. Claimed funding secured: $215 million in “social impact capital, low interest loans, grants and philanthropy.”
The September 2022 USDA grant announcement seemed to validate the vision. Twenty million dollars from nearly $3 billion USDA program funding climate-smart agriculture and timber projects. Major partners: Snoqualmie Tribe, Snohomish County, City of Tacoma, City of Darrington. Corporate support: Amazon, Microsoft. The narrative emphasized equity, Indigenous knowledge, climate resilience, and community empowerment.
The Snoqualmie Tribe’s September 23 letter withdrawing support demolished that narrative. Tribal Chairman Robert M. de Los Angeles described how Forterra refused sharing the grant application unless the tribe signed nondisclosure agreement. The tribe obtained the application through third party and discovered alarming misrepresentations:
Timber Volume: Forterra proposed manufacturing 20,000 cubic meters of timber products annually from Snoqualmie ancestral forests. The tribe harvests 2,500 cubic meters yearly—the amount considered sustainable. The 20,000 cubic meter figure “would be unsustainable and irresponsible” and was never discussed with the tribe. De Los Angeles wrote: the tribe “has never made any commitments to Forterra or anyone else to entirely strip our Forest of important cultural resources.”
Financial Commitments: The application claimed the tribe would provide nearly $1.5 million in match funding. The tribe had no knowledge of this commitment and never agreed to it.
Unauthorized Representations: The application’s “dominant narrative” presented tribal timber harvesting as necessary to rebuild “multiple disadvantaged or suffering communities to whom Forterra had made unilateral promises”—framing the tribe never endorsed and commitments never discussed.
The letter concluded: “We have serious concerns that Forterra’s grant application contains multiple unauthorized misrepresentations of fact, as well as false representations of commitments allegedly made by our tribe, and apparently impossible claims.” The tribe called for USDA to conduct full review and audit.
The crisis exposed not merely miscommunication but fundamental failure to engage partners respectfully. Requiring nondisclosure agreement before sharing application treating tribe as party to suggests organization viewing partners as obstacles rather than equals. Proposing timber harvest eight times sustainable levels without consultation demonstrates either profound ignorance of tribal sovereignty or willful disregard for it. Claiming $1.5 million tribal commitment without tribal knowledge constitutes misrepresentation whether intentional or negligent.
Third-party investigation found Forterra “did not properly obtain the tribe’s consent for parts of the application” but concluded missteps “did not appear to have resulted from any malicious or deceptive intent.” For Indigenous people with centuries of experience being deceived by non-tribal institutions, the distinction between malicious intent and incompetent disregard offers cold comfort.
The Staff Exodus: When Culture Becomes Toxic
Eighty former Forterra staffers signing open letter demanding leadership change represents extraordinary workplace rebellion. Land trusts typically attract mission-driven employees who tolerate organizational dysfunction out of commitment to conservation. For 80 alumni to publicly condemn their former employer suggests profound organizational failure.
The letter described “toxic, volatile and retaliatory workplace” and called for accountability for “long-standing detrimental conduct.” While not detailing specific grievances, the letter’s timing—immediately following tribal allegations—suggested that external controversies reflected internal dysfunctions staff had witnessed for years.
Rapid organizational growth often strains culture. Forterra’s revenue tripling from 2015 to 2020 while expanding from land conservation into community development required hiring staff with different expertise, creating new departments, and managing more complex projects. Growth can outpace organizational infrastructure—financial systems, HR policies, decision-making processes—creating chaos and dysfunction.
The National Labor Relations Board complaint filed by Office and Professional Employees International Union Local 8 in August 2022 suggested labor relations problems preceding the tribal controversy. Union organizing typically reflects worker concerns about wages, working conditions, or representation in organizational decisions. The NLRB complaint indicated problems festering months before public crisis.
Forterra’s 2024 annual report notes “rapid transformation to positive employee morale has been the result of focused leadership and a growth mindset, energized by an organization-wide commitment.” The language acknowledges previous morale problems while claiming improvement. Employee satisfaction scores mentioned suggest organizational awareness that culture requires active cultivation, not benign neglect.
The Reset: Returning to Conservation Fundamentals
Forterra’s 2024 accomplishments reflect organizational recalibration toward conservation fundamentals. Six land purchases and conservation easements totaling 240+ acres—modest compared to historic mega-deals but representing sustainable, executable work. Specific projects demonstrate focused approach:
Duwamish Hill Preserve, Tukwila: Added one acre preventing development and encroachment. Small acreage, high impact—protecting urban greenspace with cultural and ecological significance. The area once buried under trash, vandalism, and junk cars now features mature trees, native plants, accessible trails, and interpretive art capturing Puget Sound Salish history.
Central Cascades: Acquired 30 acres of timber rights near Mount Si protecting old-growth forests, completing Hancock Creek conservation initiative. This continues Forterra’s historic strength: assembling conservation puzzles piece by piece through patient acquisition.
Mount Index: Secured 102 acres of forestland with old-growth pockets along ridgeline visible from Highway 2 and popular climbing areas. The acquisition used $220,000 from Snohomish County Conservation Futures program, demonstrating continued productive government partnerships.
Saint Edwards State Park, Kenmore: Expanded park 6.5 acres enhancing wildlife corridor and preventing future development. Incremental additions to existing protected areas often provide disproportionate conservation value by reducing edge effects and fragmentation.
Naneum Creek, Kittitas County: Secured conservation easement on 146-acre family farm protecting agricultural land and Yakama Nation cultural artifacts. This returns to Forterra’s founding model: working with landowners to protect working lands through flexible conservation tools.
The 2024 report also highlights Forterra Nature Discovery program—free guided nature walks led by expert naturalists, birders, photographers, and meditation practitioners. The program reflects understanding that conservation requires cultivating people’s connections to protected lands, not just acquiring acreage and restricting access.
The Strong Communities Fund transfers mentioned in the 2024 report suggest Forterra divesting from community development projects, returning them to partners better positioned to execute. This represents organizational humility—acknowledging that conservation organization shouldn’t necessarily develop affordable housing just because housing matters for communities.
The Ongoing Challenges: Conservation in Crisis Context
Forterra operates in context where conservation challenges intensify while resources and political support remain constrained. Climate change threatens the ecosystems Forterra protects—droughts stressing forests, altered fire regimes, shifting species ranges, extreme weather damaging habitats. Conservation strategies developed for stable climate may fail under rapid environmental change.
Urban growth continues consuming open space despite conservation efforts. King County added roughly 300,000 residents from 2010 to 2020. Development pressure on remaining undeveloped land intensifies. Conservation easements and protected areas create islands in developed matrix, raising questions about long-term ecological viability of isolated fragments.
Funding constraints limit conservation capacity. While King County voters approved property tax increase for Conservation Futures in 2022, providing estimated $269 million by 2031, demand for conservation funding exceeds available resources. Forterra competes with other land trusts, government agencies, and conservation priorities for limited dollars.
The political climate adds uncertainty. Federal conservation funding depends on congressional appropriations and administrative priorities that shift with elections. State budgets fluctuate with revenue cycles. Private philanthropy responds to economic conditions and donor priorities that may deprioritize land conservation relative to other urgent needs.
Indigenous land sovereignty and cultural resource protection demand approaches beyond traditional conservation models. The Forest to Home controversy illustrated how conservation organizations with inadequate understanding of tribal sovereignty, cultural resource protection, and Indigenous rights can cause harm despite good intentions. Effective conservation in Washington requires genuine partnerships with tribal nations, not superficial consultation treating tribes as stakeholders rather than sovereign governments.
Equity considerations permeate conservation work. Who benefits from protected lands? Who bears costs of conservation? Whose knowledge and priorities shape conservation decisions? Forterra’s mission emphasizes “equitable, green, and prosperous communities” and vision of “place where everyone belongs,” but translating values into practice requires ongoing self-examination, community engagement, and willingness to share power.
The Conservation Futures Legacy: Public Investment in Permanent Protection
Forterra’s work depends fundamentally on King County’s Conservation Futures program—property tax funding land conservation since 1982. Created by 1971 Washington state legislation, Conservation Futures authorizes counties to levy small property taxes dedicated to acquiring or protecting open space, farmland, and habitat. King County voters have consistently supported the program, understanding that once land develops, it rarely returns to natural or agricultural use.
The program has protected approximately 120,000 acres across King County since inception. Major preserves like 3,000-acre Cougar Mountain Regional Wildland Park between Renton Highlands and Newcastle owe their existence to Conservation Futures funding. Smaller community assets like Ballard and Belltown P-Patches, Duwamish Hill Preserve, and neighborhood trails likewise depend on the program.
Forterra receives substantial Conservation Futures contracts—$12 million over three years as of 2022—positioning the organization as key intermediary between public funding and conservation outcomes. This arrangement makes sense: Forterra brings conservation expertise, landowner relationships, and transaction experience that King County government cannot replicate in-house. But the financial relationship also creates accountability expectations. Public funds demand public transparency, stakeholder engagement, and mission fidelity.
The 2022 Conservation Futures levy increase—approved by 68% of voters in initial results—demonstrated continued public support for land conservation despite economic uncertainty. The measure doubled the median homeowner’s annual tax from roughly $26 to $51 but generated estimated $269 million by 2031 for protecting 65,000 additional acres.
Forterra’s Forest to Home controversy erupted during the levy campaign. The organization had donated $15,000 to the levy campaign (plus $1,000 from chief external relations officer), raising questions about conflicts of interest given Forterra’s dependence on Conservation Futures contracts. The Seattle Times noted the timing but voters approved the levy anyway, suggesting public support for conservation survived organizational turbulence.
The Path Forward: Excellence Through Limits
The Seattle Times editorial board’s prescription—”Forterra should go back to basics and reset its focus on finding and preserving open space”—reflects conventional wisdom that organizations should stick to core competencies. But the recommendation oversimplifies. Conservation divorced from community needs can perpetuate inequities. Land protection without addressing displacement, economic opportunity, and cultural preservation creates incomplete solutions.
The lesson isn’t that Forterra should abandon community-focused conservation but that organizations must match ambition to capacity. Community development requires different expertise than land acquisition. Building affordable housing demands construction knowledge, financing acumen, regulatory navigation, and stakeholder management distinct from negotiating conservation easements. Respectful partnership with Indigenous nations requires cultural competency, understanding of sovereignty and treaty rights, and humility that many conservation organizations lack.
Forterra’s 2024 work suggests the organization learned these lessons. Focused land acquisitions building on historic strengths. Nature connection programs cultivating public support for conservation. Strategic partnerships rather than ambitious solo ventures. Incremental progress over transformative promises.
The organization’s 35th anniversary in 2024 provided opportunity for reflection. Thirty-five years protecting forests, farmland, wetlands, and working landscapes. Hundreds of transactions. Hundreds of thousands of acres conserved. Communities gaining access to trails, parks, and natural areas. That legacy matters and deserves protection through organizational focus, capacity-building, and humble recognition of limits.
The ampersand in Forterra’s logo—symbolizing connections between conservation and community—needn’t disappear. But the connections must be authentic partnerships rather than unilateral initiatives. The organization must listen more than promise, collaborate more than direct, and recognize when passing projects to partners better equipped serves conservation and community more effectively than retaining control.
Those forests Forterra protects will stand for generations if stewarded well. That matters more than any individual organization’s ambitions. Land for good, indeed—but good requires excellence in core mission, not expansion beyond competence. Forterra’s next 35 years depend on embracing that wisdom.
