On two separate fronts, local grass roots groups that have generated enormous support in recent months are facing the reality that change (let alone seizing power) comes slowly. How those groups respond to the fresh adversity could change the dynamics of local politics.

The first failure is the quiet death last week of HB 2155, the short-lived Olympia legislation that would have lifted the state's ban on rent control laws for cities over 400,000 in population. (Unless Spokane or Tacoma were to double its size in the next few weeks, that's a polite way of saying it was a Seattle-only bill.) HB 2155 was introduced by reps Velma Veloria and Ed Murray in January, but expired last week as Veloria and Housing Committee co- chair Steve Van Luven failed to give the bill a hearing.

The notable--in many respects, amazing--story is that it got that far at all. Rent control has a decidedly bad reputation in mainstream political circles, one tended by a politically well-connected landlord lobby for whom it is Satan incarnate. The ban on rent control laws came as a result of that lobby, which sought in 1981 to prevent any more near-disasters like the 1980 Seattle rent control initiative.

For nearly two decades, that end run around local laws has worked. But the second half of the '90s has seen a steadily worsening crisis in affordable housing in the Seattle area: one that has struck particularly hard at renters (51 percent of the city rents) and first-time home buyers. Paul Schell's much vaunted housing agenda--build more condos--offers little hope.

Into this volatile political mix stepped Local Housing Needs Local Laws, a loosely organized group that has sought to overturn the state law. The astonishing response on short notice--a Feb. 2 public forum drew over 200 people--has demonstrated both the scope of the problem and the potential for future political mayhem. LHNLL's intent is to line up support for a more than symbolic run at Olympia next year, and to get city council support as well (the city declined to amend its lobbying priorities to include 2155). The group's convener, Judy Nicastro, has also declared for this year's city council race.

Will all that energy result, down the road, in relief for Seattle's beleaguered renters? Chances are better than they'd seem. Rent control itself is an unlikely prospect, but the threat of it, used as leverage, can extract other useful concessions from our currently landlord-friendly laws. And the positive response by so many people to an idea long deemed too "radical" to even be a topic of discussion in city politics shows just how out of touch with reality our (mostly non-renting) elected officials are on this issue.

The second setback was for Save Our Valley, a multi-ethnic group in the south end which has raised a lot of eyebrows by producing hundreds of angry residents from across the political spectrum at public hearings regarding Sound Transit's plans for a new light rail system. (ETS! Vol. 3, # 18,20, among others.) At a Sound Transit meeting last week, members (representatives from communities around the Puget Sound, not just Seattle) voted overwhelmingly for a somewhat mitigated version of the at-grade routing in South Seattle that SOV so adamantly opposes.

SOV says they're not giving up: a nightmare of legal filings (and political negotiations to head them off) is likely still to come. At least as interesting is that SOV is also talking in terms of expanding its focus, and using the energy from the light rail battle to position itself as the community advocate for the Rainier Valley and south end which that neglected part of town so badly needs.

An energized SOV throwing its weight around certainly has major implications for the city council positions at stake this year. Dawn Mason, an all-but- declared candidate, is close to SOV, and the battle lines with County Exec Ron Sims and Seattle Mayor Paul Schell (co-authors of the mitigated at-grade proposal, rejected by SOV as an attempt to buy off business owner opposition with redevelopment money) are clearly drawn.

What does the ability of SOV and LHNLL to draw hundreds to public events mean? Perhaps nothing beyond the immediate issue areas concerned. But even then, it suggests that the general discontent that gave rise to Charlie Chong's (first) political ascension, and through him to the current, more open city council, is not dead yet--it's just more focused. Issues like transportation, housing, health care, and community development are the basics of people's daily lives. If progressive activists can build a coherent movement out of those concerns, we'll finally have a strong and desperately needed counterpoint to the liberal corporate cheerleading that's dominated Seattle politics for years.