Cienna’s got the scoop over at Slog:
This week, the bar was raised for eight projects hoping to move into the Seattle Center’s Fun Forest site—raised so high that all but three proposals may be out of the game.
On July 13, the review panel charged with choosing a project sent a letter (.pdf) to the eight proposers requesting more information about the project. The panel is honing in on where the money’s at: how many visitors each project expects to attract and their “financial readiness and sustainability” moving forward. The letter also points out that the chosen proposal “cannot result in a net negative budget impact to Seattle Center.”
The groups now have two weeks to firm up their financial plans, compared to, say, the year and half the Wright family had to put together its proposal for a for-profit, paid-admission, Chihuly-themed gallery/gift-shop/catering hall. But, you know, there was a public process right? So it’s all kosher.
Cienna’s conclusion? “Goldy is right; we are being humored.”
First rule of blogging, Cienna: Goldy is always right. Even when I’m not. If an opinion is not worth being blogged with absolute confidence, it’s probably not worth being blogged at all.
And that’s why I’m so confident in restating my opinion that the best proposal for the remaining two-acre patch of the Fun Forest is, well, the Fun Forest. Extend their contract another year, and the $250,000 in annual revenue it already brings in. That will give the Seattle Center the time to hold a fair bidding process — instead of the PR sham we’ve been witnessing — while giving competing proposals the time to get their financial plans in order.