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."
From the letter:
We recognize that for many of you, the RPF submittal schedule did not provide sufficient time to answer fully all the questions we put forward, especially those related to financing your project and the organizational structure and plans you propose for its construction and management. Our next phase of review will give you the chance to elaborate on these and other issues.
They're giving proponents two weeks to come up with financial plans. The only projects that have plans built into their proposals are the Chihuly museum (which had over a year to draft its proposal and has big money behind it), the Fun Forest Amusement Company (which already inhabits the space), and KEXP.
In essence, the panel wants to know who has lots of money to fund itself and is prepared to move forward now. And—whadduyaknow?—the Chihuly museum, bankrolled by the Space Needle and more than a year in the works, is the project that meets the bar. The committee even admits that the competitors are out of time and outgunned. But the reason this bidding war came to be was because the Chihuly museum was well-developed and funded without public input, and people were outraged when they found out. If it turns out that the only project that meets the new criteria is a predestined Chihuly museum, people should be outraged by this farce of a process.
Northwest Mystery Museum, Open Platform, FROG, and the Northwest Native Cultural Center cite potential funding sources like Parks Levy funds, Lake to Bay trail improvement funds, city subsidies, private donors, and grants. They also can't hope to compete with the Chihuly museum or KEXP as far as drawing in bodies—Chihuly projects attracting 400,000 visitors annually; KEXP will draw 100,000.
The letter ends with acknowledging that providing these answers "could entail a significant amount of additional work on your part during the two week window described above," and if that leads anyone to drop out from the process, please "stay connected," good luck with your future endeavors, etc.
After the public meeting last week, Goldy over at HorsesAss wrote:
Last night hundreds of people gathered again to voice our opinions about the best public use of the Fun Forest site at the Seattle Center, and once again we couldn’t help but get the vibe that we were just being humored. Oh, the committee and the Chihuly gift-shop/catering-hall folks at least tried to make a better show of it this time as compared to the insulting propaganda-fest of the first public meeting, but it was still just a show. I didn’t talk to anybody who believed a decision hasn’t already been made.
I didn't totally agree with Goldy last week—KEXP had a lot of public support at the meeting—but now, it looks as if he's right. The panel is angling to zone in on criteria that, increasingly, fits the mold of a Chihuly museum. Goldy is right; we are being humored.
