Exit133 is about Tacoma. It's about Real Estate, Politics, the Arts, Urban Development, and the interests of our readers.
Find A Job
General : Roll Call
Hotel Winthrop Vote
Roll Call at 8:20 pm
What started out in the public comment period as an apparent lovefest for all parties involved, got much more interesting when the council was allowed to ask questions and make final comments. It all hinged on the comments of Connie Ladenburg who could’ve gone either way from what we could tell.
Anderson – Yes
Baarsma – No
Evans – Yes
Fey – No
Ladenburg – Yes (deciding vote)
Lonergan – Yes
Manthou – No
Stenger – Yes
Talbert – No
Resolution #36969 passed by 5-4
So what do we now have? This resolution is one more piece in the A.F. Evans puzzle to buy the Winthrop. The letter of intent between A.F. Evans and Quigg in combination with the substitute resolution effectively gives site control to Quigg & Co. for the next 30 days or so in order for them to do the due diligence necessary to scope the project and obtain financing. If they can pull it together, then A.F. Evans will sell the property to Quigg. If they can’t, then we get low income housing for a very long time.
I heard something in one of the comments about Choice Hotels being involved… I swear I heard that… maybe I was hearing things.
Must study now. That took way longer than I had expected.
Previously on Exit133
Link | Posted on 19. September 2006, 20:42
Commenting Is Closed
Comments are allowed for two weeks from the posted date. If you want to make a comment or reopen this discussion, please contact us with your request. Thank you for visiting.
I heard the Choice Hotels reference also. How are they involved?
1 | Posted by Mike H | Sep 19, 08:52 PM
What a night.
The bottom line is that the council bet the fate of downtown on the ability of the Quigg/Trabucco team for better or worse.
If they are successful, the Winthrop Hotel will be restored as a 4 star hotel and the north end of Tacoma will undergo a striking restoration.
If they fail, downtown Tacoma will likely be stuck with the same dysfunction it experiences now for another 25 years.
The one caveat is that the council has another shot at accepting or denying the request for funds to AF Evans. This was one of the reasons given for voting for the proposal tonight.
The vote tonight basically authorized the city manager to enter into negotiations. If the Quigg hotel option does not go through, the council should deny the request when it comes before them again.
Of course, they need to time it so that they know the result of Quigg’s success or failure before they are required to make the final vote.
Crazy.
Stay tuned.
2 | Posted by Erik | Sep 19, 09:16 PM
Well it’s a good thing they have another shot at denying the funds if it should come to that.
I read the docs from the BIA blog and it looks to me like AF Evans is hanging their hat on a hook that’s stuck on the wall with chewing gum.
That is, if I read it correctly, there are at least two issues with their financing request that will never fly.
#1 is they are assuming they can get their commercial tenants to sign leases with rent increases of 10% per year for seven years… I haven’t dealt in commercial leasing for a long time, but I don’t think any sane business would sign such a lease.
#2 is they are counting on the Tacoma Community Redevelopment Authority (TCRA)to allocate future funds. According to the document, the TCRA has no authority to do so, and the projected requests from other parties combined with the AF Evans request will break the bank so to speak… there aren’t enough funds to give all the requesting parties.
Therefore, my uneducated guess is the majority of the council took the low road and approved the measure knowing full well it would be denied in later “negotiations”.
So, we’re now we’re forced to play the waiting game and see how the cards play out. We may yet get what is needed but it certainly could have been done in a less convulted manner.
Just my opinion of course :)
3 | Posted by Steve Hurley | Sep 19, 09:42 PM
The other thing to note is that if Quigg & Co finds the money for the hotel, then this $1 million won’t be needed. So, our hope is that Quigg pulls it off and the ability to pay back (per the documents noted above) becomes mute.
4 | Posted by Derek | Sep 19, 10:20 PM
I have a question..
Where and when was the Winthrop advertised when it was supposibly on the market?
Some of the council members said these 2 are the only ones that came up to the plate that looked viable.
Were others given a chance? Was this listing on national commercial real estate sites?
Anyone with any info?
5 | Posted by Jake | Sep 20, 12:17 AM
After reviewing the debate tonight, one positive major change from the council is that a majority of them now seem to desire to have the Winthrop Hotel restored.
The difference seems to be how to get there and what risks to take in the effort.
However, restoring the Winthrop still does not seem to be a high enough priority with the council as it could be (or should be)
Right now, it seems to be basically a willingness to allow a private group one shot and if it doesn’t work, its over (for the next 25 years). That’s better than 6 months ago, but there is still aways to go.
It would be nice if the Tacoma City Council would take a leadership role and pass a non-binding resolution to support the restoration of the Winthrop Hotel.
I would not be surprised if 90 percent of Tacomans support the restoration of the Winthrop. Does anyone want to start a “Restore the Winthrop” campaign?
6 | Posted by Erik | Sep 20, 12:52 AM
Where and when was the Winthrop advertised when it was supposibly on the market?
Apparently it has only been open to low income housing developers. All others have been turned away.
7 | Posted by Derek | Sep 20, 06:50 AM
The real victory was having the council delay the vote on September 12th.
Up to that time, AF Evans had no obligation to sell to anyone and was not prone to do so. The vote opened a window for the Quigg group to obtain an option on the property which they have now done.
Its not as secure as I would we would like, but the Winthrop Hotel is in a far better position than it has been in for 33 years.
8 | Posted by Erik | Sep 20, 09:09 AM
Jason Hagey’s front page TNT story today does an excellent job of putting most of the pieces of the agreement puzzle together for us.
Some of the highlights:
Coast Hotels (Benson & Paramount Hotels – Portland/Seattle) added as a partner.
Trabucco urged approval of the measure (presumably to obtain a needed exit clause) referring to it as a pathway to a controlling interest position.
Hotel group must make a $1 million non-refundable commitment by November 15th or the deal dies.
Projected closing by December 15th.
That would make a nice Christmas present for the city / region.
9 | Posted by Steve Hurley | Sep 20, 09:44 AM
I think Council did the right thing—preserving options and keeping the thing alive.
Tom Stenger made a very important point that a lot of folks are failing to take note of, and that is that AF Evans has site control. Although the property has been on the market for around three years, it is correct that only offers from low income housing providers were considered by the current owner.
If the AF Evans funding web were to fall apart because of failure to obtain funding commitments (and these are commitments at this point and not hard money—also note that the funding in this resolution is a loan), and thus lose site control, then it potentially shuts the door on all prospective higher end developers.
The council members who said that it doesn’t matter right now if the City authorizes the commitment of funding are dead wrong. Letters of credit and financing commitments have to be in place to proceed. If the City were to pull out, so would other lenders as timelines expire.
As soon as Ladenburg stated her position I knew it was in the bag—the Mayor got a free vote out of it.
10 | Posted by tom waits | Sep 20, 10:14 AM
Ladies and gentlemen, Tom Waits apparently is in the room…
11 | Posted by jamie from thriceallamerican | Sep 20, 10:23 AM
Count John and I in for the “Restore the Winthrop” campaign. Posters, letters, picketing, whatever. We will be there.
I am watching the replay of the meeting right now and wow, the legalese is confusing!
12 | Posted by Christine | Sep 21, 12:12 PM
Count John and I in for the “Restore the Winthrop†campaign. Posters, letters, picketing, whatever. We will be there.
Cool. I think most everyone in Tacoma is basically coming to the consensus of wanting to restore the Winthrop. In fact, there seems be a pile on effect lately on the issue and all kinds of people are showing up wanting in on the restoration efforts.
I am watching the replay of the meeting right now and wow, the legalese is confusing!
Yes, one of the reasons is that the council is trying to work through all kinds of different possible contingencies for the Winthrop Hotel.
Some of them would restore the Winthrop and unfortunately some scenarios would not. What would be nice is for the only serious plans to be considered would be to restore the Winthrop to a hotel again period.
With all of the restoration and developement efforts downtown, we don’t have to settle for any developement like what happened on the Woolworth building on Broadway or locating parking garages on Pacific Ave.
Morgan had a pretty good line on this on his Tacoma Daily Index interview:
I think that kind of gets back to Tacoma’s perception of itself. Do we deserve it? Can we handle it? You just have to say yes.
Also, there have been efforts to save Albers Mill and the Murray Morgan Bridge. I would think that restoring the Winthrop Hotel is certainly as much or more important than saving those structures.
13 | Posted by Erik | Sep 21, 12:34 PM
Commenting is closed for this article.