Council finds no way to comfortably sit on Foss hotel fence

Everyone was pretty sure the late Sen. Ray Moore was joking when he once rose to speak about a controversial bill.

“Some of my friends are for it and some are against it,” the Seattle Democrat said. “And I’m with my friends.”

If only it were so simple. Tuesday night’s Tacoma City Council meeting presented the rookie majority with its first taste of a decision that would make enemies out of friends.

They could approve an environmental indemnification agreement with Hollander Investments, the Bellingham firm that promises to build not just one but two hotels on the Foss Waterway.

That would please Hollander and the previous developer, who is desperate to sell out. It would please the economic development folks and the other investors on the Foss who are struggling.

Or the council could reject what has always been a routine promise that should the city cleanup of the polluted soils on the Foss be inadequate, the city would be on the hook rather than the developer.

Saying no would please the owner of the Murano Hotel, who think Hollander’s lower-price hotels and nonunion labor would give it a competitive advantage. That might put pressure on the Murano to reduce its quality and perhaps reduce its pay and benefits.

A rejection would please the workers in Pierce County’s only union hotel and organized labor in general – a constituency not without influence on a mostly liberal council.

And rejection of the deal after seven months of delay also would please those who think the Foss Board is settling for an unappealing hotel out of desperation to get something – anything – built now.

No wonder the council members squirmed a bit. One, Marty Campbell, even took a walk. Because he worked for Marriott Hotels 20 years ago and still has some stock, and because Hollander would use a Marriott franchise for the Foss hotel, he had a conflict, he said before leaving the chambers.

Councilwoman Lauren Walker explained the dilemma.

“The moment that one person would talk to us, we would think, ‘Well, this is my opinion on the situation,’” she said. “And then someone else would come over with a really strong opinion on the other side.”

Some tried to frame the issue narrowly so as to keep the sticky issues of design and organized labor out of the picture. Councilman David Boe said it was really a simple decision about transferring an indemnity agreement from one private owner to another.

Added Councilman Joe Lonergan: The threat to the Murano “unnerves me a little bit that that might be the case. But it has nothing to do with how clean the soil is and it has nothing to do with the Hollander Group.”

Some tried to expand the question.

“I’m very pleased with having so much private investment in our community, and I welcome that wholeheartedly,” Councilman Ryan Mello said. But the deal before the council Tuesday was a legitimate forum to ask tough questions about labor and urban design.

Then Mayor Marilyn Strickland made the issue bigger still – a referendum on the city’s economic future.

“We have an opportunity to say yes and send a message to the investment community in the region that Tacoma is open for business,” she said.

In the end, the members arrived at a way out of the box that they hoped might please everyone. They voted unanimously – Mello included – to approve the deal while expressing sympathy for the other issues.

It probably didn’t work. Supporters of the deal were pretty happy out in the hallway, having to be shushed and ushered away from the council doors by a security guard. Opponents – many wearing the T-shirts of the hotel employees union Local 8 – didn’t seem mollified by words that were contradicted by votes.

But when some of your friends are on one side and some are on the other (and if you can’t find a creative way to duck the decision), sometimes you just have to go with your friends.

Peter Callaghan: 253-597-8657

peter.callaghan@thenewstribune.com

blog.thenewstribune.com/politics