Followup: Alki Crab and Fish loses Seacrest contract appeal

(UPDATED 4 PM with more reaction added where the story previously ended)
Alki Crab and Fish has lost its appeal of the Seattle Parks decision ending its years of operating the concessions at Seacrest Pier. (If you missed previous coverage, we reported December 5th that Marination had been chosen, in a story that included links to both operations’ proposal documents; we reported on ACF’s protest on Dec. 6, and on a rally by supporters on Dec. 10.) Here’s the announcement just in; it’s from deputy Parks superintendent Eric Friedli:

We have completed the appeal process for the operation of the Seacrest Boathouse Facility. The original decision to award the operation to Marination has been affirmed following the appeal for reconsideration filed by Alki Crab & Fish Company (ACF).

After a careful re-examination of the ACF proposal, including their letter of appeal, the evaluation questions and the raters’ scores for each question, we did not find any compelling facts or reasons that would warrant or justify a reversal of the original decision. The RFP appeal committee consisted of Kathy Nyland of City Councilmember Sally Bagshaw’s staff, Roque Deherrera, of the City of Seattle’s Office of Economic Development, Terry Holme, Seattle Park Board Chair, and Eric Friedli, Parks Acting Deputy Superintendent.

The appeal committee evaluated the ACF protest by raising several key questions related to the overall RFP decision making process:

· Was the RFP solicitation process conducted in a fair and transparent manner?

· Were the questions posed in such a way that the respondents could reasonably be expected to respond within the context of the RFP?

· Did Parks and Recreation use a reasonable evaluation process and practices, including rating instruments?

· Were directions to raters given in such a way that raters could make consistent decisions on scoring from respondent to respondent?

· Did the respondent provide confidences and assurance based on historical performance and future business models that the respondent could reasonably be expected to meet department objectives?

Another key element of the reconsideration process included a thorough review and assessment of the quality, completeness, and depth of answers provided by the top two respondents’ proposals in response to the evaluation questions. It was clear to the appeal committee that the unfortunate omission of financial information and projection of future revenues and expenses for the operation of the facility weakened the ACF proposal. The strength of the business model provided by each RFP respondent is an important factor in assessing the ability of an operator to finance their day to day operations with little or no direct financial support from Parks.

The RFP appeal committee concluded that Marination provided a stronger set of responses to these and other questions.

It was the unanimous decision of the RFP appeal committee that the process that led to the selection of the Marination was conducted in a fair and open manner. They found that the evaluation team operated within a “best practice” framework, and that the evaluation criteria and direction to evaluators were clear and did result in consistent scoring by each rater.

Christopher concurred with the decision of the appeal committee and ACF has been informed that Parks is keeping with the decision to award the operation to Marination.

The decision still has to be ultimately ratified by the City Council, voting on the legislation officially awarding the contract. We’re seeking reaction. More to come. (Photo courtesy Laura James)

ADDED 4 PM: We have heard from Greg Whittaker, whose Alki Kayak Tours is based at Seacrest, and has been a subcontractor to Alki Crab and Fish. His official statement:

With the announcement of the concession at Seacrest Marina awarded to Marination, Alki Kayak Tours hopes to be able to begin discussion the option of collaborating with the new operators. We have worked hard over the last 7 years developing sustainable tourism at the facility, and hope to be able to remain as the boatyard operators of the concession.

And Marination co-proprietor Roz Edison also has responded to our request for comment:

We’d like to send out a big yummy “mahalo!” to all of the kind supporters who reached out during this process. We’re looking forward to welcoming the Seattle summer from the shores of Alki with our aloha-filled West Seattle peeps.

We have messages out to ACF owner Eric Galanti.

70 Replies to "Followup: Alki Crab and Fish loses Seacrest contract appeal"

  • Jtk December 21, 2011 (2:39 pm)

    Fair and Square – TWICE! – Welcome Marination! :)

  • LikeBoth December 21, 2011 (3:09 pm)

    Might ACF open elsewhere? They have the best french fries!!

  • gresham December 21, 2011 (3:25 pm)

    My family always enjoyed ACF, but make me choose between them and Marination, and frankly it’s not even close. Welcome Marination!!!

  • onceachef December 21, 2011 (3:41 pm)

    There’s a new F&C place up by where I live …9000 block on 35th SW (across from the SW Library)…it doesn’t seem to be doing very well, at least when I drive by…maybe they would sell? AFC should check it out.

  • Lorelee December 21, 2011 (3:49 pm)

    When does marination open?!

  • cr December 21, 2011 (3:57 pm)

    Now that Marination has had to jump through twice as many hoops, can we open our arms as a community and welcome them?

  • Marination_AlkiCrabFan December 21, 2011 (4:01 pm)

    I agree with LikeBoth. I hope Alki Crab finds a good, nearby alternate location … but I also can’t wait to have MN set up shop at Seacrest.

  • hopey December 21, 2011 (4:10 pm)

    Funny how the financial health of the business — not to mention providing financial documents — makes a difference in the RFP process. Imagine that. If you can’t follow the instructions, you don’t get the job.
    Welcome, Marination Station on the Pier! Or Marination Station West! Or whatever they end up calling it!

  • K M December 21, 2011 (4:10 pm)

    I’m appalled at Seattle Parks and Recreation’s decision to kick out Alki Fish and Crab and bring in another vendor that is not more qualified (IMO) to lease the park and restaurant.

    Decide for yourself, read the proposals from both companies:

    The evaluation criteria is also shown.

    The income generated between the two restaurants is basically the same.

    Alki Fish and Crab has an established successful track record of meeting the proposed goals, including contributions to the community and improvement of the building and Seacrest Cove Park.

    Marination won out over Alki Fish and Crab with qualifications based on what they say they will do (rather than what Alki Fish and Crab has already proven in performance of income and goals).

    I’m a diver who lives in Alki, I dive at Seacrest Cove and use the Water Taxi to commute downtown. I’ve spent many hours after diving eating at Alki Fish and Crab with friends, filling out paperwork for PADI dive certifications.

    I’ll really miss Alki Fish and Crab and the community won’t be the same without them. Thanks for the years of great food and service, Alki F&C, along with all the improvements you made over the years to the building and to the Park.

  • Alki girl December 21, 2011 (4:18 pm)

    This is a out right wrong. Parks something doesn’t jive here and as far as the new place good luck with all your new people that don’t want you there.I believe there was over 1400 signers that’s alot of people !!!!! Starting out on a bad foot from the get go . I hope Alki fish gets to the bottom of this but I wont be eating or anything else there. Thought parks needs $ $$$$$ guess not.

  • JanS December 21, 2011 (4:34 pm)

    Alki girl..I’m sorry you feel that way. 1400 may seem like a lot, but imagine the numbers that didn’t sign. The Parks Dept. can do what they wish. Marination has great food, and will have a following , I’m sure. Life is about choices, and your choice is to not give them business…totally up to you.

  • west seattle lifer December 21, 2011 (4:37 pm)

    Marination didn’t have to jump through any more hoops. There is plenty of people who would like marination I’m sure. If any one of you had invested the kind of money and effort that has been put at the location you would take every measure possible to secure your investment of time, money and the job security of your staff. It is an absolute shame that the city can take the livlyhood of a family run business. Its not about tacos or fish although fish does fit the location better its about giving the contract away when there was nothing wrong with what was going on. I spoke with several people in parks who have said they never would have thought this could happen. The current concessionaire has gone above and beyond any other concession contract according to parks. I hope that if nothing comes of this atleast the procedure for giving the boot to sucessful local family business is examined. This city does really stifle business growth.

  • Pfft. December 21, 2011 (4:46 pm)

    Alki Girl – Get a life. It’s o-v-e-r.

    Marination – Aloha!

  • onceachef December 21, 2011 (4:47 pm)

    It’s no wonder that children learn to be cyber-bullies with people like “Alki girl” out there…”good luck with all your new people that don’t want you there”…childish. If you don’t want to eat there don’t’s as simple as that. Marination has quite a few followers and THEY DID NOTHING WRONG! They filled out a business proposal and won…what don’t you get?…that they didn’t back out because of your petition? AFC, I hope you get into this debate and bow out gracefully…maybe things will be better elsewhere.

  • yarncore December 21, 2011 (4:47 pm)

    Hey, Alki girl? Way to be welcoming to a new business. I never would make any special trip down to Seacrest for food before, and now I have a reason to. And I know a lot of other people who want them here too. They weren’t trying to personally attack anyone. They are a business, and they made a move for an available property to further their business. Stop acting like they’re bad people just because they made a fair and honest business move.

  • MFCEO December 21, 2011 (4:51 pm)

    You’re 1,400 signatures are less than 1% of the areas population (population of West Seattle using all of its zip codes is 147,332). We Marination supporters are the 99%!

  • socamr December 21, 2011 (5:07 pm)

    Yep, Marination – a “successful local family business” – must be feeling stifled right about now.

    Look, I enjoyed ACF as much as the next person, but they didn’t submit a strong enough proposal. No one is giving them the boot – it’s the nature of business that a less successful business model will be beaten out by a better business model.

    Only those people who already have an axe to grind against city government can see this as the city acting unfairly.

  • datamuse December 21, 2011 (5:09 pm)

    1400 signers–many of whom don’t even live in West Seattle–out of a total population of over 58,000. I think Marination can take their chances.

  • CandrewB December 21, 2011 (5:10 pm)

    “Marination won out over Alki Fish and Crab with qualifications based on what they say they will do (rather than what Alki Fish and Crab has already proven in performance of income and goals).”

    And now they are contractually obligated to do what they said they are going to do. That is why it is called a contract proposal.

  • CandrewB December 21, 2011 (5:16 pm)

    “its about giving the contract away when there was nothing wrong with what was going on”

    They did not give it away. Marination earned it through the very laws and ordinances we entrust our elected officials to create and uphold as a representational republic. Or another way to say it is ACF lost it by submitting an inferior proposal. If we just “allowed” ACF to keep profiting (or losing as they claim) off of City property out of favor, then we would be a banana republic. Be careful what you wish for.

  • Jeff December 21, 2011 (5:20 pm)

    I feel bad for the original place, but hey that’s the hazard of being a renter. If you want security, own your property.

  • Pfft. December 21, 2011 (5:50 pm)

    “If any one of you had invested the kind of money and effort that has been put at the location you would take every measure possible to secure your investment of time, money and the job security of your staff.”
    Hey west seattle lifer – did ya see this?
    “It was clear to the appeal committee that the unfortunate omission of financial information and projection of future revenues and expenses for the operation of the facility weakened the ACF proposal.”
    Does turning in an incomplete proposal (and leaving out a giant part of it, namely, the FINANCIALS) sound like taking “every measure possible to secure your investment” and protect your staff? Hmmm? Does it??

  • Nate D December 21, 2011 (5:54 pm)

    Bring on the $10 taco! Welcome Marination!

  • AFC Lover December 21, 2011 (6:15 pm)

    I hope AFC finds a new home… I’ll be there! I love your food! Thanks for all your years of hospitality!

  • West Seattle since 1979 December 21, 2011 (6:25 pm)

    Agree with CandrewB, the city didn’t “give the contract away” when there was nothing wrong. It was a 10 year contract, which was up for renewal at the end of the 10 years.

    At renewal time the business currently in the space has to apply again for the contract for the next 10 years; at that time any other business can also apply for the contract on an equal footing. There is no preference given to the existing business–they and any other businesses who choose to apply start with the same chances and have to go through the same process of applying for the next 10 years. That is the way the law is set up.

    If people have problems with the law, the thing to do is to petition the city council to change the way these kind of contracts are awarded in the future so that the existing business is somehow given preference if they’re doing everything they should be. But that isn’t the law now, and Marination did absolutely nothing wrong by applying for the contract, and if they submitted a better proposal the city was right to award the contract to them.

    I hope ACF can find another place to do business, and will be able to do well there. Please, let’s welcome Marination to the marina and not make them feel as if they are interlopers in some way. They followed the law and they won fair and square.

    As far as the petitions go, I’m wondering if people who wanted ACF to stay were more motivated to sign because they wanted to change the outcome? While people who were happy that Marination won thought that since they’d already been awarded the contract, they didn’t really need to do anything because they already had the outcome they wanted?

  • Ken December 21, 2011 (6:40 pm)

    Yay Marination! Welcome to the neighborhood!

  • NikkiTaMere December 21, 2011 (6:46 pm)

    Pretty expensive taco truck food, but then, it seems more and more Seattle is only supposed to be for rich people

  • Junctionite December 21, 2011 (7:01 pm)

    Change happens : )

  • DiverLaura December 21, 2011 (7:05 pm)

    As I understand it, (as stated before in one of the other 4 comment threads) the owner of ACF thought that Parks and Recreation had his financials on hand already from a recent proposal..

    If he’d submitted them (possibly for the most recent extension or maybe the remodel or goodness knows what) that is an understandable assumption. I’m not disputing the fact that P&R felt this was an omission, and by that nature the ACF proposal was incomplete, I’m just saying that it feels a bit like this decision was already made.

    If they’d really wanted to, and indeed there were financials recently submitted by the Galanti’s, it would not have been hard to take a glance around for them in the concessionaires file if P&R had any desire to keep ACF around.

    as K M stated, if you can see past the razzle dazzle vs. hand typed letter, both proposals are essentially equivalent.

    All this current appeal/protest was designed for as i understand it, was to affirm that due process was followed for the RFP. That was the ‘decision’ being ruled on, “we followed proper process, check”

    It is the city council meeting where hopefully public opinion along with “proven performance vs. projected performance” will have some weight in the matter…

  • Yardvark December 21, 2011 (7:22 pm)

    Welcome, Marination!

  • Christopher Boffoli December 21, 2011 (7:28 pm)

    Welcome Marination!
    To those griping about pricing, just remember that food trucks are small local businesses and that their prices probably more accurately represent the true cost of what it takes to bring prepared food to market. Foods on dollar menus and in Costco freezers might be cheap and ubiquitous, but they usually don’t factor in the environmental costs that come with producing foods on an industrial scale (or the long-term costs on human health, for that matter). It is unreasonable to expect the market’s lowest common denominator to be the standard for all food pricing. If you can’t afford it then choose to eat elsewhere. But food truck owners are doing nothing wrong selling food at a price at which they can make a living wage.

  • Whoot December 21, 2011 (7:37 pm)

    Yay!!!!!! I’m married to a vegan that would never eat at AFC. I’m stoked for marination!!

  • DiverLaura December 21, 2011 (7:45 pm)

    @ West Seattle since 1979

    where did you hear it was a straight up 10 year contract out of the gate?

    I was told something along the lines of it being a 5 year contract with extensions. If so, then ACF has had to file for extension multiple times through the years, along with proposals for remodels, additions, etc… Its not like they just sat on the property for 10 years with no communication to-from P&R.

    Not that it really matters one way or another, it just feels different if they’ve renewed successfully on regular basis vs. 10 years of the city being stuck with them.

  • steve December 21, 2011 (8:02 pm)

    good luck alki fish. i’ll have to stop by again before you close. hopefully the food/service doesn’t go downhill in the interim…

  • bebecat December 21, 2011 (8:31 pm)

    Farewell Alki Fish loved you. The public officials just finished off destroying one of the most quaint peaceful places in West Seattle and certainly my favorite is passed years. 1st the Water Taxi mess and now uncharacteristic food.

  • datamuse December 21, 2011 (8:41 pm)

    $10 tacos? What? They’re like $2.

  • West Seattle since 1979 December 21, 2011 (8:49 pm)

    @DiverLaura: Sorry, I misunderstood–I thought it was a 10-year contract. I also didn’t mean to imply they didn’t have any communication with the city in that time.

  • West Seattle since 1979 December 21, 2011 (9:07 pm)

    Mine was a stupid comment and I shouldn’t have posted it–sorry. I do wish Marination a lot of luck there, however, and I hope ACF can find another place and do well. But I had no business commenting as I apparently missed something along the way.

  • NameREQUIRED December 21, 2011 (9:11 pm)

    Let’s get this straight – the P&R proposal says this: “DPR is offering a term of five (5) years with an option for one additional five (5) year
    term at DPR’s option for this concession.” READ THE RFP. It is within the FIRST page, FIRST paragraph of the RFP. SO, ACF “re-upped” FIVE years ago for this privilege, not EVERY year since the first 5 years (imagine city government doing that much work every year!) ACF was privileged to win the 5 year option, and with that, it’s somehow deemed “okay” to assume that the city already had their financials, that the city could “easily” access those financials (imagine again, the city doing the extra work that is actually the proposer’s responsibility!)

    When we feel entitled rather than privileged we certainly like to pick and choose the actions that occur in our favor and weave that as our whole and complete story, excising as immaterial and non-existent anything else that doesn’t fit neatly into the argument.

    The good side: WELCOME TO DIVERSITY, WELCOME TO THE NEW, WELCOME COURAGE OF THE NEW PROPRIETORS, WELCOME TO LOOOOOONG LINES OF NON-DIVING (because they’ve more or less indicated they won’t patronize Marination, too bad) CUSTOMERS

    YEA for $10 tacos, kimchi fried rice and everything else that smacks of change, new, different, make your eyes open and your mouths water. YEA, YEA, YEA.

    One final note: the only constant in life is change….then, you know, the end.

  • Laconique December 21, 2011 (9:38 pm)

    Holy shizzz, people, the tacos are not $10!!! And the debate is over. If you want to be petty and take out your frustration on the new owners, go for it. Enjoy being pissed off. I’m sure they won’t notice with all the business they’ll be enjoying when people figure out how great their food is.

  • westseattledood December 21, 2011 (10:24 pm)

    Well, change can certainly be more difficult for some than others. That’s my conclusion. Good luck to both places.

  • co December 21, 2011 (10:27 pm)

    perfect day is to ride bikes to alki crab and fish along the water. sit and look at the city having the clam chowder and fish & chips. Riding there to eat kimchee fried rice just wont be the same. And good luck trying to feed the kids.

  • Ajax December 21, 2011 (11:33 pm)

    @Whoot – what on Marination’s menu is vegan? All I see is pork. (I’m not being snarky, I’d really like to know.) When dining in West Seattle there is typically the choice of a side salad or hummus plate and I can only eat at Chaco Canyon so many times a week.

  • LanceR December 22, 2011 (12:08 am)

    Ajax – They do a tofu taco that is very good. They have a kalbi beef taco (close to teriyaki for those who like Japanese food), pork tacos, chicken tacos, spam sliders, pork sliders, kimchee fried rice and a quesadilla. Their cart prices are about $2.25 for the tacos. In terms of vegan, not sure if a fit. Vegetarian, a couple things.

    I’m glad of the appeal outcome. Based on the information presented, I don’t see where things were handled inappropriately.

    If AFC had submitted ALL requested materials and perhaps spent more time on the answers to the questions, taking the RFP more seriously as if their business depended on it, then there would have been a good chance of them winning. Assumptions appear to have been made – Costly ones.

    To those who criticize that city for being lazy and not getting the financials – well… The reason is similar to banks making loan decisions. Many times a bank will require financials submitted with loan applications even though they just received them for opening an account or other situations. It’s to make the job easier for those making the decisions. And it’s their right to do so. Why do we have to submit our W-2’s with our 1040’s, when the IRS get a copy from our employers as well as tax deposit info being made each pay period.

    I welcome Marination to WS permanently. They will bring great food and support to the community.

  • WS Born & Bred December 22, 2011 (6:37 am)

    Farewell AFC. Welcome Marination!

  • Leo December 22, 2011 (6:54 am)

    I didn’t care for the food there and welcome the change.Also I would be done with my Christmas shopping if the Dollar store had LAYAWAY.My name is Leo and I’am NOT a Mormon..

  • el December 22, 2011 (7:28 am)

    Never eaten at any of these places, but on my summer bike rides I ride past both a marination truck and ACF, judging by the lines of customers and buzz at both locations, the Sea Crest location will have much more activity under the new management.

  • el December 22, 2011 (7:35 am)

    Oh BTW as a small business owner myself who must submit proposals for business. Submitting an incomplete proposal is unforgivable, particularly to a gov. institution who has an obligation of due diligence to the tax payers.

  • M December 22, 2011 (8:05 am)

    Yep, a Tofu Taco is what I would want when I go down to the waterfront. Almost spit out my coffee when I read that one.

  • cr December 22, 2011 (8:38 am)

    Then just order something else off the delicious menu. Or scoot down to one of the other fish and chip joints down the road.

  • Martin December 22, 2011 (8:51 am)

    When does AC&F get the boot?
    Seems like alot of sour grapes.

  • K M December 22, 2011 (9:09 am)


    If you had a rental and a tenant who had taken care of the place and paid rent on time for 5+ years, would you kick them out and rent to someone brand new based on a lease?

    You say that “And now they [Marination] are contractually obligated to do what they said they are going to do. That is why it is called a contract proposal.”

    We all know from experience and common sense that getting a contractor to perform the terms of a contract is no easy task and there are no guarantees.

    Past performance is a significant factor in deciding on the best tenant for Seacrest Cove (rental income and property maintanence/improvements in this case).

    Past performance SHOULD have been one of the evalutation criteria in the RFP. It’s a real shame that it wasn’t taken into consideration in the evaluation of the proposals.

  • K M December 22, 2011 (9:22 am)

    And for the posts saying the process of awarding the contract was “fair and square” and gives everyone a fair chance to take advantage of business opportunities, take a step back and look at the way the overall process is set up.

    Basically, Alki Fish and Crab invested a lot of money into the business and improving the establishment. Since they don’t own the property and lost the lease, they have to walk away from everything they’ve put into it. (And potentially are personally responsible for paying business loan payments that they no longer have revenue to fund)

    This will be the same case with Marination, maintaining their business in that location will also be dependent on retaining the lease. They don’t have any more protection than Alki F&C did from another business taking over the next time the lease comes up for renewal.

    I agree with @West Seattle in that the issue is with the way the law is set up. It doesn’t provide any protection to ANY restaurant tenant who invests capital improvements into the building and park.

    PAST PERFORMANCE needs to be included as a criteria in the proposal review process.

    “If people have problems with the law, the thing to do is to petition the city council to change the way these kind of contracts are awarded in the future so that the existing business is somehow given preference if they’re doing everything they should be.”

  • Dano December 22, 2011 (10:20 am)

    Hmmm…… lesson learned?…. ANY money put into a leased space is really just a gift to the landlord in the end. Hopefully your business gets a return on the investment during the time you are allowed to use the space. Good luck, Marination folks…. But learn from what happened to the previous tenant.

  • CandrewB December 22, 2011 (12:39 pm)

    Public contracting is held to much higher standards than private contracting. It is a big difference that is taken seriously by contracting administrators, as it should be. Let’s say all things were the same except ACF was run by Haliburton and the the contract administrator was Dick Cheney; still feel the same? There are public property issues at play here. Public benefits cannot be gifted to a private party. It is against the law for good reason. Regardless of what you may think, State and local government operations are pretty clean compared with less desirable places to live in the corruption catagory. But lets address your question, if I owned a rental and had a tenant that took care of the place, I feel I should have the right to determine my own course of action rather than what you or a thousand people on Facebook tell me I should do. Let’s say the lease is up, I now want to use my property for another legal purpose, but my tenant foolishly remodeled the bathroom. Now I have to keep them as tenants until they say they are done living at my place, because you say that is only fair? And as for Marination living up to the terms of the contract… They better, or they put their organization’s assets in jeopardy. You see, there is a guarantee, it is the contract; a legally binding document. We’re not talking about hiring some guy to reseal our driveway here. The City has contract managers whose duty it is to make sure terms are being honored and also the legal system at their disposal. It rarely gets to that point, but it sure can if it has to.

  • pjmanley December 22, 2011 (3:17 pm)

    WS Neighbors: Please keep to the high road. We’re all neighbors lucky enough to live in a great place. While I love matching wits as much as anyone, some of the comments are just nasty & pointless. Odds are the person you’re sniping at probably stopped to let you cross the street or held a door for you recently. Why not be more thoughtful and write like you would speak in public, instead of giving the knife and extra twist just because you can, behind your aliases? Empathy will pay dividends, I assure you. Merry Funsies all!

  • Free Lunch December 22, 2011 (3:58 pm)

    The Marination proposal says they plan to open Mon-Fri at 6 a.m., which seems a little early for tacos. It’ll be interesting to see what they offer for breakfast.

  • Ivan Weiss December 22, 2011 (6:06 pm)

    Christopher Boffoli says:

    “Foods on dollar menus and in Costco freezers might be cheap and ubiquitous, but they usually don’t factor in the environmental costs that come with producing foods on an industrial scale (or the long-term costs on human health, for that matter).”

    Care to be specific about the “long-term costs on human health,” Chris, and tell us specifically what those are, and what scientific study you used to determine “long-term costs on human health” in Costco-prepared food as opposed to taco truck food? Or are you just saying this because you thought it sounded good?

  • Tuesday December 22, 2011 (11:18 pm)

    “Public contracting is held to much higher standards than private contracting.” Haha. Best joke of the day.

  • CandrewB December 23, 2011 (6:23 am)

    Spoken by someone who has no idea what they are talking about.

  • K M December 23, 2011 (10:48 am)

    I completely agree with @CandrewB in his statement “Public contracting is held to much higher standards than private contracting.”

    I’ve experienced it firsthand since I work in public contract administration, proposal review and construction management. There are a lot of misconceptions and negativity about government but agencies are definitely held to higher standards and must issue contracts on a fair and equitable basis.

    All I’m saying is that I think Past Performance should have been considered in the proposal review criteria. I think it’s in the best interest of the public. Parks and Rec has a duty to award contracts in the best interest of the public. If a tenant has no incentive to invest in improvements to the property because their past performance won’t be evaluated and they could lose their lease at any time, it could prevent them from doing that. That’s a detriment to the public. I completely agree with @Dano’s comment: “ANY money put into a leased space is really just a gift to the landlord in the end.” We don’t want to discourage tenants from making capital improvements to Park and Recreation buildings and property. I’m really hoping city council will allow us an opportunity to speak to them about our concerns regarding the way the proposal criteria was established and include evaluation of past performance. @pjmanley, I’m not trying to match wits or be critical of Marination, I’m just expressing that a different way of evaluating the proposals would have benefitted the public users of Seacrest Cove, which is part of Parks and Rec’s responsibilities.

  • AlkiBeachUSA December 23, 2011 (11:20 am)

    “I hope AFC finds a new home”…..then patronize the Admiral Pub…..they run that too! WELCOME MARINATION!!!

  • M December 24, 2011 (9:16 am)

    Sure hope the new tenant has figured out that the site has limited parking, and what exists is in competition with commuters, divers, and fishermen. I usually walk to AF&C since I like to walk and my kids love the kid-friendly atmosphere, however I don’t think Tofu Taco’s are gonna make my kids mouths water..

  • jr December 24, 2011 (1:19 pm)

    West Seattle seems really mean. Yikes.

  • Pfft. December 25, 2011 (9:28 am)

    Your kids don’t like tacos? Weird.

    Yep. West Seattle is really putting on a display we can all be proud of. Come visit! We’re easy to find. We’re the bitter and small-minded corner of our fair city. Just roll down your windows and follow the whining.

  • Smat December 26, 2011 (10:33 am)

    Is Seacrest Boathouse still a boathouse?

    • WSB December 26, 2011 (10:59 am)

      In that boats/paddlecraft are rented there, yes…

  • Smat December 26, 2011 (3:17 pm)

    Thx for your reply. Seems the purpose and design of the facility was for a boathouse, and the boathouse operations are/will be done by Whittaker – a subcontractor. The Parks Dept should be looking for a boathouse operator, and stay out of the restaurant business. Let the boathouse operator subcontract the food service if they want. Maybe Whitaker could bring in Starbucks, Tully’s, etc then. They have pretty deep pockets.

  • datamuse December 26, 2011 (11:13 pm)

    Wow, M. Just, wow. I love the tacit assumption, made by several, that the business that won the contract doesn’t know what it’s doing. Geez louise, people.

  • 50yrsWS December 30, 2011 (1:05 pm)

    It’s about the City – and their business model, not the tenants. The process should be changed. Yes, the financials should have been submitted. But I just did a refi, and I took things in per request all through the process. I wasn’t kicked out of the process because I didn’t have them all the first time. The City (on our behalf as taxpayers) should support the community as a whole, and the continuity of a successful, on going business that is supported by that community as long as the terms of the contract are being met and there is nothing to indicate they won’t be in the future. Yes, there should be an evaluation and “renewal” review periodically, but to just chuck them out to give someone else a try at it – ?? What kind of support for local businesses is that? I’m a landlord. It’s far more profitable of me to support and encourage the renewal of my stable tenants with a track record than it is to create a bidding war with new ones every time the leases are up. As a neither not there issue legally, I’ll add that the water setting certainly seemed to me to lend itself better to ACF than other specialties. If I were a Council or P&R member I would want to promote that relationship as long as the current business was stable.
    I agree with those that earlier mentioned bringing their out of town guests to ACF to enjoy the menu blended with the setting. I like ACF’s calamori, and I like tacos. For me there is no hostility either way. For me the criticism is with a short sighted City process

Sorry, comment time is over.