You might have thought, after the protracted investigative fiasco that accompanied the City of Seattle and Nordstrom's use of HUD money to finance a glitzy new downtown retail palace--or even the firestorm of criticism that met the city's giveaway of the lucrative PacMed building to a "public-private partnership" this fall--that The Usual Suspects would be lying low for a while.

Then again, you might believe that Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny, and the Teletubbies are all hanging out in Baghdad this week, catching some rays.

In what may be the most audacious non-stadium use yet locally of public money for a private project, County Executive Rom Sims last Tuesday announced--to virtually no media attention--a financing scheme for a planned new four-star hotel on Port of Seattle property at Sea-Tac airport, adjacent to Concourse C and connected directly to both the concourse and the parking garage. The Westin hotel would be majority-owned by the Multi-Employer Property Trust, a pension fund manager for building trades unions (home base for Ron Judd, head of the King County Labor Council). MEPT is an investor in the new Pacific Place retail development downtown. It would receive a 53-year ground lease on the airport land.

To swing the deal, King County proposes to offer Community Development Block Grant money: an $8 million HUD loan under Section 108, the same provision used by Nordstrom's to purchase the "blighted" Frederick & Nelson building downtown. Section 108 loans are generally given to non-profits, low-income housing developers, and social service agencies. King County is proposing the loan under a provision that 51% or more of the jobs created will be low or moderate income--a fair bet for an enormous hotel, heavy on the maids and bellhops. (How many of those jobs, in a union-owned hotel, won't be unionized or pay a livable wage?)

Sims' press conference posturing about having extracted public benefit for the deal was, at best, disingenuous; without the jobs promise, the loan would be illegal. According to backers, 216 new full-time jobs and 44 part-time jobs would be created; the $8 million, therefore, represents about $60,000 per low-income job. The county is essentially putting up the first few years of the cost of half of the hotel's work force.

Once again, the public is picking up the risk for a private investor's nearly certain profit. Moreover, the plopping of a elegant upscale hotel on highly visible public property is in many ways similar to Seattle's strategy for its downtown retail core: the creation of public space where the extremely wealthy will feel comfortable, and the poor won't be welcome. Except, in this case, as part of the servant class.

More pointedly, the county's desire to use CBDG money for a hotel development (owned by a real estate speculator associated with one of Sims' biggest political backers) comes sharply on the heels of a proposed King County budget that cuts social services. Sims' budget also contained a proposal for a property tax increase--six times the increase allowed under Prop 47 limits--to pay for more cops to combat a crime wave that may or may not exist. Sims is also happy to spend money on himself; the budget for the county exec's office has steadily expanded under his rule.

Why is King County's great liberal exec not finding creative financing schemes to, oh, say, direct that federal HUD money to uses for which it was actually intended? Like, perhaps, alleviating the region's crisis in affordable housing? Answer: business as usual. Sims has been doing everything possible, despite his denials, to position himself for a 2000 run at Slade Gorton's Senate seat. That includes enriching his friends and making new ones among the county's Eastside developers who want to weaken or gut the Growth Management Act and pave the Sammamish Plateau. Amidst such calculations, the concerns of the people who elected Sims in the first place--not anticipating that he would, Clinton-style, become an advocate for reduced social spending, political favors to big donors, and seedy public-private partnerships--are small change.

Not revealed as part of the county financing plan were terms of the Port of Seattle's ground lease. A private venture directly connected to airport facilities has to be considered extremely lucrative; how much, one wonders, was it worth, and to whom?

Meanwhile, the county portion of the deal is being quietly fast-tracked through the regulatory hoops. The agreement will be heard by the King County Council's Budget and Fiscal Management Committee Dec. 2. Pending approval (insert laughter here), it goes to the full council on Dec. 7.