A Goldendale business owner and tenant at the city’s incubator building told the council the tenant suffered extended harm during a long dispute over lease terms and a prolonged electricity outage, and requested a private meeting to present documents and seek a resolution.

Diana Adams, who identified herself as the managing fabricator at the incubator building, said she submitted written materials to the council and asked for a private meeting so she could explain the business’s history since the incubator opened. Adams said the business’s electricity was shut off on Aug. 31, 2024, and restored May 1 of the following year; during that period the business could not operate and she estimates more than $1 million in lost contracts. Since electricity was restored, she said, the company has secured more than $100,000 in contracts.

Why it matters: Adams said the incubator’s purpose is to support new and growing businesses and that the city’s handling of lease negotiations and building utilities has hampered that purpose. She said the city’s latest attorney-proposed lease shifted substantial operating responsibilities (plumbing, HVAC, electricity) to tenants in a way she described as “a standard industrial commercial lease” that conflicts with the incubator’s original intent.

Most important details

• Tenant’s claim of lost business — Adams said the business had to lay off two employees last year while negotiations and the power outage prevented operations, and estimated lost contracts “over a million dollars” during the outage period.

• Lease negotiations timeline — Adams said the parties had negotiated lease terms in good faith and that, after her electricity was restored in May, she was surprised to receive an attorney-drafted commercial lease that, in her words, was “not even close” to the terms they had negotiated.

• Request for council engagement — Adams said she sent a packet of supporting documents to each councilmember and asked the council to meet privately with her and staff to review the business history and negotiate a resolution; she cited the RCW (Revised Code of Washington) language she had reviewed about council authority over contracts for second-class cities.

Quotes and attribution

“We were in negotiations. The packets will show you the negotiations we were in…we were approached by the city in May to change our leases,” Diana Adams said, describing the timeline and her view of the city’s actions.

“We are designed for what that incubator building was meant to do,” Adams said, describing her business and its fit for the incubator.

What the council did and directed

• Discussion: the council heard Adams’s account during public comment; several councilmembers acknowledged the matter’s seriousness and asked the administrator and attorney to follow up.

• Direction: the mayor proposed, and the council agreed, to arrange a meeting among Adams, the city administrator and the city attorney to review the packet and discuss next steps. Council did not take any formal action to adopt or change the lease at this meeting.

Context and next steps

City Administrator Sandy Wells said the incubator dispute dates to previous administration contracts and that the city attorney had written to the tenant to explain that the requested executive session did not qualify under the statute for closed-session negotiation. Wells said staff has been working on a new contract with attorney assistance and that the council approves all contracts. The mayor and staff agreed to schedule a follow-up meeting so council can learn more and consider a path to resolution.

Ending note

Adams asked the council to “do the right thing” and to let the business operate under terms consistent with the incubator’s purpose. The council asked staff to set up the requested meeting with the tenant, the administrator and counsel and to report back to the council.