Yesterday's meeting between City Council and Renaissance Square leaders was discouraging, to say the least. Among the most unsettling aspects: the absolute lack of trust between the two groups.

If they're not able to get something worked out, far more is at stake than the future of Ren Square.

While I was stewing over that prospect this morning, a friend e-mailed his idea for a possible resolution. Here, posted with his permission, is his e-mail:

The question is, where do we go from here? Hopefully, some behind-the-scenes efforts are well under way, and compromises are being negotiated. But if not, for what it's worth, from someone who has no particular solution or axe to grind in this debate, here are some thoughts:

This community can't afford one more example of seemingly dysfunctional government and inability to make decisions on big issues. We can't afford to be seen as only being able to come together to lob charges and countercharges at each other, rather than finding ways to compromise and work together in partnership.

Thus, despite the antagonistic tone in the room yesterday, there has to be a way to get the partners to find common ground in the interest of the larger community. As one way of beginning, I'd suggest the following process or something similar to it:

Build on the mayor's offer to go to Washington to meet with the Federal Transit Administration. But offer a specific proposal to the Main and Clinton board that all the participants join in a request right away through Senator Schumer's office to set up a meeting with FTA representatives as early as possible next week to seek an extension of the deadline.

If just the city requests such a meeting, my gut says it'll be rejected. But if all the partners make a joint request, in the spirit of working out a resolution to the competing proposals, it may receive more favorable consideration.

In such a request and meeting, the partners should be absolutely candid in explaining that a number of issues have surfaced late in the game that need more time to resolve. They should say that a new proposal to scale down the plan has surfaced at the last minute, and time is needed to sort out the implications.

They should say there is no desire on anyone's part to scuttle the project, and that all parties are seeking a way to keep the project on track and not lose the $24 million. They should say that it makes no sense to make a decision with so much at stake under the gun of a deadline that doesn't afford the time to find a resolution.

They should seek a limited extension with a promise that the city will listen carefully to any legitimate reasons that may argue against the city's proposals, but that the other partners will also seek ways to accommodate to the extent possible any legitimate issues raised by the city.

All parties have too much at stake to fail at this point. Neither the city nor the county can afford a humiliating failure on such a high-stakes project with so many jobs and dollars at stake, and with MCC's downtown presence also at stake. Everyone has lots of reasons to create a resolution and to show that governmental partners can work together to resolve contentious issues in a spirit of cooperation, not through simply lobbing charges and countercharges at each other. We deserve better.

Simply put, the city should make this request for more time, and the county and RGRTA should support it, with each offering something and potentially gaining something. The county, RGRTA, and MCC should offer the city support in requesting a delay in the deadline, in the spirit of compromise, understanding that they may have to give up a quick decision and may need to put some issues back on the table. But they gain the possibility of getting Council's support, which they don't now appear to have. And they may get a decision from FTA that says there is no flexibility in the date, in which case a quick decision will have to be made by the city.

In turn, Council must promise to agree to schedule a special meeting later next week to take an up or down vote on the proposals, if the FTA refuses to grant a delay in the deadline.

This is a time for leadership and not recriminations. We heard enough of the latter yesterday.