Toss Suit Against City, Judge Urged Sides Argue Merits Of City Role In River Park Square Development

A contentious lawsuit that could help decide the future of downtown Spokane had its day in court Wednesday, but there was no immediate resolution.

Lawyers representing River Park Square and the city of Spokane asked Superior Court Judge Kathleen O’Connor to dismiss the case, saying the issues already were resolved in a December state Supreme Court case.

Attorney Steve Eugster, representing three different plaintiffs in the case against the city, disagreed, saying the city has no business being involved in a private development.

O’Connor said she will issue a written ruling, possibly by Friday.

The case involves the $100 million redevelopment of River Park Square, which would include a new Nordstrom store, a 24-screen cinema and other shops and restaurants.

The city has pledged parking meter money to help pay for the project’s parking garage if parking revenues can’t cover expenses. The city also has agreed to vacate a street for the project and is helping the developers secure a federal Housing and Urban Development loan.

Supporters label the project the catalyst that will save downtown from further decline. Opponents have called the project corporate welfare.

Duane Swinton, attorney for River Park Square, dismissed most of the issues Eugster raised, calling the lawsuit a “kitchen sink” or “scatter-gun” approach.

Eugster raised issues ranging from whether the city has a comprehensive parking plan to whether it has complied with the state Environmental Policy Act.

Swinton focused instead on three main points. The city, he said, is serving a public purpose in assisting developers with the project. The city is not lending its credit or giving money to a private party. And the city council was well within its authority when it adopted an off-street parking ordinance as an emergency.

Swinton said a December state Supreme Court case involving the Seattle Mariners supports the city’s position. That case, filed against the state, contested legislative action taken to approve financing for the baseball team’s new stadium. Eugster also was a plaintiff’s attorney in that suit.

There is a multitude of public testimony proving that the River Park Square project will create jobs and increase tax revenue, Swinton said.

“There is more than adequate testimony that establishes public purpose,” he said.

Eugster countered that the case is not about saving downtown or providing the region with an economic development tool. Rather, he said, it’s about the city assisting a private developer by vacating a street, paying rent for land and a garage, and helping the developer secure millions of dollars in HUD money to build a shopping center.

“What we have here is nothing less than the city engaging in a joint venture to provide a parking garage for a shopping mall,” Eugster said.

The garage is supposedly being built to serve the public, he said, but there’s no need for parking at the downtown public library, Riverfront Park or City Hall, three nearby public facilities. The parking garage is being built primarily to serve the shopping center, he said.

Eugster also took issue with the emergency aspect of the council’s ordinance, which prevents the public’s right of referendum.

“There is no statement that there is an emergency problem that needs to be dealt with,” he said. “The only emergency is the developer needs to issue bonds.”

Swinton said he expects that the lawsuit will be dismissed without a trial.

If summary judgment is granted and Eugster appeals, Swinton said he will ask the court to expedite the review, a request Eugster also supports.

Eugster said he could not guess about the judge’s decision, but he hopes the court would overturn the emergency language of the parking ordinance, which would force the issue onto the Nov. 4 ballot.

River Park Square is owned by Citizens Realty Co. and Lincoln Investment Co., affiliates of Cowles Publishing Co., which owns The Spokesman-Review.

, DataTimes