Two Lawsuits Challenge Downtown Project Opponents File Two Actions To Send River Park Square Plan To Public Vote

People opposing the city of Spokane’s support for the River Park Square redevelopment filed two lawsuits Monday attempting to force the matter to a public vote.

The first suit, filed by the opposition group Priorities First, claims an emergency ordinance passed by the City Council last Monday is invalid.

The second suit, filed by former city Councilwoman Margaret Leonard, claims the council violated the city charter by allowing the city to incur debt without a vote of the people.

Attorney Steve Eugster, who prepared both lawsuits, requests that the court either declare the ordinance invalid or allow the matter to be placed on the ballot.

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

Assistant City Attorney Stanley Schwartz said the city will move quickly to ask the court to dismiss both cases.

Schwartz said Eugster “uses the courts in an attempt to veto legislative actions he disagrees with. We are going to move as rapidly as possible to resolve these lawsuits.”

The City Council gave the project final approval Jan. 27 when it passed an emergency ordinance pledging parking meter money to pay for expenses related to the shopping center’s garage if its parking revenues fall short.

When an ordinance is passed as an emergency, the public cannot collect signatures on petitions to force the matter onto the ballot.

The parking meter ordinance should not have been passed as an emergency, the first lawsuit says, because it is not necessary for the support of city government, nor is it needed for public peace, health or safety.

City Attorney James Sloane said the emergency ordinance is valid and that a December state Supreme Court decision gives cities broad discretion to determine what is an emergency.

The second lawsuit claims the council is violating a section of the city charter known as Proposition 4 which says capital expenditures incurring city debt must be put to a vote of the people.

Sloane said the city is not taking on any debt because the city won’t operate the garage.

On Jan. 13, the City Council voted unanimously to allow a non-profit corporation formed by River Park Square’s owners to issue $30 million in revenue bonds to buy the shopping center’s parking garage. The garage then would be leased to a public development authority formed by the city.

The garage would be given to the city in 21 years after the bonds have been paid off using parking garage revenues.

That arrangement constitutes a lease-purchase agreement that is a capital expenditure, Eugster said.

“They’re trying to get around Proposition 4 by using a (public development authority), and we assert that they can’t do that,” he said. “The PDA is the city.”

Sloane, however, said the public development authority is a “separate public corporation” and not part of the city.

, DataTimes