City May Have To Repay Bridge Money If Lincoln Bridge Isn’T Built, Federal Government Wants Its Funds Back

If the Lincoln Street bridge project dies, the city of Spokane could be required to repay up to $5.7 million in federal funds spent on acquiring right-of-way and engineering.

According to letters from the state and federal transportation departments, federal money spent on acquiring right-of-way for the bridge, about $2.2 million, must be reimbursed immediately if the project isn’t built.

Federal funds for preliminary engineering, about $3.5 million, might also have to be returned, depending on the reasons the project is stopped, said Gene Fong of the federal transportation department.

The project is on hold while the state Shorelines Hearings Board reconsiders a permit for the bridge. The City Council last month appealed the board’s 3-3 vote upholding the state Department of Ecology’s decision to deny a permit.

Depending on the hearings board decision, either the city or Ecology could appeal to Superior Court.

Mayor John Talbott has asked the state for codes or contracts that prove the city would have to return the money.

“If there are pertinent examples of when this has happened elsewhere and under what circumstances, they would also be appreciated,” Talbott said.

The city could possibly sell property formerly owned by Salty’s and Steve and Leslie Ronald to recoup the right-of-way funds.

The former Salty’s restaurant site is on the northern edge of the bridge route. The former Ronalds property is just north of the downtown library.

The balance of the money to be repaid would have to come out of the street fund or general fund, City Manager Bill Pupo said.

Opponents of the $36 million bridge project say repaying the money shouldn’t be a big deal.

“The only thing the city necessarily has to pay back is the right of way,” said Laurel Siddoway, an attorney for Friends of the Falls. “Since they own the property and can sell it, it isn’t a very scary proposition.”

Jerry Lenzi of the state transportation department said the city should appeal to Superior Court if necessary.

The city recently filed its request for reconsideration.

Ecology and the Friends of the Falls group have filed their responses, urging the hearings board to stick with its original decision.

The board is expected to announce its decision Feb. 9.

Rather than affirming Ecology’s denial, the board’s 3-3 tie vote should result in the reinstatement of the city hearing examiner’s approval of the permit, the city argues.

Ecology and the Friends group counter that the decision under review should stand in the case of a tie vote.

In arguing its case originally to the hearings board, the city was required to show that the bridge is “absolutely essential” to the city’s transportation plan.

But the city argues that the “absolutely essential” phrase in the city’s shoreline master plan is being taken too literally by the board. It requires the city to disprove every possible alternative to the bridge.

Opponents claim that since the words “absolutely essential” are used in the city’s plan, that’s apparently what was intended.

Critics also say there are alternatives to building the Lincoln Street bridge.

The city, however, says alternative projects such as renovating the Post Street bridge or widening the Monroe Street bridge aren’t feasible, and fiddling with traffic-signal timing won’t solve the problem for the long-term.

The Lincoln Street bridge is intended to replace the Post Street bridge, which was built in 1917 and has reached the end of its life span.

The City Council endorsed the bridge project in an August 1994 resolution and again in April 1995.

This sidebar appeared with the story: WHAT’S NEXT The project is on hold while the state Shorelines Hearings Board reconsiders a permit for the bridge. The board is expected to announce a decision Feb. 9.