Council Meeting Turns Nasty Pointed Exchanges Mark Unscheduled Debate On Downtown Garage

A call for a settlement on the River Park Square garage debacle dissolved into a nasty debate that veered toward the personal at Monday’s City Council meeting.

Councilman Rob Higgins asked the council to support a settlement proposal worked out last month by Councilman Steve Corker and Bob Robideaux, manager of the downtown mall.

Instead, council members took turns launching attacks, making accusations and trying to talk over one another while wrangling over an issue that has consumed them for five months.

The divide was sharpest and the dialogue most venomous between council members Steve Eugster, Steve Corker and Roberta Greene.

At one point, Greene burst out laughing during a speech of Eugster’s. Corker later questioned the timing of Greene’s vacation last month.

The garage issue, which wasn’t on Monday’s agenda, was raised by Higgins, who pointed to the recent lowering of the city’s bond rating by Moody’s Investment Services. Higgins beseeched the council majority to take a step toward a settlement.

“There’s no doubt in my mind that we will be given another downgrade again unless we take some positive action,” he said.

In the Moody’s announcement last week, the company cited the City Council’s April 26 refusal to loan money to the struggling agency that runs the garage, as required by a 1997 city ordinance. The council members who voted against the loan said the council could not loan money to an agency that could not pay it back, as a report suggested.

The mall developers - affiliates of Cowles Publishing, which owns The Spokesman-Review - went to court for the loan. A superior court judge ordered the city to loan the funds, and the city has appealed the decision to the state Supreme Court.

Higgins signed his name to the tentative settlement proposal reached by Corker and Robideaux on May 8. Councilwomen Phyllis Holmes and Roberta Greene also signed the settlement.

The proposal would split the garage’s costs not covered by its revenue between the city and the developers for three years, for an amount up to $1.5 million.

Greene then leveled a criticism at the council majority and its interest in continuing the garage litigation as costly and damaging to Spokane. “If we want to litigate and posture, we will see further downgrades,” she said.

But three of the four council members present who voted against the loan, Corker, Eugster and Cherie Rodgers (Mayor John Talbott was absent), strongly opposed Higgins’ settlement suggestion.

Corker said his signature on the settlement offer was no longer valid, given the current litigation and last week’s council vote that authorized special counsel O. Yale Lewis Jr. to negotiate directly with River Park Square’s developers.

“I don’t understand the pressure being felt by the three council members (in the minority),” Corker said. “I’m offended that they put me in this position.”

Corker also blasted the same council members for damaging Lewis’ ability to reach a settlement.

“I’m not sure what impact this evening is going to have on those negotiations, but we have made Mr. Lewis’ job more difficult.”

But Greene wondered what Lewis was doing.

The council “is saying let him to do his job, and I’m saying he hasn’t done anything,” Greene said.

Eugster said the cost of litigation would be far cheaper than the cost of subsidizing the garage for 20 years, a possible scenario described by a consulting firm that studied the garage.

“Tonight we have had a great, grand effort at defeat by the council by the same people who brought you River Park Square,” Eugster said. “If we lose this litigation, the future value of that outflow (to the garage) is going to be in excess of $55 million. You can save millions if you fight your case.”

Eugster also criticized Moody’s for interfering in the city’s legal battle and accused the rating service of being under the sway of the developers.

“I suspect Moody’s report came about from telephone calls to try and influence their position,” Eugster said. “Essentially, what you have is a rating company trying to insert itself as an officious intermeddler between the city and the developer.”