Summary
The Washington Supreme Court held that Spokane’s city manager and city attorney could not be compelled by mandamus to loan parking meter revenue funds without an order from the city council. The court concluded that the ordinance created a special fund and was not an appropriations ordinance authorizing disbursement without further council action. The court also denied motions to consider additional evidence and affirmed the denial of Stephen Eugster’s motions to intervene and for a change of judge.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether Ordinance C31823 created a duty requiring the Spokane City Manager and City Attorney to issue a loan from the parking meter revenue fund without a City Council order.
- Whether the Supreme Court should consider three sets of additional evidence under RAP 9.11(a).
- Whether the trial court properly denied Stephen Eugster's motions to intervene and for a change of judge.
Holdings
- Ordinance C31823 did not create a duty requiring the City Manager and City Attorney to issue the loan absent an order from the City Council. Because the Council had not approved the loan, the officials could not be compelled to pay it out, and the writ of mandamus was improper.
- The court denied all three motions to consider additional evidence because the evidence was not needed to resolve the issue on review and the requirements of RAP 9.11(a) were not satisfied.
- The trial court properly denied Eugster's motions to intervene and for a change of judge. He was not a necessary party or entitled intervenor, failed to comply with intervention procedures, and filed the change-of-judge motion after the judge had ruled and without standing as a party.
Key quotations
“We agree, and find that the ordinance does not mandate that the City Manager and the City Attorney make the loan absent an order by the Council to make such an allocation.” (143 Wash. 2d at 74)
“The ordinance cannot simply bypass this requirement and give the City Manager and the City Attorney authority to pay out funds from the parking meter revenue fund when there has not been an order from the Council approving the loan.” (143 Wash. 2d at 77)
“Consequently, the City Manager and the City Attorney cannot be compelled to do so.” (143 Wash. 2d at 81)
Factual background
The City of Spokane authorized a public-private River Park Square parking-garage project financed through tax-exempt bonds and related leases. Ordinance C31823 created a parking meter revenue fund and provided that the City could loan money from that fund when parking-garage revenues were insufficient to cover ground-lease payments and operating expenses. When the garage underperformed and the Spokane Public Development Authority requested a loan, the City Manager and City Attorney sought City Council approval, but the Council rejected the loan. The Developers then sought mandamus to compel the officials to issue it.
Procedural history
The Developers petitioned the Spokane County Superior Court for a writ of mandamus after the City Manager and City Attorney declined to issue a loan without City Council approval, and the Council rejected the loan in a three-to-four vote. The superior court granted the alternative writ and ordered issuance of the loan. The City officials appealed, sought stays, and obtained direct review in the Washington Supreme Court. The Supreme Court quashed the writ, denied three motions to consider additional evidence, and affirmed the denial of Stephen Eugster's motions to intervene and change the judge.