The town-gown battle between Northwestern and the city of Evanston escalated Dec. 20 when the city filed a motion to dismiss the university’s lawsuit disputing the legality of the Northeast Evanston Historic District.
City attorney Jack Siegel of Altheimer & Gray said in the motion that the lawsuit, which argues that the district violates NU’s Fourteenth Amendment rights to due process and equal protection, is unfounded because “each count fails to state a cognizable federal claim.”
NU’s lawsuit, which was filed Nov. 20, alleges that the city’s designation of the historic district was invalid because it was “motivated by vindictiveness” and that it attempted to punish the university for refusing to pay the property taxes that are waived in the school’s 1851 charter.
The suit also states that the city treated university property differently than other property up for historic district designation and that the city conducted flawed public hearings that were biased against the university.
Evanston City Council on May 22 approved the district after twice moving its northern boundary south from the Evanston/Wilmette border to appease several north Evanston residents. The district’s current boundaries are: the alley between Lincoln and Colfax streets to the north, Emerson Street to the south, Sheridan Road to the east, and Sherman and Ridge Avenues to the west.
Siegel, who could not be reached for comment Wednesday, said in the motion that NU’s suit is illegitimate and the case should be dismissed because NU fails to prove that Evanston’s adoption of the district denies the university equal protection.
Siegel also said NU provided no facts in the suit to prove that its properties were treated differently than others included in the historic district. He further suggested that the controversy is a typical land dispute that should be handled in a state court.
“It is clear that there has been no violation of procedural or substantive due process,” Siegel’s motion states.
And the case is not ready for judicial intervention, Siegel said, because the city’s Preservation Commission has never denied NU’s right to make structural changes to its buildings in the district.
According to Evanston’s preservation ordinance, owners of buildings in a historic district must file an application with the Preservation Commission before making major structural changes such as replacing a roof or siding.
NU administrators argued that the university must be able to renovate its buildings freely in order to compete with other prestigious institutions. They also have said they didn’t want a historic district to place limits on the kinds of changes they could make.
Some administrators, including University President Henry Bienen and Senior Vice President for Business and Finance Eugene Sunshine, have hinted that the issue is less about historic preservation and more about how much money NU contributes to cash-strapped Evanston.
NU Assistant General Counsel Ann K. Adams said the university’s concerns about its future have provided a strong reason to file a lawsuit and that she is undaunted by the city’s motion to defeat it.
“We have a strong and valid complaint against the city,” Adams said. “We expected the city to file this motion. It won’t weaken our case at all.”
Later this month NU will file a brief in response to the city’s motion, Adams said. The brief will explain again the claims put forth in the university’s lawsuit. The city will have an opportunity to file a reactionary brief before a judge is scheduled to hear arguments in February.
