Northwestern defended the validity of its lawsuit about the Northeast Evanston Historic District in December, saying in a court document that the city’s plan is an “illicit scheme” to coerce money from the university.
Evanston filed a motion Oct. 26 asking U.S. District Judge Marvin Aspen to dismiss NU’s lawsuit because the university hasn’t provided enough evidence to support its claims of unfair treatment at the city’s hands.
But in NU’s response, filed Dec. 21 in the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Chicago, lawyers urge the judge to allow the suit to continue because there is a connection between the city’s animosity toward the university and the creation of the historic district in May 2000.
The city designated the area between Sheridan Road and Sherman Avenue, bounded on the north by Lincoln Street and on the south by Emerson Street, as a historic district. NU has said the inclusion of 44 of its buildings within those boundaries is an effort to thwart its ability to build or renovate much of its property.
NU’s lawsuit, filed in November 2000, seeks to prevent the city from enforcing the ordinance and claims the district violates its constitutional rights and the City Council created it to “get” the university.
“We believe that everything relating to the historic district … revealed beyond a doubt that the development of the historic district was to extract payment from Northwestern,” said Eugene Sunshine, vice president for business and finance.
Aldermen have denied NU’s claim, saying the district was enacted to preserve the historic value of homes within its boundaries.
Sunshine said some aldermen made negative comments about NU at the same time the historic district idea was being developed. They also voted to place a “Fair Share” referendum — urging the city to seek financial payments from NU — on the March 2000 ballot, he said.
The university’s document details many examples of aldermen seeking to prevent the university from buying any more property, which would then have to be taken off the tax rolls because of NU’s property tax-exempt status.
It cites Ald. Arthur Newman (1st) as saying: “I want to see Northwestern University not acquire one more house west of Sheridan Road.”
According to the document, Ald. Gene Feldman (9th) said that “stopping Northwestern University from building more institutional buildings” was a reason for creating the historic district.
NU also claims that aldermen voiced approval of a “scheme” advocated by Ben Nichols, Mayor of Ithaca, N.Y., who obtained more money from Cornell University. Nichols spoke to the City Council and advocated a “carrot and stick approach.”
Ald. Ann Rainey (8th) is quoted as encouraging the council to “cast off your chains, rise up and revolt, and make sure those elected to the Council are strong enough and have enough courage to do what Mayor Nichols did.”
These actions show how the city treats NU and reveal the bias involved in the development of the historic district, said Alan Cubbage, vice president for university relations.
Newman, referred to in the document as the “ringleader” of the district’s creation, said the university is asking for special treatment.
“If they have a complaint, the proper place is at the ballot box, not in the courts,” Newman said.
He said the university’s filing is “full of inaccuracies and half-truths” and that the historic district was not enacted to coerce the university. NU’s response also does not present a good case against the city’s summary judgment motion, Newman said.
“The pleading is short on law and heavy on paper,” he said.
The city has until Feb. 4 to file its own response to the university’s arguments. The tentative date for a decision on whether the case will continue is scheduled for March 14.
