A jury summary provided to the Tidings Tuesday, Aug. 27 gives a clearer picture of the reasoning behind last week’s court decision in favor of the West Linn-Wilsonville School District in its lawsuit against the city of West Linn.
A Clackamas County jury found that the city neglected to deal fairly and bargain in good faith with the school district in its bid to purchase the Oppenlander fields property. Based on the jury’s findings, on Friday, Aug. 23, Clackamas County Circuit Court Judge Susie Norby granted the district’s claim for relief to terminate the purchase and sale agreement that was central to the lawsuit.
No longer bound by the agreement, the district could put Oppenlander up for sale on the open market. The district declined to answer questions about the court’s decision or what it wants to do with the property now. The city also has not indicated whether it plans to appeal the decision.
“The City is grateful for the School District’s collaboration on many shared efforts, including school safety, library and parks programs, and public works projects,” read a statement from the city issued Aug. 23. “The City looks forward to continued partnership with the School District to enhance and enrich the community.”
The battle for Oppenlander — a 10-acre property on Rosemont Road primarily used by youth sports teams and dog walkers and owned by the district for more than 50 years — began in 2021 when the district declared the property surplus and put it up for sale.
The prospect of losing the fields to developers prompted outcry from community members, who rallied to push the city to buy the property from the district to keep as a park.
The city and district eventually agreed to a deal for the city to buy the property if voters approved a general obligation bond to fund the purchase. The deal became contentious in early 2022 when both parties learned that the appraiser they hired to determine the purchase price valued the land at $120,000. Having had the land appraised at $6.5 million less than a year prior, the district objected to the new valuation. When the city indicated its intent to abide by the new appraisal, the district sued, arguing the city breached the contract and failed to adhere to the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.
The jury agreed, finding that the city failed in seven ways to deal fairly and in good faith, according to a verdict summary provided to the Tidings by Norby. First, the jury found that the city breached the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing by “failing to secure a fair, objective appraisal of property value.”
Throughout the court battle, the city argued that the appraisal was fair as it was based on the fact that the land would be kept as a park, and therefore not as valuable as it would be to developers. The purchase and sale agreement stated that, if the city purchased the land, it would designate the property as a park in accordance with Chapter 11 of the West Linn City Charter.
This restriction would not take effect, however, until after the purchase, and so the jury found the city breached the implied covenant of good faith by “failing to consider that the land was not designated as a park at the time of the appraisal.”
The jury also found the city failed to deal in good faith by not considering previous land transaction dealings between the two agencies when use limitations like the Chapter 11 restriction did not impact the purchase price.
Additionally, the jury sided with the district in ruling that the city breached the good faith covenant when it failed to disclose discussions that City Attorney Ed Trompke had with the appraiser Sam Romanaggi.
Trompke reportedly asked Romanaggi to appraise Oppenlander on behalf of the city. The purchase and sale agreement allowed the parties to either hire a joint appraiser or conduct separate appraisals and use the average of the two valuations as the purchase price. When Trompke reached out to Romanaggi, he instructed the appraiser that the city wanted a low valuation of the land to get voters to approve the bond, according to emails that were provided as evidence during trial.
It was also bad faith, according to the jury, for the city to not ask Romanaggi to address the district’s concerns with his appraisal.
According to the verdict summary, the jury found the city acted in bad faith by “insisting on the $120,000 purchase price for the property.” Throughout the court proceedings, lawyers for the district argued that even city officials were surprised with Romanaggi’s valuation, but decided to take advantage of the situation rather than work with the district.
Lastly, the jury found the city violated the good faith covenant by “forcing the District to file suit to cancel the Agreement.”
Local News
