The developer of the former Civic Auditorium site has sued the City of Omaha, alleging the city’s conduct interfered with what has been a years-long downtown redevelopment project.
Civic Corner, a limited liability company owned by developer White Lotus Group, filed the lawsuit Jan. 1. The group alleges that delays in the project are in part due to delayed approvals, a clerical error and lack of communication from the city.
“The City’s conduct destroyed Civic Corner’s reasonable contractual expectations, materially interfered with Civic Corner’s ability to perform, and violated the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing inherent in the purchase agreement and its amendments,” the developer wrote in the legal complaint.
Through the lawsuit, Civic Corner will attempt to stop the city from repurchasing the roughly seven acres of land between 17th and 19th streets along Capitol Avenue.
The city law department has its own list of complaints against Civic Corner and is considering legal action against the developer, alleging the group has failed to meet contractual requirements.
Delays and disputes
White Lotus Group was on a tight timeline last year to show substantial progress in redeveloping the former site of the Civic Auditorium or the city would attempt to buy back the property, a move allowed under the contract with the developer.
Under the contract signed in 2022, White Lotus was required, through its best efforts, to complete installation of at least 50% of the project’s public infrastructure within 18 months of closing on the property in the fall of 2023.
That level of work was not accomplished, Deputy City Attorney Jennifer Taylor said last fall.
The city sent a notice of default Sept. 8 that gave White Lotus 60 days to meet a number of requirements. Those 60 days were up in early November, creating an opening for the city to pursue a buyback of the property.
In early summer 2025, Civic Corner’s application for tax increment financing was delayed due to a clerical error by the city. The developer alleges the city used that delay in its argument for a repurchase of the site. The city denied the application because ownership of the property was in dispute.
“Any dispute over ownership exists solely as a result of the City’s unilateral issuance of the Notice of Default and threatened repurchase,” Civic Corner’s filed complaint alleges.
In an emailed statement shared Tuesday, the city’s law department denied Civic Corner’s allegations and said the city is considering its own legal actions, including a potential lawsuit against Civic Corner “related to its failure to perform under the contract.”
“The city has attempted to negotiate a reasonable resolution to this dispute,” the law department wrote. “However, Civic Corner’s filing of this lawsuit clearly shows those efforts failed.”
In a statement shared Wednesday, White Lotus Group said the development team remains committed to completing the mixed-use development as planned, including housing, retail and neighborhood amenities.
“The practical effect of the city’s action is to halt a shovel-ready project already under construction in favor of uncertainty, delay and continued vacancy of a highly visible downtown site that should be generating jobs, housing and economic activity,” the developer said.
A mystery buyer
Months before the lawsuit was filed, White Lotus told city leaders the contracted buyback option between the two parties was negatively impacting the project and created significant challenges for the developer in seeking financing and vendor agreements due to the inherent uncertainty and risk of financial losses it represented.
In 2025, White Lotus CEO Arun Agarwal met with a representative of a nonprofit that expressed interest to the city “on developing a youth sports project.” Agarwal told city leaders that although he wasn’t interested in selling the property, he shared with the unnamed nonprofit what he believed to be fair market value of the site.
In an emailed statement to The Reader last year, Agarwal wrote that White Lotus Group was never informed of the identity of the nonprofit that expressed an interest in acquiring the site but had met with a real estate agent representing the nonprofit.
Those conversations between an undisclosed nonprofit and the City of Omaha were brought up in the Civic Corner lawsuit.
Despite Civic Corner’s purchase of the site, the developer alleges that the city engaged in undisclosed communications with alternative developers and nonprofit entities concerning potential redevelopment. Some of those discussions were held in early 2025, months before Civic Corner’s time to commence construction expired.
“In April 2025, an agent affiliated with a potential nonprofit buyer confirmed that an undisclosed client sought to acquire the property, but alternative to the normal transaction process of making an offer on the site, the nonprofit buyer would wait until the City ‘took it back’ from Civic Corner,” the developer wrote in the complaint.
The city’s law department contends that the property sits on land owned by the City of Omaha.
“Pursuant to the 2023 agreement, the city hoped to develop this land,” the law department said in a statement. “To ensure this, the city set several benchmarks for the developer to meet in order to retain its ownership. Regrettably, the developer did not meet these benchmarks despite having been informed several times.”
Plans for the site
White Lotus painted an ambitious picture when the group publicly announced more details of its project last September. Nicknamed The Nest, White Lotus’ redevelopment of the Civic Auditorium site aimed to draw in Creighton University students with housing, health care, retail and a long-awaited downtown grocery store.
“Our goal is to create a dynamic environment that complements Creighton’s beautiful campus and enriches the student experience, encouraging more students to stay in Omaha after graduation,” White Lotus shared in a press release.
Ambitious plans have come before.
Built in 1954, the Civic Auditorium was Omaha’s gathering place. Political rallies, graduation ceremonies, concerts and sporting events were held there until the building was demolished in 2016.
The city had a plan for the site before demolition began, but the property was marred by years of starts and stops. Tetrad Property Group in 2018 pulled out of the site, in part over an incentives dispute with the city.
Next came a developer from Kansas City, which aimed to construct a condominium building. That plan fell through, and with no contractual requirement that would allow the city to buy back the property, the site sat empty for years.
When the city repurchased the site, it applied lessons learned to the next contract. Rather than sell the property and leave it fully in the hands of the developer, the city added a buyback clause to its redevelopment agreement before White Lotus purchased the site for roughly $1.4 million in 2023.
As legal actions move forward, it appears a heated custody battle for the property will play out in the courts before the long-awaited redevelopment of the storied downtown site is finally complete.