Berg argued, somewhat incredibly, that the case "is not about building a luxury shopping mall or providing parking spaces to its citizens." Instead, it's about "whether state and local government can play an active role in economic development." Well, sure, but it's probably  most accurate to say that the case is about whether the city can heavily subsidize a luxury shopping mall in hopes of landing economic development in its borders, and not in neighboring suburbs. Then again, no one's asking for our summary!