In what may be the end of the fierce fight for the Downtown Revitalization project, a Superior Court judge declined to intervene in the City Council’s vote, according to a May 27 court filing.
A lawsuit filed May 6 sought an injunction to remove Mayor Kasey Reynolds’ no vote on the project, which could have paved the path forward for the City to apply for the Active Transportation Grant that has a deadline of June 22.
The grant is generally available every two years, meaning the project could come back to the Council in the future.
“I am grateful for the Court’s careful review of this matter,” Reynolds said. “The Court declined to bar me from serving and from voting on the downtown revitalization effort. My focus throughout has been on the job Chico voters elected me to do, including moving our downtown forward, and that work can now continue.”
The lawsuit filed by Chico attorney Peter Washington on behalf of former Mayor Ann Schwab and seven other plaintiffs alleges that Reynolds had a conflict of interest in voting on the Downtown Revitalization project, which, if passed, would have removed a lane from Broadway and Main streets and added protected bike lanes.
The lawsuit alleged she had a conflict because of her co-ownership of Shubert’s Ice Cream, located at 178 E. Seventh St.
Reynolds maintains she doesn’t have a conflict of interest in the matter.
But the mayor is also under investigation by the Fair Political Practices Commission, which is tasked with ensuring fairness throughout the state, for her votes on the project.
The plaintiffs wanted a preliminary injunction, which must meet two conditions: the plaintiff is likely to win the suit and the injunction has to balance harm between the parties if granted. Mosbarger ruled neither condition was met.
The lawsuit argued that Shubert’s would experience a change in revenue because of the project, which should disqualify Reynolds from the vote.
In the ruling from Judge Tamara Mosbarger, she noted the financial change must be a “realistic possibility” and not built around speculation.
Mosbarger said there was reason to believe there would be financial effects on downtown because of the project. But she didn’t indicate there was reason to believe Shubert’s in particular would be affected.
“… there has been no evidence submitted at this point to support the required specific findings … nor any evidence in relation to Respondent and her business specifically in this regard,” the ruling states.
Washington argued that delaying the project’s grant application another two years would affect businesses and could lead to deaths and injuries for cyclists, stating that downtown is one of the most dangerous areas for people on bicycles.
Mosbarger only addressed the grant cycle during her ruling. She stated since the grant opens every two years, delaying the project doesn’t result in irreparable harm, and reversing an elected official’s vote would be more harmful when weighted against Washington’s argument.
“The Court is concerned with the requested intrusion on the democratic process and finds that this public interest must be considered in the Court’s weighing and determination of the balance of harms,” the ruling states.
Reynolds said that she, too, had been concerned about the possibility of a judicial ruling changing a City Council vote.
“You are taking away an elected official’s job … if all people have to do is go down and do a lawsuit to undue a vote, then how would we ever have anything — it’s just complete intimidation,” Reynolds told ChicoSol.
Washington said he doesn’t agree with the outcome and Mosbarger “sees things differently than we do.” But he said Mosbarger responded to concerns he voiced in a May 27 court hearing.
Washington said “the judge is requiring proof at a higher standard than what I think the law requires,” and added that the plaintiffs wanted the revitalization to take place and to “vindicate” what they believed was a conflict of interest.
“This was never about attacking Mayor Reynolds or accusing her of intentional wrongdoing or characterizing her as a bad person,” Washington said. “Our goal was not to punish the mayor.”
Mosbarger set July 1 for a case management meeting. Washington said he and his clients would decide whether to continue pursuing the lawsuit by the July meeting.
“I have always said I would respect the decisions of the courts and the FPPC, and I will continue to do so as the process runs its course,” Reynolds said when asked for comment. “I respect that people in our community feel strongly about downtown’s future. So do I, and we are all working toward the same goal of a city we can be proud of. My commitment, now as before, is to serve all of Chico and keep our city moving forward.”
Chris Hutton is a ChicoSol contributor.