Downtown Street Redesign Tied To Lawsuit

A Chico street redesign turned into a conflict-of-interest fight. The immediate news is not that bulldozers stopped or a court froze construction — the project had already stalled. What changed is that former mayor Ann Schwab and seven other residents sued Mayor Kasey Reynolds on May 6, arguing her April 21 vote against the Downtown Revitalization Project should not have counted because she owns a business inside the project area. ### What is this project, exactly? The Downtown Chico Revitalization Project is the city’s long-running plan to remake parts of Main Street and Broadway with safer crossings, wider sidewalks, and bike facilities while also dealing with aging downtown infrastructure. The version at the center of the fight — Alternative 1 — would add protected one-way bikeways on Main and Broadway, cut the current three travel lanes down to two, and remove just one parking space. (mynspr.org) ### What happened on April 21? City Council took a second shot at approving the project on April 21, 2026, after an earlier deadlock. It failed again in a 3-3 tie. Reynolds voted no, and that no mattered because without a majority the staff-backed redesign did not move forward. Public turnout was huge — 77 people signed up to speak, and ChicoSol said about two-thirds of those who spoke backed the plan. (chicoca.gov) ### Why is Reynolds being sued? The plaintiffs say Reynolds had a personal financial interest and should have stepped aside under California’s Political Reform Act. Their argument is simple — Reynolds owns Shubert’s Ice Cream and Candy on Seventh Street, inside the downtown project area, so a vote on the redesign could affect her business. The suit asks the court to void the vote and force compliance with the recusal rules. (krcrtv.com) ### Why does business ownership matter here? Because this project is not abstract zoning language. It changes how customers, deliveries, traffic, loading, and construction would work on the blocks around downtown storefronts. Opponents have argued lane reductions and construction could hurt access and sales. Supporters — including some business owners — argue the redesign would make downtown easier to walk, bike, and linger in, which is the whole economic bet behind the plan. (mynspr.org) ### Is the lawsuit about the project design? Not really. The lawsuit is narrower than the bigger political fight. It does not mainly ask whether protected bike lanes are good or bad. It asks whether the deciding vote was legally valid. That distinction matters — if the plaintiffs win, the remedy could be another council decision with Reynolds recused, not a court-designed street plan. That is an inference from the claims described in local coverage. (krcrtv.com) ### Why is timing such a big deal? Because Chico is up against a June 22 deadline for Caltrans’ Active Transportation Program Cycle 8 grant application. Supporters of the redesign say missing that date could push the city to the next funding cycle roughly two years later and jeopardize tens of millions of dollars for the project. So even though this reads like local process drama, the clock is very real. (mynspr.org) ### What happens next? The court fight now sits on top of an already split council and a divided downtown business community. Reynolds still could choose to recuse herself in a future vote, and council could still revisit the project before the grant deadline. But the catch is that every extra week spent on legal and political maneuvering makes a June rescue harder. (savedowntownchico.org) ### Bottom line This is now two fights at once — one over what downtown Chico should look like, and one over who was allowed to decide. The second fight may determine whether the first one gets another chance at all. (krcrtv.com)