Thousand Oaks group ends court fight over downtown project

The courtroom fight over Thousand Oaks' downtown redevelopment is over. Citizens for Responsible Development in Thousand Oaks, the grass-roots group that tried to force a public vote on the city's newly approved Downtown Project, announced earlier this month that it is dropping its legal challenge — not because its objections were resolved, but because it could not afford to keep fighting.

The decision clears one more obstacle for one of the most ambitious civic projects in the city's history, one that will reshape the area around the Civic Arts Plaza and adjacent westside property that many Newbury Park residents travel to for concerts, meetings and city business.

What the group was asking the court to do

According to the Thousand Oaks Acorn (Newbury Park), the group filed a petition for a writ of mandate in Ventura County Superior Court on Aug. 12, asking a judge to intervene in its effort to gather enough signatures to put the Downtown Project before voters.

At the heart of the dispute was the referendum clock. Under state referendum rules, a petition generally must be submitted within 30 days after an ordinance is attested by the city clerk and must contain signatures from at least 10% of the city's registered voters. The group's referendum window ran through Aug. 12 — the same day it filed its court petition.

In its filing, the group alleged the city failed to provide information it was legally required to provide, and that a city enforcement action involving campaign signs disrupted the signature-gathering operation. The group argued those actions impaired its ability to meet the signature threshold and asked the court for additional time.

A hearing had been scheduled for Sept. 14, but the group announced on Sept. 10 that it would not proceed because it lacked the funds to retain licensed legal counsel.

"The cost exceeded our available resources; the only alternative was for a management team member to proceed as an individual," the group said in its statement. "We determined that this was not the strongest or most responsible path forward."

A near-miss on signatures

Group member Jeanette Welling, whose name appears on the legal document, said the campaign came closer than its small size might suggest.

"We got 7,128 signatures, which is just about 8% of the population," Welling told the Acorn. "We got those with just 13 to 15 volunteers in 30 days, in the middle of summer with people on vacation."

The figure falls short of the threshold the group understood it needed to qualify the referendum — the difference, Welling suggested, between a full sprint and a fair fight.

"I just felt like it's a David versus Goliath story," she said. "And if we would have had a little more time, we would have done it."

What the project would build

The Thousand Oaks City Council voted 5-0 on June 23 to approve the downtown project's first-phase entitlements, prompting the referendum campaign that launched in July.

The project would transform the Civic Arts Plaza area and adjacent westside property into a mixed-use downtown — a neighborhood of housing, a hotel, shops, restaurants and new public gathering spaces. For decades, Thousand Oaks has been notable among Conejo Valley cities for lacking a traditional walkable downtown core; the project is the city's highest-profile attempt to create one.

For Newbury Park residents, the stakes are twofold. The Civic Arts Plaza is already the destination of choice for performing arts and civic events in the 805 region, and a mixed-use district would add dining, lodging and gathering spaces closer to home than trips to Ventura or Los Angeles. At the same time, opponents have raised questions about transparency and process — concerns that echo debates in other fast-developing corners of the Conejo Valley.

The fight isn't over, group says

Welling was careful to frame the withdrawal from court as a pivot, not a surrender.

"This was not the end," she said in essence of the group's efforts, describing the transition toward more formal "state remedies" — avenues pursued through state-level oversight rather than county court. She said members will also keep attending City Council meetings to raise awareness among residents.

"We're gonna push on and make sure — or at least attempt — to make the city more accountable," Welling said. "There's a lot of stuff that's probably in the pipeline that we don't know about."

Whether state-level complaints gain traction, the immediate legal path is closed. With the writ of mandate withdrawn and the referendum window expired, the first-phase entitlements approved in June stand, and the project can move toward its next procedural milestones.

What to watch next

For residents on both sides of the issue, the coming months will show whether the project advances on the timeline city officials have envisioned — and whether Citizens for Responsible Development's promised "state remedies" produce any formal review of how the referendum process was handled.

City Council meetings remain the most visible venue for the debate. Welling said her group intends to be there, and residents who want to weigh in on the downtown project's subsequent phases — including design details, traffic and parking — will have their chances as the entitlement process continues.

The Acorn's reporting is the primary source for the details of the court withdrawal; 805.life will continue to follow the downtown project as it moves from approved plans toward construction.