A Richmond circuit court judge Friday denied a local psychiatrist's request for a temporary restraining order that would have paused the city’s pending sale of a Northside land parcel to the Virginia League for Planned Parenthood for $10.
Despite saying that Dr. Sheila Furey’s practice did not have standing to sue the city and Chief Administrative Officer Lincoln Saunders, Judge Tracy W. J. Thorne-Begland allowed the case — and the sale — to move forward.
Furey’s attorney, Founding Freedoms Law Center’s Michael Sylvester, said the restraining order was needed because there was no assurance that the city would wait for the case to be concluded before finalizing the sale, allowing the property to be bulldozed.
“If Dr. Furey's local medical practice doesn't have standing to challenge Richmond's unlawful sale of a $1.25 million property to Planned Parenthood for $10, then no one does,” wrote attorney Josh Hetzler, of Founding Freedoms Law Center — in a Friday statement.
The statement continued: “If the court's ruling today is correct, then the City of Richmond is incentivized to do virtually anything it wants regardless of the law without accountability or legal recourse, including giving away valuable assets to favored groups for pet projects. Surely, that cannot be the case.”
The lawsuit argues that despite the property being valuable and not blighted, the city did not allow others to make offers on the property at market value. The land and building at 4929 Chamberlayne Ave. was assessed in January by the city at $1,246,000.
Richmond City Council in July approved the use of the surplus building for a Planned Parenthood center over the objections of some residents. Councilors unanimously voted to transfer the site to VLPP for the “nominal consideration” of $10.
Chief Administrative Officer Lincoln Saunders has been directed to make the transfer, but Sylvester said it has not happened.
Richmond Mayor Levar Stoney issued a statement saying he was “pleased” to see the judge side with the city and dismiss the attempt to block the land sale, which was backed by the faith-based Family Foundation of Virginia.
“Access to affordable, quality health care, including reproductive services, is essential to the well-being of our residents,” Stoney said. “Northside is a healthcare desert, and the addition of a new Planned Parenthood clinic would meet Richmonders right where they are and provide access to quality, affordable care — including primary care for those without insurance. We will continue to move with this project and look forward to delivering a new clinic in Richmond.”
The city submitted a brief in opposition to the lawsuit on Wednesday; Thorne-Begland said on Friday it wouldn’t be addressed, and the proceedings instead focused on the request for a temporary restraining order.
Addressing Sylvester, Thorne-Begland said that his arguments assumed the court had jurisdiction.The judge said standing needed to be resolved before the court could issue a restraining order.
Deputy City Attorney Wirt Marks said Richmond had a right to give property to charitable organizations. And the two-part test under Friends of the Rappahannock v. Caroline County Board of Supervisors required the plaintiff to demonstrate proximity and personalized injury.
Marks said the plaintiff is in the same position as before the sale: The property is not unique to her practice and it can’t be assumed that she would have obtained ownership of the parcel, regardless of the Planned Parenthood arrangement.
The judge asked Sylvester why Furey didn’t make an offer on the property: “Why is this corner of Chamberlayne of keen particular interest to Dr. Furey?"
Sylvester said Furey didn’t know she could have bid — but would have offered more than $10.
After hearing arguments, Thorne-Begland said this was a case of “What’s it to you?,” adding that the plaintiff did not pass the 2-part test under Friends of the Rappahannock.
The court found Friday that Furey suffered no irreparable harm from the sale: Her practice is on Southside, far from the property in question, and she showed no interest in the property before the proposed sale.
“Court concludes she lacks standing, so the court lacks authority,” Thorne-Begland said, denying the restraining order request.
Marks moved to dismiss the complaint for lack of standing, but the judge did not grant a dismissal.
The next hearing has not yet been scheduled.
