The order was extended on June 10. | File photo.


Watson in 2022

In the three and a half years since Brett Watson left office, the former Arcata councilmember and mayor has continued to challenge a workplace violence restraining order granted in 2023 for harassment of a city employee.

The restraining order was extended this month by Judge Timothy Canning,  though through early September, according to court documents.

Watson has continued to deny wrongdoing in legal documents, contradicting findings from a lengthy 2022 city investigation that found he sexually harassed a female subordinate at work. The investigation found that he was driven by an obsession with her.

Since then, multiple courts have upheld the restraining order. Watson has made multiple unsuccessful attempts to get the order overturned. He also filed a lawsuit against the city and the employee over the issue; the latest ongoing effort started in spring 2025.

The court order barred Watson from contacting or harassing four city officials as well as entering their workplaces and having guns.

An attorney for the city filed a request to renew this restraining order on March 2, about two weeks before it was set to expire. The order was extended by a judge earlier this month, with it ending September 8, according to court minutes.

The city sought for the order to be renewed for an additional three years. In the request, the city argued that Watson’s continued legal efforts indicate that he will try to communicate with the people protected if the restraining order is no longer in place.

The city pointed to the many months he spent attempting to overturn the order and his ongoing attempt to challenge the dismissal of the related lawsuit.

“In both actions, Respondent has continued to put forth a false narrative of events, including allegations that directly contradict the findings of this Court,” the city’s renewal request stated.

The city alleges that Watson is using the court system to continue to harass, disturb and frighten the people protected by the order.

The restraining order was granted in March 2023, a few months after Watson lost his bid for re-election. At the time, Judge Canning found that Watson’s stalking behavior warranted a permanent restraining order, as the evidence showed that great harm would result if a temporary order expired.

Notably, the court found Watson did not comply with that temporary order until he was arrested for violating it.

The ruling pointed to Watson trying to visit and manipulate the employee, despite being told to stop. This included making two unauthorized entries to the employee’s office after he was denied access. After hearing from witnesses, the court found the evidence overwhelmingly suggested Watson “was obsessed with the employee and had an uncontrollable compulsion to continue communicating with her.” 

His efforts to overturn the order include an appeal to the California court of appeals, which upheld the order in June 2024 in a ruling that awarded legal expenses to the city. He sought a rehearing in the same court, which again kept the order intact later that month.

Then, he petitioned the Supreme Court of California, which denied his request to review the case in August 2024.

On top of these appeals, he filed a 2023 lawsuit against the City of Arcata and the employee he stalked in federal court, seeking damages for allegedly violating his rights.

The lawsuit claims the city violated the Americans with Disabilities Act by placing guidelines on interacting with city employees amid the investigation into his conduct. According to the lawsuit, his conditions include ADHD, depression, anxiety and recovery from substance abuse.

It claims that, due to his disabilities, he was distressed by the employee’s suggestions to spend less time together.

The lawsuit also accuses his alleged harassment victim of violating his civil rights. It states that actions taken against Watson, including the investigation into his conduct, were in retaliation for “advocacy for his constituents,” which is protected by the First Amendment.

This lawsuit was dismissed by the court in 2024. He attempted to reopen the case, which was denied.

In April 2025, he filed another appeal with the Ninth Circuit court. According to the city’s account of his legal efforts, the parties are awaiting a decision or a date for oral argument on the case.

Documents from Watson broadly argue that the relationship between the pair was consensual and cultivated by the employee for strategic reasons, accusing her in one section of the lawsuit of displaying “underlying Machiavellian designs.”

But testimony from witnesses and the employee said Watson threatened performance reviews if the employee did not return his barrage of messages, and that he showed a pattern of stalking behavior.

In recent declarations, the protected people state they remain in fear of Watson. City filings say those people remain frightened of Watson, “especially because orders from multiple State and Federal Courts do not seem to have caused [Watson] to view his conduct for what it is — disturbing, frightening, and stalking,” the city states in the request.

The city alleges Watson will reengage in his “disturbing and frightening ‘stalking’ behavior” toward certain city officials if the order is not renewed. 

Watson did not return a phone call or emails before publishing time. His attorney’s office also did not return a message seeking comment.

###

PREVIOUSLY: