Kevin England, Mayor of Chubbuck, Idaho, appointed Rodney Burch to be the City’s Public Works Director in 2015. For the first six years of Burch’s tenure, he and Mayor England had a good working relationship. During that time, Burch communicated his concerns regarding City management directly to England without issue and ultimately developed a strategic plan to improve operations, which obtained the City Council’s approval.
By 2021, England and Burch’s relationship had soured. Burch, frustrated with England’s policies and performance, proposed changing the City’s management structure from a strong mayor system to a weak mayor system by creating a City administrator position. He criticized England for: failing to implement the strategic plan; mismanaging budgeting; reducing revenue through a utility credit program; and failing to support Public Works effectively. Burch argued that a City administrator would improve oversight and reduce waste. England ultimately rejected the proposal.
Councilmember Dan Heiner challenged England in the 2021 mayoral election. Burch placed a campaign sign for Heiner in his front yard. One of Burch’s neighbors informed England of Burch’s yard sign.
England won re-election. England spoke with the City’s legal counsel and human resources director about removing Burch for cause or requesting Burch’s resignation. England said that he no longer trusted Burch because of his City administrator proposal and the documents Burch created that sharply criticized England.
England met with Burch and asked him to resign. Burch refused. England then scheduled an executive session of the City Council to argue for Burch’s removal, but the Council declined and instructed the two to continue working together. By 2022, Burch resigned, claiming that England had cut Burch out of decision-making and that many of his duties had been reassigned to his subordinates.
Burch then sued the City and England, claiming that England had retaliated against him based on his protected speech under the First Amendment. Burch alleged that his duties and decision-making were reduced and that he was constructively discharged due to his: protected speech, which included criticisms of England’s policies and performance; advocacy for a City administrator position; and political yard sign supporting England’s opponent. The district court granted summary judgment to the City and England. Burch appealed.
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed. The Court found that Burch was not constructively discharged. Burch had complained that he was working 2.5 jobs, so the reduction in his duties and decision-making did not rise to the level of intolerable working conditions that would cause a reasonable person to resign.
As to the First Amendment issues, the Court reasoned that Burch’s criticisms of England’s policies and performance, and advocacy for a City administrator position, addressed matters of public concern, as did Burch’s yard sign. The Court found that Burch’s criticisms and advocacy were made as a public employee, and therefore, were not protected speech. But Burch’s yard sign was not displayed as part of his role as a public employee and thus was protected speech.
The Court concluded that Burch failed to establish a First Amendment violation because the City and England had adequate justification for their actions and would have taken the same actions regardless of the yard sign. The Court found that the Mayor and City had legitimate reasons for their actions, including Burch’s unprotected speech and the need to maintain effective City operations.
Burch v. City of Chubbuck, 146 F.4th 822 (9th Cir 2025).