The controversy over a Santa Barbara apartment building at the center of a “renoviction” has escalated in Santa Barbara County Superior Court.

James Knapp, the property manager for 215 Bath St., is being sued criminally by the City of Santa Barbara over allegations that he illegally attempted to evict tenants. Now, Knapp has responded and filed his own civil lawsuit, alleging that Santa Barbara is interfering with his right to access the legal system.

The lawsuit was filed July 18 in Santa Barbara County Superior Court. It alleges that the city does not have the right to get involved in an eviction process until after it resolves itself through court.

“Such efforts by local jurisdictions severely restrict landlords’ freedom of access to the courts, the litigation privilege under section 47(b) of the Civil Code, Action Apartment, 41 Cal. 4th at 1243,” the suit states.

It adds that “criminal prosecution of landlords for violating just-cause eviction laws, whether state or local, are prohibited as a matter of law.”

The Santa Barbara City Council is set to discuss Knapp’s lawsuit in a closed session hearing on Tuesday. No report is expected to be given.

The civil suit is the latest flare-up in a contentious public battle over residency for tenants at 215 Bath St.

The City of Santa Barbara in May filed criminal charges against the property manager alleging that he failed to comply with the just-cause eviction ordinance. The lawsuit, still working its way through court, includes three misdemeanor counts, alleging that Knapp terminated tenancy without just cause, failed to comply with the city’s just-cause ordinance and failed to serve proper permits.

The charges come after the property owner served just-cause eviction notices to 11 tenants at 215 Bath St., a 52-unit complex. When one of the notices expired and the tenant had not vacated, the property manager filed an unlawful detainer complaint, according to the city.

Knapp said the building needs serious plumbing and electrical work and that it would be unsafe for the tenants to remain. However, the tenants contend that the property owners are just trying to drive them out so they can renovate the building and charge more money in rent.

The City of Santa Barbara’s tenants protection ordinance requires that renters have the first right of refusal to return to the apartment after a renovation, but not at the same rent that they were paying.

Corina Svacina, a resident at 215 Bath St., told Noozhawk last week that “ever since the owners took over in September of last year, they made it clear they didn’t want to renew people’s leases.”

“We are working-class people,” Svacina said. “We just want to continue to live here. They have made it clear they don’t want us.”

Svacina believes that the owners want to evict tenants so they can rent to students and charge $1,500 per bed.

She said the project’s goal is to displace the working class in Santa Barbara and put in more temporary, short-term students. She said 10 boxes were delivered to 215 Bath St. in mid-June and were addressed to EF International Student Housing.

Knapp, in response, said, “We don’t have a current plan.”

He added that right now, the goal is to renovate the entire property, including the roof, water, plumbing and electric. He said the renovation is about “investing in the community.”

“We don’t know what the plan for the property will be,” Knapp said. “All we are focusing on now is providing a safe, habitable building. We were looking at various options, which included student housing and non-student housing.”

Knapp said rents will need to go up because the owners are investing about $40,000 in each studio apartment. He also said they have offered relocation assistance to all tenants, some as much as $10,000.

Svacina said the relocation assistance offered, about $5,000, is not nearly enough to get back into the market.

“They want short-term students to live there. They want a high turnover rate,” she said. “They want to stuff in as many people as possible.”

Svacina’s lease ended in May, and she said she has been sending her monthly rent check, but it has been returned.

“As neighbors, we have never been more united, and we just want to continue to live here and work here and be good citizens,” Svacina said.