A municipal court judge dismissed the single obstruction charge against Auburn City Councilwoman Virginia Haugen on Feb. 20 after a one-day bench trial.

Visiting Judge Glenn M. Phillips found that Tacoma Prosecutor Jeanne Hayes, handling the case on behalf of the City of Auburn, had failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that Haugen obstructed police as they tried to investigate an incident of trespassing that occurred July 4, 2008.

On that date persons still unknown trespassed onto a Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railroad trestle in the 400 block of Auburn Way South and hung over part of a city Fourth of July banner a sign bearing a pointed political message: “Will the last person leaving Auburn’s downtown turn out the lights?”

Haugen was never a suspect in the trespassing itself, but she did order and pick up that sign and another on behalf of others.

Police testified that Haugen had initially denied any knowledge of that sign during the initial interview at City Hall July 7, but admitted the falsehood the next day when officers confronted her with an invoice from the sign company that had made the sign.

She refused to divulge the identities of any of the possible trespassers.

Haugen’s attorney Robert Hamilton said the city’s decision to prosecute Haugen was politically motivated and he repeatedly pointed the finger at Mayor Pete Lewis. Haugen and Lewis are known to be at loggerheads about the redevelopment of the downtown.

Phillips found that obstruction, not the false statement Haugen gave the police, was the issue. And he said that Hayes had failed to prove that Haugen willfully and intentionally obstructed the investigation.

“Separating political motivation from anything else, it’s a simple charge of obstruction … I’m satisfied that she made false statements to the officer. But that’s not the issue here. The issue here is obstructing,” Phillips said.

“There is no information before me that would indicate that Miss Haugen had a knowledge that her making the false statements — and again I do find they were intentional false statements — that she had a knowledge that by doing so she would delay or hinder a law enforcement officer. Accordingly, if this had been charged under making a false or misleading statement to a public servant, yeah, the outcome might have been different. But as to obstruction of a law enforcement officer, I do not find that the city has met its burden of proof and I enter a verdict of not guilty and dismiss the charge.”

A relieved Haugen hugged supporters but refused comment.

Friends and supporters said the city should never have pursued the case in the first place.

“I think the judge heard what we heard, the city failed to meet its burden and he ruled in the right way,” Paula Fox said.

“My thoughts are that justice was served,” said Marie Polley. “I think this woman was railroaded, and this should never have happened in the first place. Our city has other things to do than waste money on a person that was not guilty of any crime.”