Dunkl

City of San Diego v. Dunkl

Good Law
103 Cal. Rptr. 2d 269·2001 Cal. App. LEXIS 30·2001 Daily Journal DAR 757·86 Cal. App. 4th 384·2001 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 601
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 22, 2001D035559, D035585California7,195 words

Opinion

Opinion

Huffman, J.

These two separate declaratory relief actions were brought by the City of San Diego (the City) and the limited partnership which owns the San Diego Padres professional baseball team, Padres, L.P. (the Padres) against two individuals, Michael Kane Dunkl and Philip Zoebisch (collectively referred to as the proponents), who began in November 1999 to circulate a proposed initiative which would have made certain negative findings concerning an earlier city ordinance, Proposition C (Prop. C). Prop. C was adopted by City voters in November 1998 to enable funding and construction of the downtown ballpark redevelopment project pursuant to a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the City, its redevelopment agency, the Padres and others.

The City and the Padres sought judicial declarations that the proposed initiative, commonly known as the Ballpark Initiative (referred to here as the proposed initiative), was invalid and should not be placed on the ballot even if adequate signatures for that purpose were obtained. These actions were coordinated in the superior court and resulted in summary judgments in favor of the City and the Padres, the moving parties below. The basis of…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.