245 Cal. App. 4th 736
Cal. Ct. App.2016Background
- BH Partnership (BH) has leased Mission Bay property since 1953; in 2012 the San Diego City Council approved a 40-year lease extension but deferred final approval to obtain a statement of market value.
- BH retained appraiser Bruce Goodwin, who prepared a $17.8 million appraisal and presented methodology and conclusions at the February 26, 2013 council meeting.
- Council members questioned Goodwin about independence; BH’s CFO and Goodwin testified BH paid for the appraisal but did not direct the work or dictate the outcome.
- San Diegans for Open Government (SDOG) sued, alleging the lease approval violated San Diego Municipal Code §22.0901(a)(3) because the appraisal was not by an “independent fee appraiser.”
- The trial court denied SDOG’s writ and declaratory relief, finding substantial evidence supported the council’s implicit finding of Goodwin’s independence; the Court of Appeal affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the appraisal satisfied §22.0901(a)(3) as an appraisal by an "independent fee appraiser" | SDOG: Goodwin was not independent because he was retained and paid by BH and thus the council lacked an appraisal "by an independent fee appraiser." | City/BH: Testimony showed BH did not control or influence Goodwin's work; independence is a factual question for the council and substantial evidence supports the finding. | Court: Affirmed — substantial evidence supports council’s implicit finding that Goodwin was an independent fee appraiser under §22.0901; council action was legislative and not arbitrary or lacking evidentiary support. |
Key Cases Cited
- Mike Moore's 24-Hour Towing v. City of San Diego, 45 Cal.App.4th 1294 (Cal. Ct. App. 1996) (government contract awards are legislative and reviewed for arbitrariness or lack of evidentiary support)
- Pedro v. City of Los Angeles, 229 Cal.App.4th 87 (Cal. Ct. App. 2014) (substantial evidence standard described for agency findings)
- Schutte & Koerting, Inc. v. Regional Water Quality Control Bd., 158 Cal.App.4th 1373 (Cal. Ct. App. 2007) (presumption that agency findings are supported by substantial evidence)
- Yamaha Corp. of America v. State Bd. of Equalization, 19 Cal.4th 1 (Cal. 1998) (court’s independent judgment in statutory interpretation with deference to agency interpretations as appropriate)
- Citizens for Responsible Equitable Environmental Development v. City of San Diego, 184 Cal.App.4th 1032 (Cal. Ct. App. 2010) (statutory interpretation and standard of review)
- Jutzi v. County of Los Angeles, 196 Cal.App.3d 637 (Cal. Ct. App. 1987) (self-serving testimony does not automatically render evidence incredible)
- Avila v. Continental Airlines, Inc., 165 Cal.App.4th 1237 (Cal. Ct. App. 2008) (sanctions standard under appellate rules)