The state Supreme Court ruled in San Diego’s favor this week in a case involving the city’s 2015 refinancing of Petco Park construction debt to save taxpayers money.

The Supreme Court reversed on Thursday a previous Fourth District Court of Appeal ruling in favor of local attorney Cory Briggs and the group San Diegans for Open Government.

The appeals court ruled that the group had legal standing to sue the city over the bond refinancing, despite not being involved in the proposed bond transactions that accomplished the refinancing.

But the Supreme Court said the appeals court was wrong, and that Briggs did not have legal standing to file conflict-of-interest litigation against the city under the statute he used.


The 35-page ruling sends the case back to the appeals court so the judges there can determine whether SDOG might have legal standing for the case under some other statute.

The litigation contends the refinancing was a conflict of interest for the city because the financing team, which included both city employees and private organizations, had at least one member with a financial interest in the bond sale required to complete the refinancing.

Instead of considering that central issue, the courts have been determining whether the open government group has the legal standing to sue without being a party to the transaction.

The appeals court said he does, loosely defining party as anyone with an interest in the transaction, such as a taxpayer. But the Supreme Court said that definition was too loose, and that Briggs would only have legal standing if he participated in the financial contracts.


Because the refinancing was allowed to proceed in late 2015 after a lower court ruled in the city’s favor, the case doesn’t seek to block the refinancing. Instead, Briggs is seeking to set a legal precedent and recover transaction costs paid to banks as part of the refinancing.

The refinancing saved the city an estimated $25 million by lowering the interest rate on outstanding Petco Park construction debt.

The city sold $169.7 million in bonds in February 2002 to fund its share of constructing Petco, which opened in 2004. The city refinanced those bonds in 2007 and again in 2015. The second refinance is the subject of the litigation filed by Briggs.