by Brooke Williams and Brad Racino
A more up-to-date version of this story can be found by clicking here
Nearly two years ago, San Diego attorney Cory Briggs called on Mayor Bob Filner to resign for violating “principles of open, accountable, responsible government” in connection to a deal with a developer.
The next day, Briggs filed a lawsuit against the developer, Sunroad Enterprises, and the city, alleging a “pay-to-play scheme.” The city, the suit contended, was giving away public property in exchange for a $100,000 donation from Sunroad to Filner’s “pet projects.” The property included nine-foot wide strips of land on either side of a park. It was all part of a commercial-residential development in Kearny Mesa that Sunroad was building.
inewsource looked into how that lawsuit was resolved and found that the only one who has been paid so far is Briggs. But there appears to be some action since inewsource started asking questions.
Sunroad’s vice president of development, Andrea Contreras Rosati, told inewsource the company paid Briggs Law Corp. $135,000 to settle the case and put $10,000 into a San Diego park fund, as required by the settlement. Within ten days, Sunroad was also supposed to work with the city to appraise the easement, which would prohibit the city from building on two edges of the park. Sunroad was then to pay the city the appraised value 10 days after that. They signed the agreement on Aug. 21, 2014.
As of Wednesday, the easement had not been appraised. On Tuesday, inewsource asked for details of payments to the city from Sunroad since August to confirm the $10,000 donation, which was supposed to happen within three days of the settlement. The San Diego Treasurer’s Office found only three, but they were unrelated. The treasurer’s office is still trying to confirm its search didn’t miss any payments for city parks, according to city spokesman Tim Graham.
inewsource emailed Tom Story, a consultant for Sunroad, on April 11 with questions about the settlement terms. On April 14, inewsource reached Story by phone, who said he had forwarded the question on to Sunroad.
A day later, Contreras Rosati told inewsource in a phone interview that an appraiser had been hired “within the last week.”
“Cory and us, we just went back and forth for a while,” she said. “There wasn’t anything really in particular that caused the delay.”
The settlement spells out what Sunroad and Briggs were required to do if they couldn’t agree on an appraiser. Contreras Rosati said Sunroad took those steps.
She said “it shouldn’t take much longer” for the appraiser to come through, but “apparently he has quite a workload, too.”
Briggs did not respond to an emailed request for an interview Wednesday afternoon, but Contreras Rosati, who worked as a deputy city attorney until June 2014 when she took a job with Sunroad, said the company paid Briggs the $135,000.
The value of the easement in question was the first of two scandals leading up to Filner’s resignation, which was ultimately over charges of sexual harassment.
Briggs did not mention a “quid pro quo” in the resignation letter he faxed to Filner at 3:34 p.m. on July 9, although a CityBeat article, based on lengthy interviews with Briggs, Marco Gonzales and Donna Frye—three former Filner allies who sought his resignation—states multiple times Briggs’ letter asking Filner to step down was about the Sunroad arrangement. Briggs gave the city notice of the impending lawsuit against Sunroad with those allegations less than three hours later.
Sunroad’s messy history
What Briggs described as a pay-to-play scheme between Sunroad and Filner began when the City Council voted unanimously April 30, 2013 to waive a city land policy and give Sunroad a no-build easement along the edges of the north and south end of a park adjacent to the company’s development. An easement prohibiting the city from building on the land was delaying the Sunroad Centrum project in Kearny Mesa, a commercial and residential development that included a 2-acre park to be donated to the city.
The city’s real estate head at the time, James Barwick, told the City Council the easement would increase the value of Sunroad’s property because the company would be able to construct closer to the park and “build more units” as part of the project.
Barwick also told the council the “no build” easement would diminish the value of the land and pointed to “100 years down the road” when it might not be a park anymore. What if the city wanted to build a baseball field? He asked the council, saying “there should be some consideration or compensation to the city.”
Councilwoman Lorie Zapf led the motion to waive council policy, giving Sunroad the easement and saying it was “just a simple waiver.”
This wasn’t the first time Sunroad had been part of a scandal involving the city.
Years ago, the company notoriously had to remove the top of an office tower. The city had approved the height while the Federal Aviation Administration declared the building was dangerous for pilots flying into the airport in bad weather. A newspaper investigation at the time found the Development Services Department had at least two chances to limit the height before construction began.
As Story stood before the City Council in April 2013 in support of a waiver of council policy to get the no-build easement, City Councilwoman Marti Emerald recalled out loud the fiasco over the building and told Story, who was chief of staff to former mayor Dick Murphy, that she wanted to ensure this wasn’t a “manipulation of the system.”
Councilman David Alvarez asked if the City Attorney’s office had any concerns, and Shannon Thomas, deputy city attorney, said they didn’t have enough information to evaluate whether the easement had value or would be a “gift of public funds.”
In the end, Emerald joined her colleagues and voted in favor of the waiver but said “we have an obligation to make sure that we don’t give it away” and asked Story to “go back and negotiate with the mayor’s office, Real Estate Assets” to “see what kind of compensation we could get for this property.”
Story ended up working out a compensation package with the mayor’s office after Filner vetoed the council’s decision on May 16. At the time, Filner said he vetoed because was concerned about how the council waived city policies without consulting city staff.
Story reached an agreement with the mayor’s office to donate $100,000 to the city, which it allocated to a biking event and a veteran’s plaza in Ocean Beach. But a scandal ensued after Story left a voicemail for then-councilman and current Mayor Kevin Faulconer on June 7, saying the company had paid the money and was told Filner would support overriding his own veto.
A settlement
The lawsuit Briggs filed on behalf of San Diegans for Open Government* argued the city was entitled to the full dollar value of the land, and that the $100,000 had no “sufficient nexus with the loss of the park property and would not be used to fund any program or service that would benefit the Kearny Mesa community where the park is located.”
He also said the project violated the California Environmental Quality Act.
The August 2014 settlement did not include any environmental remedies. In all, Sunroad agreed to pay $10,000 to a city park acquisition fund with “with priority for parks located in Kearny Mesa and then Clairemont,” the value of the easement and $135,000 to Briggs Law Corp.
Contreras Rosati, vice president at Sunroad, said no one from the city was involved in the settlement, though some officials have asked for updates. “The city did not feel they needed to involve themselves further,” she said.
“I think I just saw an email recently where they wanted to know what was going on,” she said.
*Last week, San Diegans for Open Government filed a lawsuit against inewsource, its executive director, San Diego State University (where inewsource has its office), the San Diego State University Foundation and California State University. The lawsuit alleges conflict of interest violations concerning inewsource’s lease and non-disclosures on federal tax filings.
- Editorial Standards Page
- Ethics Policy
- Diversity Statement
- Diversity Staffing Report
- Corrections Policy
- Ownership Structure, Funding
- Founding Date
- Masthead
- Mission Statement with Coverage Priorities
- Fact-checking Standards
- Unnamed Sources Policy
Editorial Standards Page
- Our Mission
- Ethics Policy
- Diversity
- Ownership Structure, Funding and Grants
- Financial Documents
- Fact-checking and Verification Standards
- Unnamed Sources
- Corrections and Clarifications
- Actionable Feedback and Newsroom Contacts
- Masthead
- Byline Policy
- The Trust Project
- Privacy Policy
Our Mission
inewsource is a nonprofit, nonpartisan newsroom dedicated to improving lives in the San Diego region and beyond through impactful, data-based investigative and accountability journalism.
Our Vision
Betrayals of the public trust are revealed and rectified, wrongdoing is deterred, and inequities are illuminated thanks to inewsource’s deep, dogged, fact-based reporting.
Our Values
Truth: Above all else, we value the importance of a free and credible press. Truth is the cornerstone of democracy and the core value for inewsource.
Transparency: We build trust with our readers by adhering to the highest standards and ethics, and to reporting with facts, precision and context.
Collaboration: Our newsroom prioritizes collaboration over competition. We regularly partner with media outlets on reporting projects and to share content.
Community: Our reporting serves the San Diego region, and we strive to build relationships with our audience by getting out into the community to listen and engage.
Ethics Policy
inewsource will conduct its business with the highest standards of decency, fairness and accuracy. These standards shall apply equally to inewsource employees, freelancers and all others engaged in gathering information on behalf of inewsource. All receive a copy of these ethical standards.
In the course of our reporting, we will consistently:
● Identify our organization and ourselves fully and avoid false representations of any kind to any source.
● Obtain consent from all parties before electronically recording any interview or conversation except in extraordinary cases authorized by the Managing Editor and Editor. If a source refuses to be taped, that must be honored; no recordings are to be made without consent.
● Respect the individual’s right to privacy. inewsource will never manipulate or barter private, personal, health, financial or other extraneous information in the course of preparing its reports.
● Any source we describe or write about in any significant manner must be contacted. The employee should document all efforts to contact the source, and if unsuccessful, should summarize these efforts at contact in the body of his/her writing.
In addition, inewsource follows the Code of Ethics of the Society of Professional Journalists. The latest version, revised in 2014, can be found here.
Editorial Independence Policy
We subscribe to standards of editorial independence adopted by the Institute for Nonprofit News (INN) as follows:
Our organization retains full authority over editorial content to protect the best journalistic and business interests of our organization. We will maintain a firewall between news coverage decisions and sources of all revenue. Acceptance of financial support does not constitute implied or actual endorsement of donors or their products, services or opinions.
We accept gifts, grants and sponsorships from individuals and organizations for the general support of our activities, but our news judgments are made independently and not on the basis of donor support. Our organization also may consider donations to support the coverage of particular topics, but our organization maintains editorial control of the coverage. We will cede no right of review or influence of editorial content, nor of unauthorized distribution of editorial content.
Our organization will make public all donors who give a total of $1,000 or more. We will accept anonymous donations for general support only if it is clear that sufficient safeguards have been put into place that the expenditure of that donation is made independently by our organization and in compliance with INN’s Membership Standards.
Diversity
Diverse Voices
Inclusiveness is at the heart of thinking and acting as journalists, and it supports the educational mandate of inewsource. Race, class, generation, gender, sexual orientation, ability, and geography all affect point of view. inewsource believes that reflecting societal differences in reporting leads to better, more nuanced stories and a better-informed community.
inewsource is committed to employment equity and diversity.
Diverse Staffing Report
Below is a breakdown of staffing data at inewsource. We determine the composition of our staff by asking them to self-identify. It is based on a newsroom of 11 and a total staff of 15 as of August 2020. Percentages are based on 15 total survey responses. The numbers include full-time and part-time staff, full-time fellows and full-time and part-time interns.
| All Staff Percentages are based on 15 total survey responses. The numbers include full-time and part-time staff, full-time fellows and full-time and part-time interns. | Newsroom Percentages are based on 15 completed survey responses to this question. | Business Percentages are based on 15 completed survey responses to this question. | |||
| Gender Identity | Gender Identity | Gender Identity | |||
| Women | 80% | Women | 82% | Women | 75% |
| Men | 20% | Men | 18% | Men | 25% |
| Sexual Orientation | Sexual Orientation | Sexual Orientation | |||
| Straight | 87% | Straight | 82% | Straight | 100% |
| LGBTQ-identifying | 7% | LGBTQ-identifying | 7% | ||
| Not specified | 7% | Not specified | 7% | ||
| Speak a language beyond English at home | 33% | Speak a language beyond English at home | 18% | Speak a language beyond English at home | 75% |
| Race/Ethnicity | Race/Ethnicity | Race/Ethnicity | |||
| White | 67% | White | 73% | White | 50% |
| Hispanic or Latinx | 20% | Two or more races | 18% | Hispanic or Latinx | 50% |
| Two or more races | 13% | Hispanic or Latinx | 9% | ||
| Age | Age | Age | |||
| 20-29 | 40% | 20-29 | 45% | 20-29 | 25% |
| 30-39 | 47% | 30-39 | 45% | 30-39 | 50% |
| 60 or older | 13% | 60 or older | 9% | 60 or older | 25% |
* The percentages in the charts have been rounded and may not add up to 100.
Ownership Structure, Funding and Grants
inewsource is a nonprofit organization, whose legal name is Investigative Newsource. It does business as inewsource. The business was incorporated on Aug. 4, 2009 in the state of California. Tax-exempt status as a 501c3 was granted by the IRS on Sept. 15, 2010. inewsource is funded primarily by individual contributions and foundation grants. We are guided by a board of directors.
Editorial independence: Journalists employed by inewsource take no editorial direction from donors whose contributions may support the organization. inewsource will not hesitate to report on its donors when events warrant. Our Editorial Independence Policy details the firewall between journalism and revenue.
To be transparent with the public, inewsource lists its donors on its website. In cases where a donor is the subject of an inewsource story, additional disclosure will be made.
Financial Documents
We do our due diligence to earn your trust in our reporting, as well as in our governance and financial sustainability. All of our financial documents are made available to view so that our supporters can trust we are sound stewards of your philanthropy. Review our IRS Form 990s, audited financial statements and annual reports:
Tax Returns
Financial Statements
Annual Reports
Fact-checking and Verification Standards
Transparency is one of our core values. Today, there is a need to build trust with our audience because new media and ways of communicating spread lies and slanted news faster than “real” news. At the same time, this era of new technologies makes it easier than ever for news organizations to be transparent. People don’t just have to believe us, they can investigate our investigations with our source materials.
Transparency is key to building credibility.
inewsource reporters have primary responsibility for reporting, writing, and fact-checking their stories. But before a story is published, the reporter reviews all facts and sources with an editor or another reporter. Facts must be traced to a primary source.
In addition, we “transparify” certain investigative stories. This process involves publishing a version of the web story with hyperlinks to all the story’s facts. This is proof that all facts have been documented with primary evidence. We do this to build trust with our readers and to be as transparent as we hope the public figures and institutions that we hold accountable will be.
Unnamed Sources
Not all sources are created equal. Some sources cannot speak authoritatively, provide proper analysis or speak specifically to every inquiry placed before them. To maintain the integrity of our reporting, inewsource reporters must select sources who can speak with validity to the topic at hand, and avoid presenting unqualified or underqualified sources as experts.
If an interviewed source has a conflict of interest, or whose qualifications may be tangential or limited, reporters will note that within the context of the story.
It is incumbent upon reporters to fully background their sources to uncover conflicts of interest or slant prior to using them in a story.
Unless discussed prior to an interview, all subjects talking to inewsource journalists are on the record. Specifically, the source is identified by name and title, and their exact or paraphrased words are attributed to them for publication. If journalists speak with sources who are not politicians, public figures or those not commonly interviewed by journalists, staff should explain clearly that information discussed will be on the record and for publication.
There are times, however, when information may be critical for a story but cannot be found or verified by other means. For example, a source may be able to confirm specific information about a series of events they may have witnessed, but have legitimate concerns about using their name or title. The repercussions to the source could be legal, job-related retribution or personal safety. The source and journalist must discuss these potential dangers and terms of use should be agreed upon by both parties.
If inewsource publishes information from an anonymous source, inewsource will explain to readers, in as much detail as possible, why we agreed to anonymity.
Corrections and Clarifications
inewsource strives for accuracy in everything we do, which is why we are committed to fact checking our content. But sometimes we make errors. When that happens, we correct them. We also clarify stories when something we’ve written is confusing or could be misinterpreted.
We endeavor to always be transparent about our commitment to correcting errors and clarifying misperceptions. When staffers see, hear or read about a possible issue with the accuracy of any inewsource content, they are expected to bring it to the attention of an editor and the web producer so it can be evaluated to determine how to proceed.
Including the web producer is key because inewsource is a multimedia news organization and shares its content with multiple partners on multiple platforms. The web producer must alert these partners about corrections and clarifications.
Corrections and clarifications should be included at the bottom of stories and dated.
Actionable Feedback and Newsroom Contacts
Our audiences know the region we cover and have a stake in maintaining and improving the quality of life in San Diego and Imperial counties. We know your knowledge and insights can help shape what we cover and how we cover it. We invite your comments and complaints on news stories, suggestions for issues to cover or sources to consult. We rely on you to tell us when we get it right and when we need to keep pushing.
Your comments, questions and suggestions can be sent to the team as a whole at contact@inewsource.org or you can contact a specific member of our staff.
Masthead
CEO, Editor and Founder: Lorie Hearn, loriehearn@inewsource.org
Lorie Hearn is the chief executive officer, editor and founder of inewsource. She founded inewsource in the summer of 2009, following a successful reporting and editing career in newspapers. She retired from The San Diego Union-Tribune, where she had been a reporter, Metro Editor and finally the senior editor for Metro and Watchdog Journalism. In addition to department oversight, Hearn personally managed a four-person watchdog team, composed of two data specialists and two investigative reporters. Hearn was a Nieman Foundation fellow at Harvard University in 1994-95. She focused on juvenile justice and drug control policy, a natural course to follow her years as a courts and legal affairs reporter at the San Diego Union and then the Union-Tribune.
Hearn became Metro Editor in 1999 and oversaw regional and city news coverage, which included the city of San Diego’s financial debacle and near bankruptcy. Reporters and editors on Metro during her tenure were part of the Pulitzer Prize-winning stories that exposed Congressman Randy “Duke” Cunningham and led to his imprisonment.
Hearn began her journalism career as a reporter for the Bucks County Courier Times, a small daily outside of Philadelphia, shortly after graduating from the University of Delaware. During the decades following, she moved through countless beats at five newspapers on both coasts.
High-profile coverage included the historic state Supreme Court election in 1986, when three sitting justices were ousted from the bench, and the 1992 execution of Robert Alton Harris. That gas chamber execution was the first time the death penalty was carried out in California in 25 years.
In her nine years as Metro Editor at the Union-Tribune, Hearn made watchdog reporting a priority. Her reporters produced award-winning investigations covering large and small local governments. The depth and breadth of their public service work was most evident in coverage of the wildfires of 2003 and then 2007, when more than half a million people were evacuated from their homes.
Managing Editor: Mark J. Rochester, markrochester@inewsource.org
Mark J. Rochester began as inewsource managing editor in April 2021, having served as editor in chief at Type Investigations, a nonprofit investigative newsroom in Manhattan. He was previously senior news director for investigations at the Detroit Free Press. Both newsrooms, he notes, shared a commitment to diversity and inclusion, and their investigative journalism often received national recognition for exposing problems impacting communities of color.
His family looks forward to returning to California, having spent more than seven years in San Francisco where Rochester was a senior manager for the Associated Press. While with the news cooperative, he led computer-assisted reporting training efforts around the West, both inside and outside of AP, and conducted a widely used analysis of the $74 million in campaign contributions that went toward the California gay marriage ballot initiative in 2008. The AP analyzed who gave and why and then made the data available to member newspapers. The resulting series of stories based on the data was AP’s 2009 Pulitzer nomination for Local Reporting.
Rochester, who served as a Pulitzer Prize jurist in 2017, also has held senior leadership positions at the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, The Denver Post, Newsday and The Indianapolis Star. Rochester is vice president of Investigative Reporters & Editors Inc., the 6,000+ member international organization dedicated to improving investigative journalism. He also serves on the national advisory board of the Investigative Reporting Workshop at American University in Washington, D.C.
Byline Policy
Most of our articles carry a byline to identify the author. In some cases, inewsource will use a brand byline such as “Staff” or “inewsource” for internal or editorial information about the newsroom. In these instances, inewsource‘s Editor and Managing Editor are responsible for content that uses a brand byline.
The Trust Project
inewsource is proud to be a member of The Trust Project and support efforts to increase transparency in journalism by displaying the 8 Trust Indicators on our stories. We launched the Trust Indicators on Sep. 16, 2020.
Privacy Policy
inewsource has prepared this Privacy Policy to explain how we collect, use, protect, and share information when you use our inewsource.org website (the “Site“) or when you use any of our services (the “Services“).
By using the Site or Services you consent to this Privacy Policy.
Log Data
Like many site operators, we collect information that your browser sends whenever you visit our site (“Log Data”).
This Log Data may include information such as your computer’s Internet Protocol (“IP”) address, browser type, browser version, the pages of our site that you visit, the time and date of your visit, the time spent on those pages and other statistics.
Cookies
Cookies are files with small amount of data, which may include an anonymous unique identifier. Cookies are sent to your browser from a web site and stored on your computer or mobile device.
Like many sites, we use “cookies” to collect information. You can instruct your browser to refuse all cookies or to indicate when a cookie is being sent. However, if you do not accept cookies, you may not be able to use some portions of our site.
Certain pages on our site may set other third party cookies. For example, we may embed content, such as videos, from another site that sets a cookie. While we try to minimize these third party cookies, we can’t always control what cookies this third party content sets.
Additionally, we may use third party services — such as those that provide social media conveniences, measure traffic, send newsletters and facilitate donations — that may place cookies on your computer. We don’t have any way of knowing how such services handle the resulting data internally. inewsource makes no claim, nor takes liability for the insecure submission of information via these applications.
Here are the services whose cookies you can find on inewsource.org:
- Sharing buttons for Facebook and Twitter. These use the standard scripts provided by each company.
- Google Analytics, which we use to measure site traffic. Google Analytics gathers certain non-personally identifying information over time, such as your IP address, browser type, internet service provider, referring and exit pages, time stamp, and similar data. We also use Facebook Pixel to measure, optimize and build audiences for advertising campaigns served on Facebook. In particular it enables us to see how our users move between devices when accessing our website and Facebook, to ensure that our Facebook advertising is seen by our users most likely to be interested in such advertising by analyzing which content a user has viewed and interacted with on our website.
- Stripe, which allows us to accept donations through our website.
- Salesforce to manage newsletter subscriber, donor, and other identifiable user data.
- Mailchimp, to manage newsletter distributions. We collect your email address if you choose to subscribe to one of our email newsletters or email news alerts. Other optional information that you enter when subscribing – such as your first and last names or city are simply so that we can deliver more personalized email newsletters. We DO NOT sell, rent or market your information to any other parties. We retain your information only as long as necessary to provide your service. When we send emails, it collects some data about which users open the emails and which links are clicked. We use this information to optimize our email newsletters and, as aggregate information, to explain what percentage of our users open and interact with our newsletters.
Personal Data
We only collect personally identifiable information such as your name and email address when you sign up for a newsletter, donate to our organization, or otherwise submit it to us voluntarily. We do not share your personal data with any third parties other than some common service providers, whose products use your information to help us improve our site, deliver newsletters, or allow us to offer donation opportunities.
inewsource limits access to all user data for the purposes of newsletter, fundraising, and customer service only. User data is not sold to or otherwise shared with anyone not working with or for the inewsource.
You may unsubscribe or opt-out of our email and mail communications at any time by hitting the “unsubscribe” button in any email you receive from inewsource, or by emailing us at contact@inewsource.org or calling us at 619-594-5100.
Donor Information
The identities of all donors will be listed on our website. inewsource does not share, trade, sell, or otherwise release donors’ personal information to any third parties.
Refunds
If you encounter errors when donating on the website, please contact us at members@inewsource.org. For example, if you submit a donation for an incorrect amount or make a duplicate transaction please email us immediately so we can reverse the charges.
Cancellation of Recurring Donations
You can cancel your monthly recurring donations free of charge by notifying us at members@inewsource.org.
Links to Other Websites
Our site may contain links to documents, resources or other websites that we think may be of interest to you. We have no control over these other sites or their content. You should be aware when you leave our site for another, and remember that other sites are governed by their own user agreements and privacy policies, which should be available to you to read.
Disclaimers and Limitation of Liability
Although we take reasonable steps to prevent the introduction of viruses, worms, “Trojan Horses” or other destructive materials to our site, we do not guarantee or warrant that our site or materials that may be downloaded from our site are free from such destructive features. We are not liable for any damages or harm attributable to such features. We are not liable for any claim, loss or injust based on errors, omissions, interruptions or other inaccuracies on our site, nor for any claim, loss or injust that results from your use of this site or your breach of any provision of this User Agreement.
Contact Us
If there are any questions regarding this privacy policy, please contact us at contact@inewsource.org or call us at 619-594-5100.
Ethics Policy
This policy can be found on this page.
Diversity Statement
This policy can be found on this page.
Diversity Staffing Report
This policy can be found on this page.
Corrections Policy
This policy can be found on this page.
Ownership Structure, Funding
This policy can be found on this page.
Founding Date
2009-11-01
Masthead
This policy can be found on this page.
Mission Statement with Coverage Priorities
This policy can be found on this page.
Fact-checking Standards
This policy can be found on this page.
Unnamed Sources Policy
This policy can be found on this page.
Article Post Types
post
My understanding here is that Mr. Briggs filed a lawsuit to hold a developer accountable for inappropriate actions, won the suit through a settlement, was paid by the developer, and there is a pending obligation that will benefit the citizenry. I gather as well that had Mr. Briggs taken no action, the City Attorney had no plans to make the developer accountable and the inappropriate actions of the developer would have gone unchallenged. No question Mr. Briggs makes good money in some of these suits, but state law would seem to be designed to reward individuals who prevail in civil suits that inure to the benefit of the general public. Absent Mr. Briggs’ actions in this case, who would have defended the city against the developer’s clearly inappropriate actions? Apparently no one.
Cory Briggs for City Attorney.
Maybe INewsSource should be investigating Jay Goldsmith instead of Cory Briggs. Briggs seems to be on top of things, Goldsmith, not so much.
I disagree. Cory Briggs is nothing more than an extortionist. He is only in it for the big money he gets from filing these lawsuits. I’m just waiting for this current Chargers Stadium debacle to get past the planning stage so that he can file a lawsuit to extort even more money from the citizens.
I don’t know him and I’m not clear on the purity of his motives, but to me the value of having someone press these cases when no one else will seems to me to be a net benefit. In this case, citizens paid nothing apparently. They only benefit.
I think Cory Briggs revealed the purity, or lack thereof, of his motives when he threatened to sue SDSU and inewsource over their investigations of the public record and his activities. I suppose it could just be a case of someone who can dish it out but can’t take it.
I have to wonder why Mr. Racino neglected to mention that Andrea Contreras was the Deputy City Attorney responsible for both Sunroad cases, at which point she took a job with Sunroad. I think the public needs to know the truth about the very cozy relationship between the City Attorney and Sunroad.
“Briggs did not respond to an emailed request for an interview
Wednesday afternoon, but Contreras Rosati, who worked as an deputy city
attorney until June 2014 when she took a job with Sunroad, said the company paid Briggs the $135,000.”
I’m not sure why my name disappeared and I became “Guest”
I do not know. Our comments are run through a third-party hosting service, Disqus. Your name showed up this time.
Possibly. However, when I look at what inewsource initially accused Mr. Briggs of (conflicts of interest), it doesn’t seem a lot different than what inewsource is accused of in the lawsuit.
Mr. Racino: As I understand Theresa’s point, it is not that Ms. Rosati was a deputy city attorney, but rather that she was the DCA responsible for overseeing the prior Sunroad cases while working for the city and now works for Sunroad. I don’t know that to be true, but if correct, it’s an important issue considering that a major theme of this series is conflicts of interest on the part of Mr. Briggs. In this particular case, why didn’t the City Attorney pursue the issue on behalf of the city and once Mr. Briggs prevailed on behalf of the city, why didn’t the City Attorney hold Sunroad accountable for the terms of the settlement than inured to the benefit of the city? Must Mr. Briggs intervene on behalf of the city and, once he prevails, enforce the terms of the settlement?
So am I understanding this correctly? The city tried to give easements to Sunroad without an opinion of the city attorney on the legality of the gift; Filner tried to get the city $100K in exchange for the easements in an illegal manner; Briggs sued to make the city follow the law on both the $100K and the original gift and won $10K plus the appraised value of the easement for the city and attorney’s fees for himself in a settlement; the city hasn’t followed through collecting their $10K or the appraised value of the easement. The article implies that there is some standoff between Sunroad & Briggs on selecting an (honest?) appraiser, but the settlement states that the city shall select an appraiser, and only if the city refuses to select an appraiser do Sunroad & Briggs select an appraiser. Meanwhile, Sunroad’s “consultant” Tom Story was mayor Murphy’s chief of staff, and their current VP for Development Andrea Contreras Rosati was at least in the city attorney’s office at the time of the easement transfer, and possibly was the lead on the Sunroad issues.
And your headline is that Cory Briggs actually collected on his attorney’s fees? Why isn’t the headline and lede that the city apparently has no desire to collect from Sunroad, and thus is de facto making the (possibly) illegal gift anyway? Aren’t you just a little bit curious why the city refused to select an appraiser, even though that appraiser would be paid by Sunroad not the city? Doesn’t Rosati going to Sunroad and the city attorney’s office not following through exceed your standards for “appearance of potential for conflict of interest” set elsewhere? Sometimes it isn’t all about Cory Briggs, the story is about how the city (or at least the city attorney) deals with developers.
Now that this 2013 Sunroad matter has resurfaced as part of an iNewsource exposé on Briggs maybe we can get a few facts straight.
The 2013 City Council action granting Sunroad a waiver of State and local building setback requirements and absorbing that building requirement in the form of a permanent “no build” easement on adjacent City property was an illegal gift of public funds because no attempt was made by the City to determine the value of that easement, nor was Sunroad asked to pay anything for it. With a zero setback Sunroad was able to build many more living units on its lot and was thereby enriched at the expense of the City.
Mayor Filner correctly vetoed that illegal City Council action.
He was then deliberately misinformed by the City Attorney as to the law on this matter. The City Attorney falsely advised the Mayor that it would be illegal for the City to accept a direct payment for this easement. According to the City Attorney it had to be a quid pro quo “contribution” by Sunroad to some other “cause” of the Mayor’s choosing.
The City Attorney then invited Cory Briggs to sue the Mayor and the City on this matter.
It was a deliberate attempt by the City Attorney and others to trick Mayor Filner into doing something illegal. Filner discovered the truth in time to decline a $100,000 Sunroad donation. This iNewsource story fails to mention that Filner never accepted the proposed $100,000 donation to his so-called “pet projects.”
The fact is that Sunroad paid nothing to the City for that valuable easement therefore it was a gift of public funds. This illegal action was deftly steered through City Council by Sunroad’s Tom Story using Councilmember Lori Zapf as a willing tool. It can only be reversed by City Council action. Any related agreement between Sunroad and Briggs is irrelevant.
For the record I can confirm that Briggs personally told me in 2013 that Jan Goldsmith invited him to sue the City on this matter and I can also confirm for the record that Filner personally told me, shortly after these events took place in 2013, that he had been falsely advised by the City Attorney to do exactly the opposite to what the law required regarding how Sunroad should have paid for this easement. These are the facts.
Pat Flanney: inews doesn’t care about the bribes and conflicts in the city attorney’s office nor in the former mayor’s office because nobody is paying them to care. I took a break from this website for a few weeks because this BS got so boring now I return and it’s the same crap. I give up. Go to courthouse area bar downtown and ask about this Briggs crap and even the people who don’t like the guy think that this is a bought and paid for media hit. And now they cry “Freedom of the Press” because someone shined the light on them and exposed their own “smoke” (maybe fire?) but freedom of the press is not freedom from ethics and freedom from consequences of using public money from SDSU to go after a private citizen that the hotel owners, city attorney, and the convention center mafia hate. Look at the list of donors to inewsource – people are talking now and these jerks will get what is coming to them.
Theresa: can you give us a link to something that shows Andrea Contreras as DCA in a Sunroad case? In other words how did you learn this?
Brad: did you know that Andrea Contreras was the DCA on a Sunroad case before Theresa pointed it out here?
Mr. Flannery: Thank you very much for this. Sadly, as I have watched this story unfold I have perceived a journalistic single-mindedness that avoids the embarrassing possibility that others may be far more deserving of scrutiny.
And thank YOU Mr. Brewster. Like you I am concerned that the public be told the full story of what happened in 2013.
It seems that a relatively minor Sunroad/City land-use issue was leveraged into a much bigger agenda by those who wanted to get rid of Mayor Filner for political reasons. Filner is not an attorney and as the City’s Mayor at the time was obliged to rely on the legal advice of the person elected to advice him on ALL administrative legal matters, the City Attorney. It appears that this particular City Attorney gave his client, Mayor Filner, a false steer on this particular Sunroad land-use administrative issue.
These sordid 2013 events need to be fully investigated as a matter of ongoing public concern. Who is really running our City? What happened in 2013 has far wider implications for the public good than Mr. Briggs receiving a questionable $135,000 from Sunroad to go away.
Where does this so-called settlement now leave the City on “gift of public funds” questions? How did Mr. Briggs happen to get involved in such a relatively minor land use issue in the first instance? What part did the City Attorney play in setting up the conditions that precipitated this law suit?
Many, many questions. Let’s hope these two experienced investigative journalists are up to the task. I believe they are. We probably need to just give them time. We should help them where we can. If not, the shadowy events of 2013 will darken this city’s reputation for decades to come.
Thanks, Pat, for providing this additional information. Dorian Hargrove’s new piece in the Reader http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2015/apr/23/ticker-city-attorney-goldsmith-briggs-cacciatore/ makes a bit more sense in light of what you wrote of mis-information / mis-direction by the City Attorney toward Mayor Filner. My (cynical) friend who works in those circles says that Hargrove is often (but not always) way off the mark. What you posted lends some support to what’s in his article.
If Cacciatore really only worked / billed 91.75 hours for Helix (on city stuff or overall?) for <$8K, that's billing ~$85/hr, more appropriate for a GIS coordinator than a subject matter expert. And owning/operating a coffee shop as she is reported to be doing now isn't such a step down from working that few hours. [OK, that's still close to double what I make as a PhD scientist for the feds even counting benefits, but the going rate for contract principle scientists (who would both know what the weaknesses in a report were and be in the position to sandbag a report) on permitting or compliance projects is a whole lot higher.]
If Hargove's facts (not his quotes from Briggs) are correct and came from a couple of simple public records requests, I'm interested in Brad Racino & iNewsource explaining why he didn't uncover those facts somewhere along the way of researching & publishing 20 or so articles on Briggs. If they're not correct, I'm interested in who fed them to Hargrove, or pointed him in the direction of that specific public records request.
Then again, with the different parties involved in TMD willing to go to the mat, I'm not confident that truth will have anything to do with the outcome of everything over the next year or two. I sure wish I had KPBS, iNewsource, the Reader, SDFP, and other outlets actually practicing unbiased journalism and exposing what is really going on (I gave up on the UT long ago). Thanks to the handful of folks who post information that the news outlets (with shield law protection) don't.