Christian Group Files Suit Against S.D. Over Restrictions in Prop. A

A subsidiary of Campus Crusade for Christ filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the City of San Diego seeking to stop the enforcement of Proposition A because the slow-growth initiative strips the organization of its prior approval for a Christian university and industrial park in the northern reaches of San Diego.

Attorneys for University Development Inc.--a for-profit development arm of Campus Crusade--contend that the city’s interpretation of Proposition A “constitutes an unreasonable and unlawful discrimination” against the development because the project, known as La Jolla Valley, was the only one singled out by the initiative to be stripped of council approval.

The lawsuit asks for the courts to stop the city from using Proposition A against La Jolla Valley, or for $70 million in damages. That is how much the lawsuit claims Campus Crusade will lose in property value because of the initiative’s effect on its 5,100-acre holding in the city’s “urban reserve”--about 52,000 acres primarily in San Diego’s northern reaches that have been declared theoretically off-limits to development until 1995.

University Development attorney James Milch declined to comment on the lawsuit, except to say that it was filed shortly before the statute of limitations permitting a legal challenge was to run out.

Assistant City Atty. Curtis M. Fitzpatrick said the legal action was not a surprise, and several council members have said that they expected a lawsuit over the initiative.

Over the vehement protests of environmentalists and other slow-growth advocates, the San Diego City Council narrowly approved the La Jolla Valley project on Sept. 11, 1984. Campus Crusade convinced council members to let them immediately begin building a 1,000-acre Christian university and a 500- to 750-acre industrial park, while the council deferred construction of homes on the remaining 3,350 acres until 1995.

That decision inspired Proposition A, and environmentalists secured voter approval of the slow-growth measure in November. During the campaign, developers, led by Campus Crusade, spent $600,000 to defeat it. Wresting power away from the council over developments in the urban reserve, the measure calls for a citywide general vote on any development proposed for the area after Aug. 1, 1984.

Because La Jolla Valley was approved by the council a month after that date, the initiative reversed the approval. Council members reinforced this interpretation when they officially adopted the initiative as city policy in December.

In the lawsuit, Campus Crusade attorneys argue that Proposition A should not be applied retroactively. Requiring special elections for developments in the urban reserve, they allege, “is unconstitutional and void in that it has no reasonable relation to the public health, safety, moral or general welfare.”

By adopting Proposition A and applying it to La Jolla Valley, council members “have acted in such a fashion as to diminish and/or destroy the value of plaintiff’s property for the use of the construction of a University and Industrial Park,” the lawsuit states.

The suit says the La Jolla Valley land was worth $130 million after the council’s approval. But Proposition A has deflated that by $70 million, an amount the Campus Crusade subsidiary wants to reclaim in damages, plus 10% interest, if it is not allowed to proceed with the project.

“This is just a matter that has come up in the last 24, 48 hours and basically the law firm is handling that,” said Tracy Johnson, administrative assistant in Campus Crusade’s office of communication.