![\"San](\"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/us\/wp-content\/uploads\/2026\/02\/SUT-L-trash-vote01.jpg\")
San Diego City Council President Joe LaCava speaks during a council meeting in June. (Hayne Palmour IV)<\/p>\n
In June, the city filed a lawsuit<\/a> calling on the Local Agency Formation Commission \u2014 which provides guidance to communities seeking to become cities \u2014 to rescind a ruling allowing La Jolla\u2019s cityhood effort to move forward. On April 29, LAFCO had issued a \u201ccertificate of sufficiency\u201d<\/a> indicating ACLJ had gathered the required number of petition signatures to keep the movement alive.\u00a0<\/p>\n The lawsuit sought to stop LAFCO and its executive officer, Keene Simonds, from proceeding with the cityhood process, which includes launching an administrative review of the application filed<\/a> by ACLJ in January 2025.<\/p>\n The dispute centers on LAFCO\u2019s actions during the process of verifying the petition signatures, which ultimately reversed the San Diego County registrar of voters office\u2019s initial determination that ACLJ\u2019s petition drive had failed to gather enough valid signatures.\u00a0<\/p>\n The city also contended the La Jolla cityhood review process would impose \u201csubstantial irreparable harm\u201d on San Diego due to the costs associated with staff time required for the next steps and that dedicating staff members\u2019 time to that process would take away from \u201cperforming their core functions.\u201d<\/p>\n ACLJ responded with a court motion arguing that the city\u2019s case was a strategic lawsuit against public participation, or SLAPP, calling it a \u201cmeritless attempt to obstruct democratic participation and silence a public interest effort through costly litigation.\u201d\u00a0<\/p>\n In October, Superior Court Judge Judy Bae granted ACLJ\u2019s motion<\/a>, dismissing the city\u2019s lawsuit and allowing LAFCO to move to the next steps in the process.\u00a0<\/p>\n The city had the option to appeal Bae\u2019s ruling but decided not to<\/a>. As a result, the city must pay ACLJ\u2019s legal fees.\u00a0<\/p>\n