S1: Well , welcome in San Diego. It's Jade Hindman on today's show , the latest reporting on a slew of lawsuit San Diego has filed against residents and businesses impacted by those devastating floods of 2024. This is KPBS Midday Edition. Connecting our communities through conversation. Nearly two years after floods devastated San Diego neighborhoods in January of 2024 , the legal fallout continues between the city and residents. While the city faces over 50 lawsuits , they've now filed more than 20 cross complaints against businesses and local residents. Joining me live with the latest is Mara Fox. Her latest article in the San Diego Union-Tribune lays out all the details. And she's a reporter with that that paper. So Mara , welcome to Midday Edition. Thanks.
S2: Thanks for having me. Hey. So glad to have you here.
S1: So bring me up to speed with the 50 something lawsuits now filed against the city.
S3: So there has been 53 lawsuits filed against the city by over 1500 people , which is a lot. Um , and they're alleging that the city failed to maintain its stormwater system , its storm channels. And that failure led to the catastrophic flooding that we saw last January when so many homes were were destroyed and people were displaced. Um , I should note this isn't the first time the city actually is being sued for for something like this. Back in 2018 2019 , a group of residents in southeastern San Diego sued the city for something rather similar of failure to maintain the the storm channels after some catastrophic flooding , maybe less catastrophic than than what we experienced last year , but still the damage to their homes. Um , and and in that case , the city and the residents settled for around $200,000 , which is not a lot of money. Yeah. Um , but. But I think it's important to note that this is not the first time the city is. Yeah. Is is is kind of under fire for this. Yeah.
S2: Yeah.
S1: Well , your recent reporting looks at the city's cross complaints against more than a dozen parties , including at least two flood victims. Um , what is a cross complaint , exactly ? And what is the city arguing here ? Yeah.
S3: Yeah. So. Right. The city by later. Um , by. Yeah. By late August , the city had filed more than 20 cross complaints against more than more than a dozen parties. Um , which at this point they may have filed more. I haven't fully checked on that as of a few weeks later. Here. Um , but basically , this is a way for the city to initiate a claim against these parties that it sees as partly liable for , for the damages and that it sees as that should bear that financial responsibility. So they're saying that that these parties either owned , maintained , controlled property , that there was a storm channel on , that they should have been the one to , to to take care of these storm channels. Or they're also saying that they did something to divert the water so that it wouldn't flow properly. So there's kind of a mix of the city saying you either didn't do enough or you did something that , um , that , that caused damage. Um , so the city kind of uses this term , it's like preserving its right to contribution , which is a little bit of a fancy legal term. That doesn't mean a lot to to just people like you and me on the , on the day to day. Okay.
S2: Okay.
S3: All right. Um , but but basically they're just saying that if we , they're saying the city is saying it's not liable for this , but if they're found liable that it will be because of the failures of these , these other parties that they , you know , they they , they bear some of that responsibility and should be paying for it.
S1: So then would they be seeking damages from people or would it be kind of more like a let's call it even. Yeah.
S3: Yeah. They're wanting their they're not seeking damages from these parties , but they're , it's more so that like if flood victims are suing anyone , if you're suing the city , well you should also be getting money from , from these other parties because they also were were were wrong and and not maintaining these channels.
S1: So that's what they're alleging.
S3: Um , and maybe depending on where you stand on this case , that is how you see it. But I wanted to know if this was a was a common practice , from what I'm understanding , it is. I spoke with a law professor and a former defense attorney , Bill Sloman , when he works at Thomas Jefferson School of Law. Um , and especially because he is a former defense attorney. He was saying that this is pretty common practice. This is when he was practicing. It's something that , you know , he would have kind of followed a similar , similar approach , especially I think if you look at where the city has , um , how they've kind of handled this from over the last year. So back in March , they filed what's called the demurrer. And it was basically they were trying to reduce the legal claims against it. So they've already tried to kind of push back against what they're being sued for. Sure. There are six legal claims filed against it. They tried to knock out three , um , that they didn't really get far with that. Only one was knocked out. So basically , this is all just the city's effort to , you know , they're not commenting on their legal strategy. But as we're seeing it play out , um , this is their effort to kind of , you know , either reduce the claims against it or reduce its financial , um , liability , which , you know , the , the , the law professor I spoke with , he was kind of like their sort of like paper working each other to death. Like this element of of , um , of the the legal process.
S4: Oh , what a headache. Well , you spoke to the lawyer.
S1: Representing two.
S4: Of the flood.
S1: Victims included in this cross complaint situation. What did he tell you ? Yeah.
S3: So that's Evan Walker , and he is ? Yeah. He's one of the lawyers for representing many of these. Of these victims. Um , and , you know , when I spoke with him back in June , when , um , when we'd first reported that these , uh , these cross complaints were filed , he really saw it as , like , kind of a slap in the face to these , to these people , like , you know , they're the flood victims are suing the city , and the city is kind of defiantly saying , like , if you sue us , like if you come after us , we're gonna we're not going to take it lying down is basically what he said. Um , and , and so he kind of reiterated that recently when I spoke with him in , in August and , and really just said , even if these , you know , because he's representing two of these two of these parties , these two flood victims , um , and he's like , even if the city , you know , even if they had some liability for this , why is the city suing them ? He's wondering , you know , offer them less money in a settlement , but to sue them , he finds to be , like , a pretty inappropriate to step in this. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. Callous , as you said. Well , the city is also suing Home Depot and another business in South Crest. Why is that ? Yeah.
S3: So there. There's Home Depot. There's a homeowners association. There's even a construction company that the city contracted with to to work on the Clay Avenue mini Park in Logan Heights. So there's kind of a range here , but. But what you'll notice when you look at these properties and their addresses is they're all pretty centralized. And what this comes down to is like the location of , of these properties. Um , and so many of them are in , uh , in South Crest , just north of the South Crest Recreation Center. A few others are north in Mountain View , and they're really , like along this , um , where the water would , would run , um , through it , through the storm channel. So it's really like location dependent. Um , the Home Depot just happens to be like , on that , right ? In that zone. And the city is saying , hey , Home Depot , you had a you had a responsibility to maintain this and you didn't. Allegedly. Huh.
S1: Huh. Well , there's a thousand unidentified defendants in the city's cross complaints. Can we expect to get the full list at any point ? No.
S3: So the city told us in in August when we were reporting this story that they they will be back in July , but they don't expect to to identify all 1000. They have named four of them of these unidentified people. But the 1000 is is kind of a , uh , a it's a lot. And I guess I'd hate to say no. The city could certainly find and identify a thousand additional parties that it finds liable , but , um , that is that would be a very extensive list.
S1: Yeah , I'd say so.
S3: This is pretty standard. They have periodic check ins with the judge just to kind of get an update on where things stand. Um , and so that's tomorrow. And then Evan Walker told me that they're looking at a trial date to start date of next summer. So summer 2026 , that's if they don't go to a settlement. So , you know , anything could happen. But that's kind of the the timeline they're they're operating on. So it feels like it's taking a long time. But at the same time like this is in the the legal world. This , you know , might be pretty standard.
S1: Well , I mean , there are still are there are still people , you know , without a home. Mhm.
S3: Mhm. Yeah. There are. Um , yeah. I've been speaking over the months to , to people periodically of just the , you know where they're at with their uh they're rebuilding. There's , you know , one person , you know , so many people are back in their homes certainly. But um , but some folks are still working on those final , um , those final developments. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. Well , you spoke with Martha Navarro. Excuse me ? She's a Beta Street resident who's suing the city , but. But she's not been named in as a cross defendant.
S3: So she's not being sued by the city , which , yeah , like you mentioned , is important to note , but , um. But. Yeah. Martha and her family. She's. She and her husband have two young boys , and their their home on B2 Street is their , their , their first time homeowners. And they moved in just right before the flooding. And they moved in back in December or late last year. So. So they're back home. They've they've their house looks great. I visited it , um , earlier this year , but they spent 20 to $25,000 on , um , last year and this year as well. You know , just trying to , um , to to , you know , buy appliances like clothing for their kids , furniture , like they lost everything these families , like , just lost everything. Um , and so , so they , you know , they're hoping that this , that , you know , they can reach an outcome in this lawsuit soon so that they can hopefully get some , some kind of financial compensation. Um , but it's interesting , when I spoke with her recently , she was saying , like , they might end up using that , that money that they potentially will get from from the lawsuit to put on a down payment for a new house in another neighborhood. So like they've just moved to this house like they it's the exciting. It's their first home. But the risk of there being another flood is , is really , really top of mind for them. Yeah.
S1: Yeah. Everyone's really left to way some life decisions there. I've been speaking with Mara Fox. She's community community's reporter for the San Diego Union Tribune. Mara , thank you so much for joining us.
S3: Yeah , thanks. It's been great.
S1: That's our show for today. I'm your host , Jade Hindman. Thanks for tuning.
S5: In to Midday Edition. Be sure to have a great day on purpose , everyone.
