San Diego Mayor Todd Gloria Monday applauded an appeals court ruling on a 2020 ballot measure to tax hotels to fund a convention center modernization among other goals, and reiterated his desire to get to work.

"By increasing the transient-occupancy-tax, a tax on hotel rooms, the city expects to generate around $82 million in fiscal year 2026. In the first 10 years, the increased tax is expected to generate around $1.04 billion in additional revenue."

Measure C was listed on city-written ballot materials sent to voters as needing two-thirds of votes to pass. It fell short of that threshold in 2020, earning 65.25% approval. The Court of Appeals ruling said that was plenty. According to the California constitution, tax hikes can be approved with a simple majority.

"This ruling is a win for San Diego -- and for the voters who overwhelmingly said yes to this back in 2020," Gloria said. "It finally allows us to move forward with long-overdue improvements to our convention center, stronger investments to reduce homelessness, and real dollars to fix our streets. This decision clears the way for progress that benefits everyone -- our workers, our businesses, and our city's future."

To fully move forward with the financing detailed in the ballot measure, it will return to the San Diego City Council (which voted 6-3 to approve the measure in 2021 despite not technically meeting the as-written ballot requirements) to "pass a clarifying ordinance to realign timelines that were delayed during the legal process," according to a statement from Gloria's office.

As a result of the ruling, the city can begin securing financing for the convention center upgrades, though due to a settlement with Fifth Avenue Landing LLC, the city cannot begin any expansion until after 2026.

When the council did elect to pass the measure, some members of the majority claimed the state constitution overruled the city-written ballot material.

"Voters should be able to rely on ballot materials," then-Council President Pro Tem Stephen Whitburn said. "But the constitutional right is more fundamental. We need to go with the state constitution and 65% of voters and say it was approved."

The three council dissenters claimed approving the ballot measure set a bad precedent and sent a disheartening message to voters who may already be distrustful of government.

"The will of the voters must be maintained," said then-Councilwoman Monica Montgomery Steppe, who argued the ballot language was clear. "This can breed more cynicism during a time when faith in the government is at an all- time low."

Councilwoman Vivian Moreno also voted no on the council's retroactive action.

"The ballot materials informed the voters that passage of Measure C required a two-thirds vote and the voters depend on that information being accurate and reliable," she said. "Taking this action today to change the criteria for passage under which Measure C was presented to the voters is not forthright and I cannot support it."

Councilmen Joe LaCava and Raul Campillo voted to pass the measure, but only to get a legal perspective on it. Similar such retroactive changes and eventual court decisions in Fresno, Oakland and San Francisco in the past year were cited by both sides.

"I can't make that declaration," LaCava, now the City Council president, said as to the legality of the council's retroactive maneuvering. "Let the courts have the final say."

Councilwoman Marni von Wilpert, an attorney, said last year's council had punted on certifying the measure's passage. She said "sufficient clarity now exists" on the issue.

(photo: ABC 10)