On Sept. 11, the California Supreme Court refused to hear the college's petition of its earlier decision that granted the city the right to determine whether or not a stadium could be built on the campus. The court's decision brings an end to a legal resolution to the issue, leaving the stakeholders to the task of finding resolution among themselves.

"The Supreme Court has denied the position, so this issue can go no further," said James Eller, the lawyer representing West Valley College. "This is the end of all legal proceedings."

The decision is a relief for the city. "I believe this was the right decision when it comes to protecting the neighbors," said Mayor Nick Streit.

It also appears to be a relief for the district, with new West Valley Chancellor Stan Arterberry desiring to "move past the litigation and do more collaborate ventures that promote education," he said.

Tensions originated in 1967 when the planning commission allowed the college to be built, with one condition—stated in a conditional use permit—that no stadium ever be built.

The college reapplied to build a stadium in 1977 and was again denied by the planning commission. Conflict and confusion ensued over the decision, culminating in a 1996 action by the West Valley Board of Trustees. It voted to exempt the college from city zoning laws, basing the action on a state government code that allows state-funded schools to exempt themselves from city zoning ordinances by a two-thirds vote of their boards.

In response to the West Valley decision, the city filed a lawsuit against the district in March 1996.

A Santa Clara County Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the college in October 2000, citing agreement with West Valley that the conditional use permit was not as legally binding as a signed contract, which the two entities didn't have.

The city responded in December with a petition to appeal the superior court decision. The appeal went to the Sixth Appellate District Court in May 2002, where the original decision was overturned in favor of the city.

This seemed to be the end of the debate, with both city and district officials exhausted after decades of legal bickering.

However, West Valley had one final recourse, which it took in July, filing a petition of the ruling with the California Supreme Court. The court last week declined to hear the petition, bringing the legal wrangling to an end.

Reconciliation between the city and the college remains on the horizon, however. Streit and Arterberry both appear to be ready to settle this issue while looking forward to a positive future of communication. They are setting their hopes on an already-established community task force.

The task force, a nine-person collective including three representatives each from the city, the college and the adjacent neighborhood, was created to spark discussion among all involved parties. Arterberry, one of the college representatives, said the group's goal is to have a resolution by the end of the year.

"I foresee us working together as neighbors and doing this instead of litigation against one another," he said. "We need to get beyond the decision and resolve the issue in a way that is in the interest of the citizens, the city and the district, allowing us to finally get back to the business of education."

Streit agreed. "I am strongly in favor of continuing the task force to work out a compromise," he said. "The decision has taken the issue away from the lawyers and put it back into the hands of the neighbors that live next to the college, the city and West Valley College. Now we can sit down all as neighbors and come to a solution."