In Bianchi v. City of San Diego (1989) 214 Cal. App. 3d 563, the Court concluded the issues litigated in the prior WCAB proceeding were not identical to the issues litigated in the Board hearing. (Id. at pp. 567-569.) Because two of the three elements of collateral estoppel were not shown, we concluded the trial court erred by collaterally estopping the Board from making a finding contrary to a finding in the prior WCAB proceeding and ordering the Board to grant the employee's application for industrial disability retirement benefits. (Id. at pp. 565, 572.) In Bianchi v. City of San Diego, supra, 214 Cal. App. 3d 563, the Court concluded the Board was not in privity with City and therefore the Board was not collaterally estopped from making a finding contrary to a finding in a prior Workers' Compensation Appeals Board (WCAB) proceeding to which City was a party. ( Id. at pp. 569-572.) The Court stated that "the Retirement Board here is not in privity with the City. The retirement system is established as an independent entity; all funds for the system are required to be segregated from city funds, placed in a separate trust fund under the exclusive control of the Retirement Board, and may only be used for retirement system purposes. . . . The board has the sole authority to determine the rights to benefits from the system, and to control the administration and investments for the fund." The Court also stated that "while the City's economic interests may have been represented at the WCAB Workers' Compensation Appeals Board hearing, the economic interests of the retirement system participants were not represented; hence the parties to the WCAB were not identical to or in privity with the parties to the Retirement Board hearings." (Id. at p. 572.)