Tag: CEQA history

Court of Appeal Views Appellants’ Failure to Present and Discredit Evidence favorable to the Agency as a Concession that Substantial Evidence Does In Fact Support Agency

In an unpublished decision, El Pueblo Para El Aire Y Agua Limpio v. Kings County Board of Supervisors, 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. LEXIS 4984, Greenaction for Health and Environmental Justice and El Pueblo Para El Aire y Agua Limpio (collectively appellants) sued the Kings County Board of Supervisors (County) alleging that the County’s approval of … Continue Reading

Court Denies Attorney’s Fees Where Successful Petitioner Does Not Confer a Significant Benefit to Public and Discharges Writ of Mandate After Compliance

In an unpublished opinion, California Oak Foundation v. County of Tehama (2012) 2012 Cal. App. Unpub. Lexis 3970, the California Third District Court of Appeal affirmed a decision denying petitioner’s request for attorney’s fees on the basis that their successful challenge to a golf course community project, which Tehama County approved in 2006, did not … Continue Reading

California’s Highest Court Grants Review of Berkeley Hillside Preservation Decision

On May 23, 2012, the California Supreme Court unanimously agreed to grant review of Berkeley Hillside Preservation v. City of Berkeley (2012) 203 Cal.App.4th 656. The issue before the court will be whether the City of Berkeley must prepare an environmental impact report (EIR) before approving the construction of a 10,000-square-foot single-family home. The trial … Continue Reading

Contents of an Administrative Record: Who is in “Control”?

Preparation of the administrative record for CEQA litigation is governed by Public Resources Code section 21167.6, subdivision (e).  In Consolidated Irrigation District v. The Superior Court of Fresno County, (2012) ___ Cal.App.4th_____, the court provided important guidance regarding the proper contents of the record and sets some limitations on an agency’s responsibility to respond to … Continue Reading

Substantial Evidence Test Applies to Subsequent Environmental Review After a Negative Declaration Has Been Adopted for a Project

In Abatti v. Imperial Irrigation District (2012) 2012 Cal.App. LEXIS 496, the court considered whether the substantial evidence, rather than the “fair argument,” test applies to determine whether further environmental review is warranted for a subsequent approval where the agency has initially adopted a negative declaration for the project. In 2006, the irrigation district adopted … Continue Reading

Court Defers to Local Agency Characterization of Lot Line Adjustments as Ministerial Actions Not Subject to CEQA

In Sierra Club v. Napa County Board of Supervisors (2012) 2012 Cal.App. LEXIS 454, the Sierra Club challenged a lot line adjustment ordinance adopted by Napa County, which allowed lot line adjustments under the Subdivision Map Act on parcels that had previously been adjusted, as long as the prior lot line adjustment has been completed … Continue Reading

Where a Local Government Does Not Endorse Amendments to its Certified Local Coastal Program, the Coastal Commission’s Authority to Adopt such Amendments is Very Narrow

In City of Malibu v. California Coastal Commission (2012) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, the California Court of Appeal, Second District, considered whether California Public Resources Code section 30515, known as the override provision of the Coastal Act, allows a public works agency to apply to the Coastal Commission to override policies and standards in a locality’s … Continue Reading

Tolling Agreements to Extend CEQA’s Statute of Limitations during Settlement Discussions are Valid

In Salmon Protection and Watershed Network v. County of Marin (2102) 2012 Cal.App. LEXIS 458, the court considered whether a public agency and a party disputing the adequacy of an EIR could enter into an agreement to toll the statute of limitations setting the time period for filing a CEQA lawsuit to challenge the EIR. … Continue Reading

Third Appellate District Grants Partial Publication of CEQA Decision Relating to Agricultural Mitigation, Urban Decay, Res Judicata, and the Deliberative Process Privilege

In Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (2012) ___ Cal.App.4th ___ (Opinion), the Court rejected Citizens for Open Government’s and Lodi First’s (Petitioners) challenges to the reapproval by defendant City of Lodi (City) of a conditional use permit for a proposed shopping center to be anchored by a Wal-Mart Supercenter (Project) after the … Continue Reading

Thomas Law Group Research Supports Conclusions in San Francisco Chronicle Highlighting the Need for CEQA Reform

On March 6, 2012, the San Francisco Chronicle published an article entitled “Costly, lengthy appeals part of S.F.’s culture.” (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/06/MNB21N1TA9.DTL.)  The article highlights how San Francisco’s environmental appeal process and environmental litigation are often used to stall and kill projects within San Francisco.  The article noted that in 2011, eleven CEQA lawsuits were filed challenging … Continue Reading

Court Awards Agency’s Costs of Preparing Administrative Record Despite Petitioner Electing to Prepare the Record

In an unpublished decision, Landwatch San Luis Obispo v. Cambria Community Serv. Dist., 2d Civil No. B229545 (2012), the Court upheld a trial court’s cost award of $14,615.41 to the Cambria Community Service District for time spent preparing the administrative record.  The District initially sought almost $24,000.  In reaching the amount awarded, the trial court … Continue Reading
LexBlog