In a high-profile CEQA case involving renovation of the State Capitol grounds, the Third District Court
Athletic Field Lighting Project Not Categorically Exempt from CEQA
The First District Court of Appeal overturned the City of San Francisco’s decision that Saint Ignatius High School’s project to install four permanent 90-foot-tall athletic field lights was exempt from CEQA. Saint Ignatius Neighborhood Association v. City and County of San Francisco, 85 Cal.App 5th (2022).
The City approved the lighting project without environmental review
Meritless CEQA Suit Warranted Malicious Prosecution Claim Against Attorney
The court of appeal held that an attorney’s actions in filing and prosecuting a meritless challenge to construction of a single-family home supported a claim for malicious prosecution. Jenkins v. Brandt-Hawley, No A162852 (1st Dist., Dec 28, 2022).
The underlying lawsuit challenged permits issued by the Town of San Anselmo allowing the Jenkins family to
CEQA Categorical Exemption Must Be Agendized under Brown Act
On February 15, 2023, the California Supreme Court issued an order depublishing this decision. While still binding on the parties to the case, the decision can no longer be cited or relied on as authority.
The City of Thousand Oaks violated the Ralph M. Brown Act by adopting a CEQA exemption without having listed the
CEQA Review Not Required for Water Allocations That Were Part of Earlier Project
A CEQA challenge to water allocations by the City of Los Angeles and its Department of Water and Power was barred by the statute of limitations because the allocations were under leases approved years earlier. County of Mono v. City of Los Angeles, 81 Cal.App.5th 657 (2022).
In 2010, the City approved a set
Responsible Agency Under CEQA Must Make Express Findings as to Each Potentially Significant Impact Identified in Lead Agency’s EIR
The Court of Appeal held that the City of Mount Shasta, acting as a responsible agency, violated CEQA by approving a wastewater permit for a water bottling plant without making specific findings as to each potentially significant impact of its permit identified in the lead agency’s EIR. The City’s determination that there were “no unmitigated
Court Upholds EIR for Kern River Diversion and Storage Project
A California Court of Appeal held that the EIR for a public water authority’s river diversion and water storage project adequately described the unadjudicated waters to be diverted and adequately analyzed impacts to water rights and groundwater supply. Buena Vista Water Storage District v. Kern Water Bank Authority 76 Cal. App. 5th 576 (2022).
Until
EIR Recirculation Not Required Although Final Version of Approved Project Was Not Specifically Evaluated in EIR
The Second District Court of Appeal held that: (1) despite revisions to a mixed-use development project, the project description in the EIR was “accurate, stable, and finite;” (2) an opportunity for public comment on the finally approved project was not required under CEQA; and (3) because the revised project was not significantly different from alternatives
County Did Not Violate Its Duties Under CEQA By Approving a Project at the Density Agreed to in a Stipulated Judgment
The court held that the County of Marin did not abdicate its duties under CEQA when it approved a specific project pursuant to a stipulated judgment. Tiburon Open Space Committee v. County of Marin, 78 Cal. App. 5th 700 (2022).
The dispute in this case surrounded the potential development of a 110-acre parcel on an
EIR’s Statement of Project Objectives Was Unduly Narrow
The EIR for a bottling plant in Siskiyou County withstood challenges to the project description and impacts analysis, but the EIR’s stated project objectives were unreasonably narrow and the County should have recirculated the EIR in light of significant new information about project emissions. We Advocate Through Environmental Review v. County of Siskiyou, 78 Cal.App.