A court of appeal has upheld Monterey County’s approvals for a desalination plant, rejecting challengers’ claims that uncertainty regarding the availability of source water for the plant necessitated additional CEQA review. Marina Coast Water District v. County of Monterey, 96 Cal.App.5th 46 (2023).

In 2018, the California Public Utilities Commission, acting as the CEQA

The Third District Court of Appeal has held that Sacramento County’s environmental impact report for a master planned community complied with CEQA’s requirements for analysis of greenhouse gas emissions. Tsakopoulos Investments, LLC v. County of Sacramento, 95 Cal.App.5th 280 (2023). Describing in detail the County’s analysis, the court held that substantial evidence –

Property owners who acted illegally by blocking parking on a public street fronting their houses were not entitled to use the County’s alleged noncompliance with CEQA as a defense to actions enforcing encroachment laws.  Anderson v. County of Santa Barbara, 94 Cal.App.5th 554 (2023).

Property owners in the Montecito area of Santa Barbara County

The Court of Appeal upheld the City’s determination that compensatory mitigation for the loss of a historic building in the form of funding of other historic preservation was not feasible because there were no other buildings in the downtown areas with the same architectural style, period of significance, and purpose. Preservation Action Council of San

The appellate court invalidated the City’s reliance on CEQA’s Class 32 in-fill exemption to approve construction of a hotel because the project included demolition of affordable housing and thereby conflicted with General Plan policies favoring preservation of such housing. United Neighborhoods for Los Angeles v. City of Los Angeles, 93 Cal.App.5th 1074 (2023).

A