On-Demand Webinar | Charting a Course for Offshore Wind Energy in California
[WEBINAR] Update on the California Environmental Quality Act: What’s New for 2018
In its recent decision in Hilltop Group Inc. v. County of San Diego, California’s Fourth District Court of Appeal issued a number of holdings that resulted in a strong ruling in support of streamlined environmental review for...more
In an important published opinion filed February 16, 2024, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Div. 1) held the San Diego County Board of Supervisors committed a prejudicial abuse of discretion in granting project opponents’...more
2023 served up roughly the same number of published appellate CEQA cases as 2022 with a defense win percentage of over 80 percent, which has been the case in many, if not all, of the past ten years. A prominent theme of...more
In Tsakopoulos Investments v. County of Sacramento (2023) 95 Cal. App. 5th 280, the Third District Court of Appeal (“Court”) upheld the County of Sacramento’s (“County”) certification of the Mather South Community Master Plan...more
City of Los Angeles - The Processes and Procedures Ordinance Becomes Operative January 22, 2024 - The city council adopted the Processes and Procedures Ordinance amending the Los Angeles Municipal Code (LAMC) to...more
In a partially published opinion filed September 20, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 3) affirmed the Alameda County Superior Court’s judgments denying writ petitions in three partially consolidated CEQA actions...more
A recent court decision provides guidance to lead agencies seeking to comply with CEQA requirements related to greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions. In Tsakopoulos Investments, LLC v. County of Sacramento, the Third District Court...more
In McCann v. City of San Diego (2023) 94 Cal.App.5th 284 (McCann II), the Fourth District Court of Appeal held the trial court exceeded its jurisdiction by failing to discharge a writ of mandate. The writ was issued for the...more
In a 72-page published opinion filed March 30, 2023, the First District Court of Appeal (Div. 4) affirmed in full the trial court’s judgment, which upheld the EIR for the Oakland Waterfront Ballpark District Project (project)...more
In E. Oakland Stadium Alliance v. City of Oakland (Mar. 30, 2023, No. A166221) ___Cal.App.5th___ [2023 Cal. App. LEXIS 240], the First District Court of Appeal concluded that the EIR prepared for the proposed Oakland A’s...more
In a lengthy published decision, the Court of Appeal upheld the City of Oakland’s environmental impact report (EIR) for the proposed Oakland A’s MLB stadium and mixed use project, rejecting numerous challenges and affirming...more
The City of Irvine violated CEQA by approving a development project based on an addendum to a program EIR containing insufficient information regarding the project’s greenhouse gas emissions and by relying on CEQA’s Class 32...more
In a published opinion filed February 6, 2023, the Fourth District Court of Appeal (Div. 3) affirmed a judgment setting aside an addendum to a 2010 program EIR (PEIR) and accompanying approvals for a 275,000-square foot...more
In IBC Business Owners for Sensible Development v. City of Irvine et al. (Feb. 6 2023, Case No. G060850) ___ Cal.App.5th ___, the Fourth District Court of Appeal held that the City of Irvine (“City”) violated CEQA when it...more
In an opinion on rehearing filed January 18, 2023, the Third District Court of Appeal reissued its previous published opinion in the Save Our Capitol! case (my January 2, 2023 post on which can be found here) with the...more
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...more
In a lengthy opinion tackling several of CEQA’s hot topics, a court of appeal has rejected the EIR for the Martis Valley West project, finding its Lake Tahoe water quality analysis, GHG and traffic mitigation measures, and...more
What Happened - A mammoth case out of Lake Tahoe affirms a new environmental review obligation for project proponents: Why can’t you do solar? Upending what traditionally was a relatively straightforward analysis regarding...more
In Stop Syar Expansion v. County of Napa (2021) 63 Cal.App.5th 444, the First District Court of Appeal upheld Napa County’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the expansion of Syar Industries, Inc.’s aggregate mining...more
Signed into law by California Gov. Gavin Newsom on May 20, 2021, and taking immediate effect as an "urgency statute," Senate Bill (SB) 7 revives and expands the previously enacted Environmental Leadership Development Project...more
AB 900, a law that provided for speedy resolution of California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) litigation, was allowed to “sunset” at the end of the 2020 legislative session, without an anticipated legislative extension. On...more
Welcome to CEQA News You Can Use, a quarterly production of Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP’s Natural Resources lawyers. This publication provides quick, useful bites of CEQA news, which we hope can be a resource to your...more
ACEEE highlights 10 building energy performance standards to help meet climate goals - Bullet Utility Dive – June 24 - The American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE) released a white paper this Monday...more
In an opinion filed November 26, and ordered published on December 23, 2019, the Third District Court of Appeal partially reversed a judgment rejecting a labor union’s CEQA challenges to the EIS/EIR for a geothermal power...more
An EIR that did not squarely respond to detailed comments recommending additional mitigation measures has been held not to comply with CEQA. Covington v. Greater Basin., 3d Dist. Court of Appeal Case No. C080342 (certified...more