Articles

Subscribe to Articles via RSS

By Cori Badgley

In Guggenheim v. City of Goleta (2009) 2009 U.S. App. LEXIS 21313, the court made two important rulings: a challenge to an ordinance on its face, instead of as applied to plaintiffs, could be brought as a regulatory taking claim and a mobile home park rent control ordinance constituted a regulatory taking under Penn Central. Courts have rarely upheld regulatory takings claims, and for a rent control ordinance to be found a taking would appear to greatly expand the possible situations in which a regulatory taking has occurred.
Continue Reading Take This! Wealth-Transfer under Rent Control Ordinance Constitutes a Regulatory Taking

By Katherine Hart

Senate Bill 448 sponsored by Fran Pavley was signed into law by Governor Schwarzenegger on October 11, 2009. The bill establishes the California State Safe Harbor Agreement Program Act (the “Act”) and adds provisions to the California Fish and Game Code. It will become effective on January 1, 2010.
Continue Reading Conservation Pays: New Statutory Protection for Landowners to “Take” Protected Species

By Glen Hansen

The ongoing mortgage crisis in California’s residential real estate market reinforces the current importance of California’s Home Equity Sales Contract Act law (“HESCA”), which is codified in Civil Code section 1695 et seq. Several cases in 2009 applying HESCA demonstrate how courts will enforce the strict requirements of that statute.
Continue Reading Case Law in 2009 Underscores the Strict Requirements of California’s Home Equity Sales Contract Act

By Cori Badgley

In San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District v. San Bernardino Local Agency Formation Commission (2009) 173 Cal.App.4th 190, the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District addressed the statutory interpretation of the Cortese-Knox-Hertzberg Local Government Reorganization Act of 2000 (Gov. Code, §§ 56000 et seq., 57000 et seq.) (“CKH Act”) as it relates to water districts. Specifically, San Bernardino Valley Water Conservation District (“SBVWCD”) argued that the repeal of certain sections in the Water Code relating to consolidation meant that LAFCo had no authority over the consolidation of water districts. The appellate court disagreed.
Continue Reading Are Small, Special Purpose Districts an Endangered Species?

By Katherine Hart

On August 27, 2009, the Court of Appeal, Third Appellate District in California issued the first ever CEQA decision on what an energy conservation impacts analysis can entail. In Tracy First v. City of Tracy, et al., the City of Tracy (“City”) prepared and certified an EIR and approved a project which included 1) a specific plan amendment to change the designation of property from industrial to commercial, and 2) a conditional use permit (“CUP”) to build a 95,900 square foot WinCo Foods store. Petitioner Tracy First sued to challenge the certification of the EIR and the approval of the project on the grounds the City failed to look at issues of energy conservation, alternatives, and extraterritorial traffic impacts…
Continue Reading A CEQA Issue of First Impression: Energy Conservation Impacts Analysis in EIRs

Diane Kindermann Henderson is a partner of Abbott & Kindermann, LLP and will be speaking at the California Construction & Industrial Materials Association Conference. She will be speaking about 2009 Land Use and Environmental Law Update: Cases, Codes, and Regulations. For more details, including RSVP information visit http://www.calcima.org/html/what_s_new.html.
Continue Reading Diane Kindermann Henderson to Speak at CalCIMA 2009 Annual Education Conference October 14, 2009

By Cori Badgley

The Compassionate Use Act (Health and Safety Code § 11362.5) and the Medical Marijuana Program (Health and Safety Code § 11362.5) legalized the use and distribution of medical marijuana subject to specific restrictions outlined in the statutes. Many cities, such as the City of Claremont, do not have areas zoned to permit medical marijuana dispensaries. In City of Claremont v. Kruse (2009) (Case No. B210084), the Court of Appeal, Second Appellate District addressed whether the state statutes preempted the City from refusing to permit a medical marijuana dispensary and declaring it a nuisance. The court held that the City’s actions were not preempted and that the defendants continued operation of the medical marijuana dispensary constituted a nuisance.
Continue Reading City Not Required to Zone for Medical Marijuana

By William W. Abbott

California’s historic settlement patterns are far more diverse then what would first appear to be the case. In addition to the religious (San Bernardino, Compton, Whittier ), the ethnic (Solvang, Ft. Ross) and the timber company towns (Samoa, Westwood, McCloud), there are numerous spiritual, philosophical, labor and socialist undertakings in this state’s history. This article is an overview of the labor/socialist origins of the Kaweah Colony, located in eastern Tulare County.
Continue Reading The Kaweah Colony: A Socialist Settlement in the 1880’s

By Cori Badgley

In CEQA cases, the courts evaluate whether the agency proceeded in the manner required by law and whether substantial evidence supports the agencies decision. In other words, did the agency act reasonably in its analysis. This is the crux of City of Long Beach v. Los Angeles Unified School District (2009) 176 Cal.App.4th 889, in which the City of Long Beach (“City”) challenged the adequacy of an EIR for the construction of a high school in the City. Finding that the school district acted reasonably in its analysis of all the issues challenged by the City, the court upheld certification of the EIR.
Continue Reading Appellate Court Emphasizes CEQA’s Focus on Reasonableness

By Leslie Z. Walker

According to Las Lomas Land Co., LLC v. City of Los Angeles (Sept. 17, 2009, B213637) ___ Cal.App.4th ___, the long standing rule that CEQA does not apply to projects rejected or disapproved by a public agency, allows a public agency to reject a project before completing or considering the EIR. In Las Lomas, the Court of Appeals for the Second Appellate District made clear that a city may stop environmental review mid-stream and reject a project without awaiting the completion of a final EIR. While this holding may avoid wasting time and money on an EIR for a dead-on-arrival project, it will also make it harder for projects to stay in play until the entire environmental document is complete.
Continue Reading CEQA Does Not Apply to Project Disapproval, Even if the EIR is Underway