Articles

Subscribe to Articles via RSS

By William W. Abbott

When it comes to administrative appeals of land use decisions, state law largely delegates to cities and counties the choice of being flexible or rigid on administrative appeals (e.g. tentative subdivision map approvals, conditional use permits, CEQA documents). Most cities and counties opt for a de novo review by the appellate body. This means that the appellate body effectively starts over on the decision, and it is empowered to make any decision it deems to be appropriate under the circumstances. As illustrated by the recent decision of Citizens for Open Government v. City of Lodi (Browman Development Co., real party in interest) 2006 Cal. App. LEXIS 1764, de novo review may permit a project opponent to challenge in court the adequacy of the CEQA document, even though the appeal to the city council was on non-CEQA grounds.
Continue Reading Local Administrative Rules Leave Door Open for CEQA Challenge

By Rob Hofmann

Cultural artifacts and Native American remains receive different levels of protection under state and federal law. This article discusses the different laws and recent changes brought about by the passage of AB 2641.
Continue Reading Effective January 1, 2007, the California Legislature expands landowners’ obligation to repatriate Native American remains and associated cultural artifacts

Abbott & Kindermann’s Annual Land Use, Real Estate, and Environmental Law Update

Abbott & Kindermann, LLP again presents their annual program for clients and colleagues interested in current land use, environmental, and real estate issues affecting commercial and residential development, real estate acquisition, easements, leasing and property acquisition, vineyard and winery development, and mining. Water quality and wetlands issues will also be covered. The focus will be on recent developments in case law, statutes and administrative regulations, and how these changes impact your daily business practices. Handouts will be available and there will be ample opportunity for questions.

Date: Thursday, January 18, 2007
Registration: 8:30 a.m. – 9:00 a.m. with continental breakfast
Program: 9:00 a.m. – 12:00 noon
Location: Sacramento Radisson
500 Leisure Lane
Sacramento, CA 95815

There is no charge for this program and MCLE credit is available. An RSVP will be required as space is limited. To reserve your space now, call (916) 456-9595 and ask for Michelle.
Continue Reading Save the Date!

By Janell M. Bogue

In a victory for the Regional Water Quality Control Boards and State Water Resources Control Board, the Second Appellate District revised its opinion in County of Los Angeles v. California State Water Resources Board (2006) 2006 Cal.App.LEXIS 1744 on November 6, 2006. Though several parties submitted petitions for rehearing, the court modified its previous October 5, 2006 opinion on its own and denied all the rehearing petitions.
Continue Reading Second Appellate District Modifies Opinion Regarding CEQA Analysis for NPDES Permits

Diane Kindermann Henderson, with Diane Moore of Moore Biological Consultants, will be teaching a class entitled “Clean Water Act Section 404: Nationwide and Other Specialized Permits” for the North State Building Industry Association.

Topics covered will include specialized permits required under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act, the current Nationwide Permit Program, and other general permits and letters of permission. Attendees will also learn strategies for dealing with regulatory agencies in seeking permits.
Continue Reading Diane Kindermann Henderson to Teach Class on Clean Water Act Section 404

By Janell M. Bogue

Recently, the Second Appellate District issued an opinion which may change how the nine Regional Water Quality Control Boards (“Boards” or “Regional Boards”) issue National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permits and comply with California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The case is County of Los Angeles v. California State Water Resources Control Board (2006) 143 Cal.App.4th 985.
Continue Reading Second Appellate District Holds that NPDES Permits are Subject to Focused CEQA Review

By William W. Abbott
As noted in our recent article “The Importance of the Mundane: CEQA’s Small Details are Important as Well”, the Sixth Appellate District discussed how the lead agency thoroughly documented the genealogy of a later EIR from a series of prior CEQA documents. In Save our Neighborhood v. Lishman (2006) 140 Cal.App.4th 1288, the Third Appellate District recently made a similar observation when evaluating a legal challenge to an addendum which followed an earlier EIR. The court held that is important at the outset for the environmental document preparer to declare and document the pedigree relationship from earlier CEQA documents.
Continue Reading Pedigrees Are Not Just For Dogs: CEQA Documents Deserve Them As Well

By Cori Badgley

The Endangered Species Act (“ESA”) is a complex web of provisions that are not always easily interpreted. A recent case decided by the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals, Center for Biological Diversity v. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (2006) 450 F.3d 930, illustrates the intricacies of the ESA and provides a warning to all those wishing to claim violations of its provisions – do your homework.
Continue Reading Recent Case Illustrates Great Deference Given to Fish and Wildlife Service’s Interpretation of Endangered Species Act