Laserfiche WebLink
<br />10A <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />SUPREME COURT RULING COULD DERAIL RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT <br />Environmental Review of Water Supply Criticized <br /> <br />In a case involving a long-range proposal to public is assured those environmental conse- <br />develop 6,000 acres in Rancho Cordova for quences have been taken into account. <br />18,000 homes, the California Supreme Court <br />made a ruling that has the potential to disrupt the <br />project indefinitely. <br /> <br />In its 6-1 ruling, the Supreme Court deter- <br />mined that Sacramento County's environmental <br />impact report (EIR) on the Sunrise Douglas <br />development project was inadequate, as it failed to <br />identify long-term water sources for homes and <br />did not sufficiently assess the project's potential <br />effects on the Cosumnes River. <br /> <br />The city and the Vineyard Area Citizens for <br />Responsible Growth disagreed on the impact the <br />Supreme Court's decision will ultimately have on <br />construction activities. In the meantime, work <br />continues on the project, as it will likely be several <br />months before the case is sent back to the lower <br />courts for a decision on that issue. <br /> <br />In addition, the Supreme Court held that if a <br />long-term water supply for the development could <br />not be secured, a mitigation measure that with- <br />holds project entitlements (building permits, etc.) <br />may not substitute for an adequate environmental <br />analysis. <br /> <br />The Supreme Court also discussed that even <br />without a showing that water from an identified <br />source is likely to be sufficient, the California <br />Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) courd have <br />been satisfied by fully disclosing the uncertainty, <br />the other possible outcomes, their environmental <br />impacts, and any appropriate mitigation mea- <br />sures. <br /> <br />In its conclusion, the Supreme Court cau- <br />tioned that CEQA is more than a set of technical <br />hurdles for agencies and developers to overcome. <br />Rather, CEQA, and in particular, an EIR, is in- <br />tended to ensure that the officials have a full <br />understanding of a project's environmental conse- <br />quences in the decision making process, and the <br /> <br />The case is Vineyard Area Citizens for Re- <br />sponsible Growth v. C;(y of Rancho Cordova, <br />2007 WL 272091. The League thanks Michael <br />Zischke, Clark Morrison, and Scott Birkey with the <br />law firm of Cox, Castle & Nicholson for drafting the <br />friend-of-the-court brief on behalf of the League. <br /> <br />. . . . . . . . & . . . . . . . . . . . . <br /> <br />PRESIDENT from page 1 <br /> <br />Those programs that were reduced or elimi- <br />nated included funding for Community Develop- <br />ment Block Grant (CDBG), transit programs, <br />Amtrak, first responders, emergency manage- <br />ment training, and the COPS program. <br /> <br />The president's proposed budget is the start- <br />ing point for a discussion about the federal <br />government's ultimate spending plan. The Na- <br />tional League of Cities (NLC) has reported that <br />after attending meetings on Capitol Hill, there was <br />much support to restore funding to some of the <br />programs slated for decreases or elimination. <br /> <br />NLC's analysis of the president's FY 2008 <br />budget proposal and a chart that highlights the <br />proposed and previous funding levels for key <br />federal programs is located at www.cacities.org/ <br />federalresources. City officials are encouraged to <br />review these documents for the proposed cuts to <br />programs of interest to cities. <br /> <br />If you have any questions, please feel free to <br />contact Genevieve Morelos at <br />gmorelos@cacities.org or (916) 658-8254. <br /> <br /> <br />PAGE 2 . PRIORITY FOCUS <br />February 9, 2007 . Issue #6 <br /> <br />Visit the League's Official Website--www.cacities.org <br />