Search results

Order by most recent / most popular / relevance

Results: 1-10 of 52

Second District rejects CEQA challenge to EIR for riverbed sand and gravel mining project, upholds Santa Barbara County’s discretion to formulate project-specific threshold of significance, and finds EIR’s erroneous “not significant” conclusion nonprejudi

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
March 11 2013

The Second District Court of Appeal upheld the County of Santa Barbara's Final Revised Environmental Impact Report for a 30-year conditional use

Governor signs AB 900 to speed CEQA litigation challenging massive “green” projects

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
September 27 2011

What originated as legislation to expedite anticipated CEQA challenges to the proposed Farmers Field football stadium project in Los Angeles (SB 292) transformed under Senator Darrell Steinberg’s political leadership into more ambitious legislation (SB 900) that will expedite CEQA litigation over “green” mega-development projects certified by Governor Brown as “Environmental Leadership Development Projects”

CEQA sanctions statute: effective deterrent to abuse?

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
September 21 2011

Everyone seems to talk about abuses of the CEQA process and meaningful CEQA reform, but nothing ever seems to get done, much to the chagrin of developers who find themselves the target of CEQA litigation

New law requires CEQA lead agencies to identify real parties in notices

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
October 11 2011

As I pointed out on September 13, 2011 (“Ten CEQA Litigation Mistakes To Avoid”), a CEQA plaintiff must not forget to name all real parties in interest since a failure to name indispensible parties under Code of Civil Procedure 389 will result in dismissal

CEQA mitigation on conservation easement lands: how a plea to legislators killed a threat to farmers’ property rights (for now)

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
October 7 2011

Shortly before the close of the last legislative session, I found myself writing a strongly-worded letter (on behalf of myself and interested clients of Miller Starr Regalia) to Governor Brown, the authors of proposed SB 436 (Kehoe) and AB 484 (Alejo) and certain Senate and Assembly Committee Chairs to urge an amendment of or alternatively a “no” vote on or veto of those bills

“Deferral” under CEQA: it’s complicated!

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
November 15 2011

CEQA calls for environmental review of discretionary projects at the earliest meaningful stage, to serve its purposes of public participation and informed decision-making

Governor’s veto said CEQA is enough, no need for law requiring “economic impact report” for superstores

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
November 23 2011

Like the Sherlock Holmes story featuring the “dog that didn’t bark,” sometimes proposed legislation that doesn’t pass can nonetheless provide fundamental insights

Supreme Court reaffirms corporate CEQA standing

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
October 17 2011

Can a corporation challenge a business competitor’s or other entity’s project under CEQA when its real interests are commercial rather than environmental?

CEQA doesn’t require the killing of mice with missiles: non-prejudicial notice errors do not require project set-aside

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
October 25 2011

CEQA’s information disclosure provisions are so integral to its statutory scheme that conventional harmless error analysis does not apply

Successful CEQA petitioners may recover attorneys’ fees for administrative proceedings and are not disqualified by non-pecuniary stake

Miller Starr Regalia
-
USA
-
November 8 2011

Potential recovery or payment of plaintiffs’ attorneys fees is always a factor to be considered in prosecuting and defending CEQA suits

next >