On December 5, 2022, the real party in interest (Arakelian Enterprises, Inc. dba Athens Services) and respondent City of Thousand Oaks both filed petitions for review in the California Supreme Court in G.I. Industries v. City of Thousand Oaks (2022) ___ Cal.App.5th ___. (My recent post on the Second District Court of Appeal’s modified opinion order, which contains a link to my original post on the case, can be found here.)
The real party’s petition forcefully (and, to me, persuasively) argues that the Second District’s G.I. Industries opinion significantly expands and conflicts with the reasoning of San Joaquin Raptor Rescue Center v. County of Merced (2013) 216 Cal.App.4th 1167, inappropriately expands the Brown Act to arguably any agency finding, imposes new obligations not found in the Brown Act, and “imposes a completely new public comment requirement on CEQA exemptions that directly conflicts with CEQA and decades of CEQA jurisprudence.” The petition further argues the opinion constitutes poor public policy and imposes onerous new obligations on public agencies that will invite delay-producing gamesmanship by opponents of their actions. A copy of the petition, drafted by Manatt attorney Benjamin G. Shatz, can be found here.
The Supreme Court now has 60 days, or until February 3, 2023, to decide whether to grant or to deny the petitions for review, or to deny review and depublish the opinion. We’ll continue to follow this important case with interest.
