CP&DR

San Mateo County Authority Over SFO Runway Expansion Made Clear

Mar 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 03 Mar 2002

San Mateo County must approve plans for expansion of San Francisco International Airport before the project is considered by a state panel that decides on development along San Francisco Bay, according to a state Attorney General's opinion.

Court Rules Chula Vista Agency Can Take Non-Blighted Property

Mar 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 03 Mar 2002

A Superior Court ruling that blocked the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency from condemning a 3.2-acre parcel has been overturned by the Fourth District Court of Appeal. The appellate panel rejected all arguments from the landowner and ruled that the city's eminent domain lawsuit was an appropriate action that served the public use. In 1974, Chula Vista adopted the Bayfront Redevelopment Project for territory west of Interstate 5. In 1998, the redevelopment agency amended the project area to include land

County Can Require Indemnity Agreement From Permit Applicant

Mar 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 03 Mar 2002

A county can require an applicant for a development permit to indemnify the county in any attempt brought by a third party to void the permit, according to an opinion from the Attorney General's office.

District Trumps City For Providing Wastewater Service, Panel Rules

Mar 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 03 Mar 2002

A sanitation district has exclusive jurisdiction to provide sewer service to an area annexed by Corona, and the city cannot interfere with that right, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. The lawsuit was forced by the Riverside County Local Agency Formation Commission's decision 16 years ago not to decide who would provide sewer service to the area.

Irrelevant Ballot Arguments OK, But False or Misleading Ones Are Not

Feb 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 02 Feb 2002

Although they cannot be false and misleading, ballot arguments need not be relevant, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled. The panel issued its opinion in a lawsuit challenging the title of, and ballot arguments for, a City of Huntington Beach measure on the March ballot that would impose a tax on a power plant.

Measure to Block El Toro Airport Overturned on Multiple Grounds

Feb 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 02 Feb 2002

An Orange County ballot initiative that sought to block the development of a civilian airport at the closed El Toro Marine Corps Air Station has been thrown out by a state appellate court. The court ruled that Measure F from March 2000 interfered with essential governmental functions, crossed the line into administrative activities, and was vague.

State Supreme Court Will Rule Validity of Antiquated Subdivision

Feb 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 02 Feb 2002

The state Supreme Court will review an appellate court ruling that subdivision maps recorded prior to the first version of the Subdivision Map Act in 1893 do not create legal parcels. In January, all seven of the state's high court justices voted to review the decision in Gardner v. County of Sonoma (see CP&DR Legal Digest, November).

Court Rules Not Every Party in a Contract Is ‘Necessary' For a Lawsuit

Feb 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 02 Feb 2002

The Third District Court of Appeal has allowed a California Environmental Quality Act suit to proceed even though the plaintiffs did not name every entity involved in the proposed project.

Supreme Court Hears Arguements in Tahoe Takings Case

Feb 1, 2002

Kenneth Jost, Lake Tahoe, Legal Digest, Tahoe Regional Planning Agency, Vol. 17 No. 02 Feb 2002

WASHINGTON _ Lake Tahoe area property owners seeking compensation for a moratorium on development first enacted two decades ago received a mixed reaction on January 7 from the two Supreme Court justices who hold the critical votes for their claims.

Northern California Builders' Attack of Endangered Species Act Fails

Feb 1, 2002

Legal Digest, other, Vol. 17 No. 02 Feb 2002

The U.S. Supreme Court has declined to review an endangered species decision in a California case handled by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court's decision, issued in mid-January, means that the appellate court opinion upholding the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Services listing of four species of fairy shrimp that live in California as either endangered or threatened will stand.

Articles