The forests of the Sierra Nevada have long been a landscape of controversy, a battleground for conflict over logging, wildlife protection, water diversion, and the accelerating encroachment of vacation homes and subdivisions into flammable scenery.
WASHINGTON _ The Supreme Court has spared municipalities from the threat of paying attorneys fees awards for improperly blocking construction of cellphone towers.
When the City of Lake Forest added the power of eminent domain to a 14-year-old redevelopment plan, the city should have made new blight findings, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.
In a March referendum election, El Dorado County voters upheld a revised county general plan and rejected a growth-control measure that would have tied growth to Highway 50 improvements. The election was another step toward a new general plan, as the county has been without a legal general plan for six years.
State prison officials are moving forward with plans to build a new death row at San Quentin, but elected officials and business interests in Marin County are urging the state to reconsider.
This month's selection of In Brief includes: Los Angeles County Supervisors approve revised Santa Clarita Valley EIR; agreement reached on environmental dispute at Northstar Ski Resort; San Joaquin County lobbyist is convicted on 17 counts over involvement with Stockton power plant proposal; Yolo County sues the City of Woodland over retail power center and auto mall; and more.
The City of Los Angeles's general plan framework has survived a second lawsuit filed by neighborhood activists, who won an earlier round against the city.
The Third District Court of Appeal has published its decision in a case involving the environmental impact report for the 6,000-acre Sunrise Douglas community plan in the City of Rancho Cordova.
In a rather harsh opinion, the Third District ruled against the Environmental Council of Sacramento and Vineyard Area Citizens for Responsible Growth. The court found that the project opponents failed to state the facts fairly and did not address the evidence in the record (see CP&DR Legal Digest, March 2005).
The City of Escondido erred when it approved a lower-than-requested mobile home rent increase, but the city's action did not constitute a taking of private property, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.
