Description: Challenge to regional transportation plan on grounds that it failed to address climate change.
-
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 11/16/2017 Opinion Download Opinion issued on remand from California Supreme Court. California Court of Appeal Said 2011 EIR for San Diego Transportation Plan Did Not Adequately Address Mitigation of Greenhouse Gas Impacts. The California Court of Appeal ruled that substantial evidence did not support the determination of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) that an environmental impact report (EIR) prepared for a regional long-term transportation plan in 2011 adequately addressed mitigation for the plan’s impacts on greenhouse gas emissions. The Court of Appeal issued this decision on remand from the California Supreme Court, which in July 2017 upheld SANDAG’s approach to disclosures of the plan’s greenhouse gas emissions and potential inconsistency with statewide emissions reduction goals. As a threshold matter on remand, the Court of Appeal rejected SANDAG’s argument that the challenges to the 2011 transportation plan and its EIR were moot because SANDAG had subsequently adopted versions of the transportation plan and EIR that superseded the versions under review. On the merits of the appeal, the court considered whether the 2011 EIR had adequately addressed mitigation of the significant greenhouse gas emissions impacts it disclosed and concluded that it had not. The Court of Appeal stated: “Missing from the EIR is what [the California Environmental Quality Act] requires: a discussion of mitigation alternatives that could both substantially lessen the transportation plan’s significant greenhouse gas emissions impacts and feasibly be implemented.” Instead, the EIR had “considered and deemed feasible three measures requiring little to no effort to implement and assuring little to no concrete steps toward emissions reduction” and had “considered and deemed infeasible three particularly onerous measures” that “would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce and [that required] implementation resources not readily available.” 12/16/2014 Opinion Download Modified version of opinion issued. 11/24/2014 Opinion Download Opinion issued. The California Court of Appeal agreed with the trial court that the approval of the regional transportation plan violated CEQA. The appellate court rejected the contention of the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) that CEQA did not require it to analyze the transportation plan’s consistency with greenhouse gas emissions reduction targets through 2050 that were set forth in Executive Order S-3-05, which was signed by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger in 2005 and which the appellate court said “underpins all of the state’s current efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” The court said the decision not to conduct such an analysis “did not reflect a reasonable, good faith effort at full disclosure and is not supported by substantial evidence because [it] ignored the Executive Order’s role in shaping state climate policy.” The court said that omission of the analysis gave the false impression that the regional transportation plan furthered climate policy goals when “the trajectory of the transportation plan’s post-2020 emissions directly contravenes it.” The appellate court also said that because the environmental impact report (EIR) had not considered feasible mitigation alternatives that would substantially lessen the plan’s greenhouse gas emissions, substantial evidence did not support SANDAG’s determination that it had adequately considered mitigation for greenhouse gas impacts. In addition, the court found the EIR’s assessment of alternatives, air quality impacts, and agricultural impacts to be insufficient. One justice issued a dissenting opinion in which she said the majority’s opinion elevated the Executive Order to a “threshold of significance” and in doing so stepped overstepped the court’s authority. SANDAG filed a petition for review in the California Supreme Court on January 29, 2015. -
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 07/13/2017 Opinion Download Opinion issued upholding agency's review. California Supreme Court Upheld San Diego Review of Long-Term Greenhouse Gas Impacts Associated with Regional Development Plan. The California Supreme Court ruled that the San Diego Association of Governments’ (SANDAG’s) review of greenhouse gas emissions associated with a regional development plan adequately disclosed information about the plan’s greenhouse gas emissions and the plan’s potential inconsistency with statewide goals for reductions in such emissions. The court therefore reversed lower courts’ rulings that SANDAG’s California Environmental Quality Act Review (CEQA) should have evaluated the significance of impacts against the 2005 executive order issued by Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger that set a goal of reducing emissions 80% below 1990 levels by 2050. The Supreme Court found that SANDAG’s environmental impact report (EIR) “[did] not obscure the existence or contextual significance of” the executive order’s target and “[made] clear that the 2050 target is part of the regulatory setting in which the Plan will operate.” The court said SANDAG’s overall approach to evaluating greenhouse gas impacts was reasonable and adequately informed EIR readers. The Supreme Court stated, however, that “we do not hold that the analysis of greenhouse gas impacts employed by SANDAG in this case will necessarily be sufficient going forward. CEQA requires public agencies like SANDAG to ensure that such analysis stay in step with evolving scientific knowledge and state regulatory schemes.” One justice filed a dissenting opinion, writing that the EIR managed “to occlude the elephant in the room—that the plan was associated with a major projected increase in greenhouse gas emissions, diverging sharply from emission reduction targets reflecting scientific consensus.” 03/11/2015 Order Order issued. The California Supreme Court granted SANDAG’s petition for review. The Supreme Court granted review only on the issue of whether compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act required an analysis of the regional transportation plan’s consistency with the 2005 executive order’s goals. -
Cleveland National Forest Foundation v. San Diego Association of Governments
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 12/03/2012 Decision Download Ruling issued on petitions for writ of mandate. Several environmental groups filed a lawsuit challenging a regional transportation plan developed by the San Diego Association of Governments on the grounds that it failed to address, among other things, GHG emissions and climate change impacts. The trial court agreed, holding that the EIR did not sufficiently analyze the GHG impacts of the plan through 2050. 11/28/2011 Petition for Writ of Mandate Several environmental groups filed a lawsuit challenging a regional transportation plan developed by the San Diego Association of Governments on the grounds that it failed to address, among other things, greenhouse gas emissions and climate change impacts. Specifically, the lawsuit alleged that the defendant violated the California Environmental Quality Act by failing to address these issues in its draft environmental impact report.