Only two jurisdictions are considering implementing the law so far -- the City of San Diego and Humboldt County. But others may have to use SB 10 in order to implement their housing elements >> read more
In a new case from Humboldt County, the First District Court of Appeals has ruled that Caltrans must see the trees as well as the forest -- at least in the environmental impact report for a controversial road widening.
In a decision bolstering farmland preservation, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled that Humboldt County can enforce updated land use regulations against a landowner whose original Williamson Act contract predates the regulations.
A proposed subdivision that undergoes environmental review and receives approval does not become a new project for California Environmental Quality Act purposes merely because the local government's approval expires and a new subdivision map is submitted, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.
A logging plan and endangered species permit that were part of the Headwaters Forest deal approved by the state in 1999 have been invalidated by the state Supreme Court. The court set important precedents by rejecting both a "sustained yield plan" and an "incidental take" permit held by Pacific Lumber Company.
The Humboldt County district attorney cannot sue Pacific Lumber Company for allegedly submitting false information during the state's processing of an environmental impact report and sustainable logging plan, the First District Court of Appeal has ruled.
The court ruled that the district attorney's lawsuit was blocked by a section of the state Civil Code and by the Noerr-Pennington doctrine, which protects lobbying and petitioning activities. The court did not rule on the legitimacy of Pacific Lumber's allegedly fraudulent statements.
Spurred by a land use plan intended to remove Pacific Lumber Company from bankruptcy, the Humboldt County Board of Supervisors is moving toward adopting policies that would limit residential development on land zoned for timber production.
A lawsuit contending that a Eureka Redevelopment Agency deal for a waterfront development violated conflict of interest laws has been thrown out. The First District Court of Appeal upheld a trial court judge, who ruled the lawsuit was filed after the statute of limitations had expired.
Nearly seven years ago, state Sen. Byron Sher wrote what turned out to be a prophetic commentary for the San Francisco Examiner about the pending resolution of one of the most bitter, drawn-out and violent disputes over forest management in California history. "Look beyond the hype over the deal to save the Headwaters Forest," he wrote in June 1998, "and you'll see that taxpayers may not be getting their money's worth."