County officials are questioning the state's housing allocation process, which often requires counties to plan for thousands of housing units even as they are also planning to protect agricultural land and open space.
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.
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.
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).
Despite a recession, $12 billion state budget deficit and already large debt obligations, numerous bond proposals will appear on the state ballot this year.
City leaders in Azusa believe they have their community on a more prosperous track after years of political fighting and questionable land use decisions. Downtown redevelopment is finally taking hold, builders are constructing upscale houses, and an exhaustive planning process for a prized 400-acre parcel appears to be settling old disputes.
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.
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.
Early this spring, University of California, Santa Cruz, officials intend to release a draft plan for new facilities that will greatly expand the school's marine biology research capabilities.
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.
