CP&DR

Public Officials Win Attorney Fees For Suing Own Board

Jul 23, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Orange County, Parks and open space, Vol. 24 No. 09 Aug 2009 - 1

Two members of the board overseeing the Orange County Great Park who sued the public agency over access to executive recruitment information should have their attorney fees paid, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

In Brief: AG Challenges Pleasanton Growth Management

Jul 15, 2009

Alameda County, CP&DR Staff, In Brief, Vol. 24 No. 08 Jul 2009 - 2

This collection of news briefs from around the state includes Attorney General Jerry Brown's decision to join a lawsuit over Pleasanton's growth management ordinance; a court's rejection of the state's diversion of transit revenues to balance the general fund; approval of the Hollywood Park reuse plan; and the introduction of a new groundwater study and modeling tool for the Central Valley.

Government Property Acquisition Costs May Rise

Jul 13, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Eminent domain, Legal Digest, Los Angeles County, Vol. 24 No. 08 Jul 2009 - 2

A state appellate court has issued a ruling in an eminent domain case that could have expensive ramifications for government agencies. The court ruled that a business owner isn't required to have a written lease in order to seek compensation for lost goodwill resulting from a government taking of property.

Court Exempts Church From Historic Landmark Process

Jul 9, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Historic preservation, Legal Digest, San Francisco, Vol. 24 No. 08 Jul 2009 - 2

A state appellate court has blocked San Francisco from considering an historical landmark designation for a 98-year-old church building. The court ruled that, under state law, the building is exempt from local regulations to protection historic landmarks. >>read more

County Attorney Guidance Withheld From Project Opponents

Jul 1, 2009

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Tehama County, Vol. 24 No. 07 Jul 2009 - 1

Tehama County did not have to disclose publicly advice it received from an outside law firm on how to comply with the California Environmental Quality Act while dealing with a controversial development project, the Third District Court of Appeal has ruled. The unanimous three-judge panel ruled that the four documents were protected by attorney-client privilege or work product privilege, even though Tehama County shared the documents with the project's developer.

Researchers Question Value Of Enterprise Zones

Jun 26, 2009

California, CP&DR Staff, Economic development, In Brief, Vol. 24 No. 07 Jul 2009 - 1

There is no evidence that California's enterprise zone program – the state's largest economic development effort – has increased jobs in program areas, according to a Public Policy Institute of California study. "Our main finding is that, on average, enterprise zones have no effect on business creation or job growth," PPIC researchers Jed Kolko and David Neumark wrote.

Prop 218 Challenge To Pomona BID Assessments Rejected

Jun 24, 2009

CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Local government finance, Los Angeles County, Vol. 24 No. 07 Jul 2009 - 1

Property assessments levied to fund the downtown Pomona Property and Business Improvement District did not violate Proposition 218, the Second District Court of Appeal has ruled for a second time.

No EIR Needed For Warehouse Covered By Specific Plan, Court Rules

Jun 24, 2009

California Environmental Quality Act, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Riverside County, Vol. 24 No. 07 Jul 2009 - 1

Approval of an 88-acre warehouse distribution facility at March Air Reserve Base was exempt from environmental review because the project was included in a general plan and a specific plan, both of which received environmental analysis, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Lawsuit Over San Clemente Homes Reinstated

Jun 1, 2009

Coastal development, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Orange County, Vol. 24 No. 06 Jun 2009

Opponents of the proposed construction of two houses on a coastal bluff in San Clemente may pursue their lawsuit to overturn the California Coastal Commission's approval of the projects, even though the suit was filed after a statute of limitations had ostensibly expired, the Fourth District Court of Appeal has ruled.

Cabaret Loses 1st Amendment Argument Over Use Permit

May 28, 2009

Adult businesses, CP&DR Staff, Legal Digest, Los Angeles County, Vol. 24 No. 06 Jun 2009

A state appellate court has upheld the City of Los Angeles's refusal to grant a conditional use permit for the sale and on-site consumption of alcohol at an adult cabaret. The court ruled that the decision to deny the permit strictly concerned alcohol and did not prohibit the expression of protected speech.

Articles