Section 21000 - Legislative findings and declaration as to quality of environment

8 Analyses of this statute by attorneys

  1. Crude-By-Rail Update: Siting a Crude Oil Transloading Terminal in California? Developers Should Seek Old Industrial Sites and Proactively Embrace the Environmental Impact Review Process

    Baker & Hostetler LLPGabriel CollinsNovember 20, 2015

    com/article/2014/09/06/california-oil-lawsuit-idUSL1N0R62SH20140906 (discussing the dismissal of a lawsuit against a CBR transloading facility that alleged noncompliance with CEQA on timeliness grounds). [1] See Cal. Public Resources Code §§ 21000 et seq. (containing CEQA); Verified Petition for Writ of Mandate, No. S1500CV284013 (Cal. Sup. Ct., Kern Cnty. Jan. 28, 2015), available at http://earthjustice.org/sites/default/files/files/BCT%20Petition%20-%20Final%20with%20Exhibits.pdf [2] See 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq; See Cal. Public Resources Code §§ 21000, 21001 [3] Id. at § 21080(a).

  2. California Courts Close Loopholes in Definition of “Project” Under CEQA

    BuchalterBarbara LichmanAugust 29, 2019

    During the week of August 19, 2019, both the Appellate and Supreme Courts of California issued decisive opinions clarifying the parameters of agency action subject to environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act, Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000, et seq., (“CEQA”). The courts were responding to repeated efforts by public entities to circumvent their CEQA obligations by redefining the actions that constitute a “project” subject to analysis under CEQA.

  3. Town vs. Gown - How Land Use and Environmental Laws Mediate Disputes Between Universities, Colleges and Communities

    Best Best & Krieger LLPJennifer LynchSeptember 30, 2017

    However, when local agencies use the tools at their disposal to anticipate, control far, and address potential tensions—ideally before they come to a head—everyone wins. 1 Cal. Public Resources Code, § 21000 et seq. 2 Cal.

  4. Calif. High Court: U.S. Rail Law Doesn't Categorically Pre-empt CEQA on Public Entity Projects - Decision Sets Up Showdown with Federal Government That May Require Resolution by U.S. Supreme Court

    Holland & Knight, LLPElizabeth LakeAugust 9, 2017

    The decision may also set up a showdown before the U.S. Supreme Court about whether federal law trumps California's environmental statutes. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Cal. Pub. Res. Code §21000 et seq., imposes significant procedural and substantive requirements on private and public projects throughout the state. However, even a state law as broad as CEQA is limited by federal law.

  5. California WaterFix: A Snapshot of the SWRCB Water Rights Change Hearings

    Downey Brand LLPAustin ChoJuly 1, 2017

    [lxii] Ruling on Evidentiary Objections to Admission of Testimony and Exhibits into Evidence, Establishment of Deadline for Rebuttal Testimony and Exhibits, and Notice of Rebuttal Hearing Dates, February 21, 2017, Attachment A.[lxiii] Department of Water Resources and U.S. Bureau of Reclamation, Bay Delta Conservation Plan/California WaterFix Final EIR/EIS, 2016, available at http://baydeltaconservationplan.com/FinalEIREIS.aspx.[lxiv] See LAND letter to Hearing Officers re: New Information Pertaining to CWF Hearing Process in BDCP/CWF Final Environmental Impact Report/Statement , Feb. 16, 2017, available at http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/waterrights/water_issues/programs/bay_delta/california_waterfix/docs/petitions/2017feb/20170216_land_ltr.pdf.[lxv] See Ruling on Evidentiary Objections to Admission of Testimony and Exhibits into Evidence, Establishment of Deadline for Rebuttal Testimony and Exhibits, and Notice of Rebuttal Hearing Dates, February 21, 2017, p. 2.[lxvi] Cal. Pub. Resources Code, §§21000 et seq.[lxvii] 42 U.S.C. §§ 4321 et seq.[lxviii]See, e.g., Department of Water Resources, Exhibit DWR-57, Testimony of John Bednarski, May 31, 2016, p. 16.[lxix]See Cal.

  6. New Regulations Could Expand CEQA Review of Impacts to Common Birds - California Department of Fish & Wildlife Proposes Draft Nesting Birds and Birds of Prey Regulations

    Holland & Knight, LLPDaniel GolubAugust 24, 2015

    5 (“Section 3503.5”).4 Cal. Public Resources Code §21000 et seq.5 80 Fed. Reg. 30032 (May 26, 2015).6 14 Cal.

  7. The Federal Surface Transportation Board Finds California Environmental Quality Act Preempted as Applied to High-Speed Rail Projects

    Buchalter NemerBarbara LichmanJanuary 2, 2015

    In a surprising decision, Surface Transportation Board Decision, Docket No. FD35861, December 12, 2014 (“Docket”), the Federal Surface Transportation Board (“Board”) ruled that the application of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000, et seq., to the 114 mile high-speed passenger rail line between Fresno and Bakersfield, California is preempted in its entirety by federal law. The Board’s decision is not only surprising in the context of prevailing legal authority, but also potentially important in the context of other modes of transportation.

  8. Bay Area Air District’s Significance Thresholds Reinstated: No CEQA Review for CEQA Review Thresholds

    Pillsbury Winthrop Shaw Pittman LLPAugust 16, 2013

    Successful implementation may prove more difficult with the SCS and BAAQMD's CEQA guidelines working at cross-purposes. Cal. Pub. Res. Code § 21000, et seq. Cal.