Sierra Club v. San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission, (Califia Development Group)

ORDER
Review Granted SIERRA CLUB et al., Appellants v. SAN JOAQUIN LOCAL AGENCY FORMATION COMMISSION, Respondent CALIFIA DEVELOPMENT GROUP et al., Real Parties in Interest No. S072212 C.A. 3rd, No. C027361 California Supreme Court Filed September 23, 1998
        Appellants' petition for review GRANTED.


(Editor Note - For your convenience we reprint below the Daily Journal's Ruling Column brief which summarized the earlier decision of the lower court.)

GOVERNMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE AGENCIES

Action dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies
where plaintiffs didn't request reconsideration of agency ruling.

        The C.A. 3rd has held that where a statute provided for a rehearing before an administrative agency, they must first exhaust their administrative remedies before seeking judicial review.
        In 1996, the city of Lathrop approved a developmental proposal. Lathrop approved a plan and certified an environmental impact report. The San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) commenced proceedings to approve Lathrop's annexation of the territory that was to be developed. The Sierra Club, San Joaquin Farm Bureau Federation, Eric Parfrey and Georgianna Reichelt (petitioners) objected to the annexation proposal. In October 1996, LAFCO approved the proposal, and found overriding consideration with respect to the environmental impacts described by the Lathrop environmental impact report. The petitioners filed suit alleging LAFCO had violated various Government Code provisions governing annexations, and that there was no evidence to support the overriding of the environmental considerations. The trial court dismissed the suit on the ground the petitioners failed to exhaust the administrative remedy of a rehearing. The petitioners contended that the grounds for dismissal were no longer applicable.
        The C.A. 3rd affirmed. Alexander v. State Personnel Board held that "where a statute provides for a rehearing before an administrative agency, the remedy must be attempted or a claim of error in the administrative hearing is barred under the doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies." This finding was not in conflict with Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6, which provides that a "writ of mandate may be subject to the limitations provision, notwithstanding failure to seek reconsideration, when the statutes or regulations governing reconsideration expressly provide that failure to seek it is not a bar to judicial review." However the rule in Alexander requiring exhaustion of administrative remedies prior to filing suit is incorrect and outmoded. "It presents a fitful trap for the unwary. . . . Therefore, we recommend that the Legislature enact a statute superseding the rule in Alexander, or that the California Supreme Court grant hearing in this case and overrule Alexander.
        Sierra Club v. San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission, C.A. 3rd, No. C027361, filed June 19, 1998, by Blease, J.; Puglia, J., concurring.
        The full text of this case appears in DJ D.A.R. 6712, June 23, 1998.