This is the property of the Daily Journal Corporation and fully protected by copyright. It is made available only to Daily Journal subscribers for personal or collaborative purposes and may not be distributed, reproduced, modified, stored or transferred without written permission. Please click "Reprint" to order presentation-ready copies to distribute to clients or use in commercial marketing materials or for permission to post on a website. and copyright (showing year of publication) at the bottom.

Modification: Planning and Conservation League v. Dept. of Water Resources

Lower Court

Sacramento County Superior Court

Lower Court Judge

Kevin R. Culhane

Environmental impact analysis of amendments extending existing State Water Project contracts did not violate the California Environmental Quality Act despite testimony they could be used to fund a separate project.





Court

California Courts of Appeal 3DCA

Cite as

2024 DJDAR 822

Published

Jan. 29, 2024

Filing Date

Jan. 25, 2024

Opinion Type

Modification

Disposition Type

Affirmed

Case Fully Briefed

May 31, 2023

Oral Argument

Nov. 15, 2023


PLANNING AND CONSERVATION

LEAGUE et al.,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES,

Defendant and Respondent;

THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA et al.,

Interveners and Respondents.

 

No. C096304

(Super. Ct. No. 34201980003053CUWMGD)

 

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES,

Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

CALIFORNIA WATER IMPACT NETWORK et al.,

Defendants and Appellants;

THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA et al.,

Interveners and Respondents.

 

No. C096316

(Super. Ct. No. 34201800246183CUPTGDS)

 

NORTH COAST RIVERS ALLIANCE et al.,

Plaintiffs and Appellants,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES,

Defendant and Respondent;

THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT

OF SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA et al.,

Interveners and Respondents.

 

No. C096384

(Super. Ct. No. 34201980003047CUWMGDS)

California Court of Appeal

Third Appellate District

Filed January 25, 2024

 

ORDER MODIFYING OPINION AND DENYING PETITIONS FOR REHEARING

 

NO CHANGE IN JUDGMENT

 

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Sacramento County, Kevin R. Culhane, Judge. Affirmed.

 

Law Office of Roger B. Moore and Roger B. Moore for Plaintiffs and Appellants in case No. C096304.

 

Law Office of Adam Keats and Adam Keats; John Buse; Law Office of E. Robert Wright and E. Robert Wright for Defendants and Appellants California Water Impact Network, AquAlliance, California Sportfishing Protection Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Friends of the River, and Planning and Conservation League in case No. C096316.

 

Freeman Firm and Thomas H. Keeling; Law Office of Roger B. Moore and Roger B. Moore for Defendants and Appellants County of San Joaquin, County of Contra Costa, Contra Costa County Water Agency, County of Solano, County of Yolo, County of Butte, County of Plumas, Plumas County Flood Control and Water Conservation District, and Central Delta Water Agency in case No. C096316.

 

Law Offices of Stephan C. Volker, Stephan C. Volker, Alexis E. Krieg, Stephanie L. Clarke and Jamey M.B. Volker for Plaintiffs and Appellants North Coast Rivers Alliance, Institute for Fisheries Resources, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations, San Francisco Crab Boat Owners Association, and Winnemem Wintu Tribe in case Nos. C096316 and C096384.

 

Rob Bonta, Attorney General, Robert W. Byrne, Assistant Attorney General, Eric M. Katz, Ryan R. Hoffman, L. Elizabeth Sarine, and Janelle Smith, Deputy Attorneys General, for Defendant, Plaintiff, and Respondent Department of Water Resources.

 

Marcia L. Scully, John D. Schlotterbeck, and Robert C. Horton; Best Best & Krieger, Amy E. Hoyt and Miles Krieger; Redwine and Sherrill and Steven B. Abbott; J. Carlos Orellana; Hanson Bridgett and Adam Hofmann; Meyers Nave and Gregory J. Newmark; Amelia Minaberrigarai; Nossaman and Paul S. Weiland for Interveners and Respondents.

 

THE COURT:

It is ordered that the opinion filed herein on January 5, 2024, be modified as follows:

1. On page 10, the first sentence of the last paragraph, the word "following" is changed to "by" so the sentence reads:

The department received numerous comments by the close of the review period.

2. On page 23, the last sentence on the page is deleted and the following is inserted in its place:

Alliance provides insufficient information regarding the nature of the addendum and insufficient analysis to support its argument that the addendum is a reasonably foreseeable consequence of the amendments, as required in Laurel Heights I, supra, 47 Cal.3d at page 396.

The petitions for rehearing filed on January 16, 2024, by appellants California Water Impact Network et al. and January 19, 2024, by appellants North Coast Rivers Alliance et al. are denied.

There is no change in the judgment.

 

FOR THE COURT:

MAURO, Acting P. J.

MESIWALA, J.

WISEMAN, J.*

 

* Retired Associate Justice of the Court of Appeal, Fifth Appellate District, assigned by the Chief Justice pursuant to article VI, section 6 of the California Constitution.

 

#282140

For reprint rights or to order a copy of your photo:

Email Jeremy_Ellis@dailyjournal.com for prices.
Direct dial: 213-229-5424