Facts

California High-Speed Rail Authority (CHSRA) submitted a supplemental return on a previously-issued writ of mandate, asserting that it had satisfied the writ's requirement and the writ should be discharged. The writ required CHSRA to revise its Environmental Impact Report for the Bay Area to Central Valley High-Speed Train Project to comply with a prior judgment against CHSRA before reconsidering a project approval.

PETITIONERS' CONTENTIONS:
Petitioners contended that the EIR was still defective for multiple reasons, and therefore the certification of the EIR was adequate and the re-approval of the project was invalid.

RESPONDENT'S CONTENTIONS:
CHSRA contended that the EIR was adequate and fully complied with the court's prior judgment and writ, and therefore the supplemental return should be accepted and the writ discharged.

Settlement Discussions

The CEQA mandatory settlement meeting resulted in no settlement.

Result

The court rejected CHSRA's found that the EIR was still inadequate on multiple grounds, rejected respondent's supplemental return on the writ, and issued a supplemental writ of mandate ordering CHSRA to rescind its recertification of the EIR and re-approval of the project. Petitioners' objections to respondent's return on writ of mandate granted in part and denied in part. Respondent's request to discharge the writ denied. Supplemental writ of mandate ordered issued.

Other Information

This case was coordinated with another case, Atherton II, Case Number 34-2010-80000679. Both cases were briefed and heard in tandem and parallel decisions issued in both cases. Plaintiffs in Atherton II were: City of Palo Alto, Community Coalition on High-Speed Rail, Mid-Peninsula Residents for Civic Sanity, and Patricia Louise Hogan-Giorni. In that case, on the same grounds, the court granted judgment for petitioners and ordered issuance of a writ of mandate. FILING DATE: Aug. 8, 2008.