Supreme Court of California

Court of Appeals' reversal of a trial court's denial of plaintiffs' mandamus petition seeking to prevent the closure of a private airport, holding that defendant-county's action amounted to a project requiring environmental review under CEQA, is reversed as: 1) declining to renew the conditional use permit was not a public project under CEQA because the county did not directly undertake to close the airport, but simply decided not to reauthorize a private activity that required a permit; and 2) as the airport operation was the project in question, projects rejected by a public agency are specifically exempted from CEQA requirements.

Appellate Information

• Decided 12/28/2009
• Published 12/28/2009

Judges

• CORRIGAN, J.

Court

• Supreme Court of California

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• Law Office of Lanny T. Winberry and Lanny T. Winberry, Sacramento, for Plaintiffs and Appellants.


• For Appellees:
  
• Robert A. Ryan, County Counsel, and Krista C. Whitman, Deputy County Counsel, for Defendants and Respondents., Edmund G. Brown, Jr., Attorney General, Gordon Burns, Deputy State Solicitor General, J. Matthew Rodgiquez, Chief Assistant Attorney General, Mary E. Hackenbracht, Assistant Attorney General, Denise Ferkich Hoffman and Bruce Reeves, Deputy Attorneys General, for State Water Resources Control Board, Natural Resources Agency, California Environmental Protection Agency, California Integrated Waste Management Board, Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy and Department of Parks and Recreation as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents., Jennifer B. Henning for California State Association of Counties and League of California Cities as Amici Curiae on behalf of Defendants and Respondents., Taylor & Wiley, John M. Taylor, Kate Leary Wheatley, Sacramento, and Matthew S. Keasling, for Real Parties in Interest and Respondents.