Preview
DANIEL C. CEDERBORG — SBN 124260
County Counsel
Kyle R. Roberson — SBN 285735
Deputy County Counsel
FRESNO COUNTY COUNSEL
2220 Tulare Street, 5th Floor
Fresno, California 93721
Telephone: (559) 600-3479 RCE VED,
Facsimile: (559) 600-3480
FRESNO. county Sb UBPRIOR OURT
wars 0,
Exempt From Filing bY-s Pursuant
Attorneys for Respondents To Government Code Section 6103
COUNTY OF FRESNO and
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FRESNO
SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF FRESNO
10
CIVIL DIVISION
11
12 SIERRA CLUB, REVIVE THE SAN Case No. 11CECG00706
JOAQUIN and LEAGUE OF WOMEN (Consolidated with Cases Nos. 11CECG00709
13 VOTERS OF FRESNO and 11CECG00726)
14 Petitioners RESPONDENT’S ALTERNATIVE
15 [PROPOSED] AMENDED WRIT OF
Vv, MANDATE
16
COUNTY OF FRESNO; FRESNO
17 COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
Judge: Honorable Kristi Culver Kapetan
18 Dept. 403
Respondents
Petition Filed March 7, 2011
19
FRIANT RANCH, L.P.
20
Real Party in Interest.
21
22
23 Final Judgment on Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Mandate in favor of Petitioners Sierra
24 Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno, and against Respondents
25 County of Fresno and Fresno County Board of Supervisors (“County”) and Real Party in Interest
26 Friant Ranch, L.P., having been entered in this proceeding ordering an amended peremptory writ
27 of mandate be issued from this court directly the County promptly set aside its approval of the
28 Friant Project, in compliance with the all legal obligations and internal procedures necessary,
1
Respondents’ Alternative [Proposed] Amend Court Case No. 11CECG00706
Writ of Mandate
in consideration of the judgment and opinion of the County of Appeal of the State of California,
Fifth Appellate District, dated November 24, 2020, as well as the judgment and opinion of the
Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fifth Appellate District dated May 27, 2014, as
modified by the opinion of Supreme Court of California dated December 24, 2018,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that promptly upon service of this writ, the County of Fresno
shall:
(1) Vacate its decision to approve the Friant Ranch project promptly and in no case later
than 90 day after service of this writ. This includes the vacating of the following approvals:
e Adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 511;
10 e Adoption of the update of the Friant Community Plan;
11 Adoption of the Friant Ranch Specific Plan;
12 Adoption of the ordinance approving Amendment to Text Application No. 363-
13 Friant Zoning Regulations, containing zoning regulations specific to Friant
14 Ranch;
15 Adoption of the ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 3751 to rezone
16 certain parcels and
17 (2) Vacate its decision to certify the completion of the final EIR promptly and in no case later
18 than 90 days after service of the writ on the County.
19 (3) Prepare a revised EIR, reticulate the revisions to the EIR, and certify the completion of the
20 revised EIR. The revised EIR, in accordance with the decision of the California Supreme Court,
21 shall provide an adequate discussion of health and safety problems that will be caused by the rise
22 in various air pollutants resulting from the project’s development, which analysis shall
23 reasonably inform the public and the decision-making body how anticipated air pollutant effects
24 will adversely affect human health or, alternatively, shall adequately explain why it is not
25 scientifically feasible at the time of drafting to provide such an analysis. In addition, the revised
26 EIR must either explain the bare conclusion that “mitigation measures will substantially reduce
27 air quality impacts related to hum activity within the entire Project area” or delete the word
28 “substantially.” The County may not approve the project before preparing a revised EIR,
2
Respondents’ Alternative [Proposed] Amend Court Case No. 11CECG00706
Writ of Mandate
circulating the revisions to the EIR, and certifying the revised EIR in accordance with this order.
This Court shall retain jurisdiction over the proceedings by way of a return to the writ of
pursuant Public Resources Code section 21168.9, subdivision (b). This Court requires the
County to file an initial return explaining the action it intends to take to satisfy the writ’s
requirements within 30 days of issuance of the writ.
BY ORDER FO THE COURT, THE PEREMPTORY WRIT SHALL BE ISSUED.
Dated: By
Honorable Kristi Culver Kapetan
10 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Respondents’ Alternative [Proposed] Amend Court Case No. 11CECG00706
Writ of Mandate
PROOF OF SERVICE
Sierra Club, et al. v. County of Fresno, et al. Fresno County Superior Court Case No. 11CECG00706
(Consolidated with Case Nos. 11CECG00709 and 11CECG00726)
I, Vincent Soliz, declare as follows:
lam a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a
party to the within action. I am employed at the Fresno County Counsel’s Office, 2220 Tulare
Street, Fifth Floor, Fresno, California, 93721.
On February 22, 2021, I served a copy of the within:
RESPONDENT’S ALTERNATIVE [PROPOSED] AMENDED WRIT OF MANDATE
on the interested parties in said action addressed as follows:
James G. Moose Douglas P. Carstens
Tiffany K. Wright Michelle N. Black
10 Laura M. Harris Chatten-Brown, Carstens & Minteer, LLP
11 Remy Moose Manley, LLP 2200 Pacific Coast Hwy, Ste.318
555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-27052
12 Sacramento, CA 95814 dpce@cbcearthlaw.com
jmoose@rmmenvirolaw.com mnb@cbcearthlaw.com
13 twright@rmmenvirolaw.com
14 lharris@rmmenvirolaw.com
15
x by transmitting via Electronic Mail the above listed document(s) to the Electronic Mail
16
address(es) set forth above on this date before 5:00 p.m. pacific daylight time.
17
I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the
18 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on February 22, 2021, at Fresno, California.
19
20
21 Vf
Vi incent Soliz
22 Litigation Paralegal
23
24
25
26
27
28
Proof of Service
Fresno Superior Court Case No. 11CECG00706
Preview
DANIEL C. CEDERBORG — SBN 124260 County Counsel Kyle R. Roberson — SBN 285735 Deputy County Counsel FRESNO COUNTY COUNSEL 2220 Tulare Street, 5th Floor Fresno, California 93721 Telephone: (559) 600-3479 RCE VED, Facsimile: (559) 600-3480 FRESNO. county Sb UBPRIOR OURT wars 0, Exempt From Filing bY-s Pursuant Attorneys for Respondents To Government Code Section 6103 COUNTY OF FRESNO and BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF FRESNO SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF FRESNO 10 CIVIL DIVISION 11 12 SIERRA CLUB, REVIVE THE SAN Case No. 11CECG00706 JOAQUIN and LEAGUE OF WOMEN (Consolidated with Cases Nos. 11CECG00709 13 VOTERS OF FRESNO and 11CECG00726) 14 Petitioners RESPONDENT’S ALTERNATIVE 15 [PROPOSED] AMENDED WRIT OF Vv, MANDATE 16 COUNTY OF FRESNO; FRESNO 17 COUNTY BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Judge: Honorable Kristi Culver Kapetan 18 Dept. 403 Respondents Petition Filed March 7, 2011 19 FRIANT RANCH, L.P. 20 Real Party in Interest. 21 22 23 Final Judgment on Petitioner’s Petition for Writ of Mandate in favor of Petitioners Sierra 24 Club, Revive the San Joaquin, and League of Women Voters of Fresno, and against Respondents 25 County of Fresno and Fresno County Board of Supervisors (“County”) and Real Party in Interest 26 Friant Ranch, L.P., having been entered in this proceeding ordering an amended peremptory writ 27 of mandate be issued from this court directly the County promptly set aside its approval of the 28 Friant Project, in compliance with the all legal obligations and internal procedures necessary, 1 Respondents’ Alternative [Proposed] Amend Court Case No. 11CECG00706 Writ of Mandate in consideration of the judgment and opinion of the County of Appeal of the State of California, Fifth Appellate District, dated November 24, 2020, as well as the judgment and opinion of the Court of Appeal of the State of California, Fifth Appellate District dated May 27, 2014, as modified by the opinion of Supreme Court of California dated December 24, 2018, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that promptly upon service of this writ, the County of Fresno shall: (1) Vacate its decision to approve the Friant Ranch project promptly and in no case later than 90 day after service of this writ. This includes the vacating of the following approvals: e Adoption of General Plan Amendment No. 511; 10 e Adoption of the update of the Friant Community Plan; 11 Adoption of the Friant Ranch Specific Plan; 12 Adoption of the ordinance approving Amendment to Text Application No. 363- 13 Friant Zoning Regulations, containing zoning regulations specific to Friant 14 Ranch; 15 Adoption of the ordinance approving Amendment Application No. 3751 to rezone 16 certain parcels and 17 (2) Vacate its decision to certify the completion of the final EIR promptly and in no case later 18 than 90 days after service of the writ on the County. 19 (3) Prepare a revised EIR, reticulate the revisions to the EIR, and certify the completion of the 20 revised EIR. The revised EIR, in accordance with the decision of the California Supreme Court, 21 shall provide an adequate discussion of health and safety problems that will be caused by the rise 22 in various air pollutants resulting from the project’s development, which analysis shall 23 reasonably inform the public and the decision-making body how anticipated air pollutant effects 24 will adversely affect human health or, alternatively, shall adequately explain why it is not 25 scientifically feasible at the time of drafting to provide such an analysis. In addition, the revised 26 EIR must either explain the bare conclusion that “mitigation measures will substantially reduce 27 air quality impacts related to hum activity within the entire Project area” or delete the word 28 “substantially.” The County may not approve the project before preparing a revised EIR, 2 Respondents’ Alternative [Proposed] Amend Court Case No. 11CECG00706 Writ of Mandate circulating the revisions to the EIR, and certifying the revised EIR in accordance with this order. This Court shall retain jurisdiction over the proceedings by way of a return to the writ of pursuant Public Resources Code section 21168.9, subdivision (b). This Court requires the County to file an initial return explaining the action it intends to take to satisfy the writ’s requirements within 30 days of issuance of the writ. BY ORDER FO THE COURT, THE PEREMPTORY WRIT SHALL BE ISSUED. Dated: By Honorable Kristi Culver Kapetan 10 JUDGE OF THE SUPERIOR COURT 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Respondents’ Alternative [Proposed] Amend Court Case No. 11CECG00706 Writ of Mandate PROOF OF SERVICE Sierra Club, et al. v. County of Fresno, et al. Fresno County Superior Court Case No. 11CECG00706 (Consolidated with Case Nos. 11CECG00709 and 11CECG00726) I, Vincent Soliz, declare as follows: lam a resident of the State of California, over the age of eighteen years, and not a party to the within action. I am employed at the Fresno County Counsel’s Office, 2220 Tulare Street, Fifth Floor, Fresno, California, 93721. On February 22, 2021, I served a copy of the within: RESPONDENT’S ALTERNATIVE [PROPOSED] AMENDED WRIT OF MANDATE on the interested parties in said action addressed as follows: James G. Moose Douglas P. Carstens Tiffany K. Wright Michelle N. Black 10 Laura M. Harris Chatten-Brown, Carstens & Minteer, LLP 11 Remy Moose Manley, LLP 2200 Pacific Coast Hwy, Ste.318 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 800 Hermosa Beach, CA 90254-27052 12 Sacramento, CA 95814 dpce@cbcearthlaw.com jmoose@rmmenvirolaw.com mnb@cbcearthlaw.com 13 twright@rmmenvirolaw.com 14 lharris@rmmenvirolaw.com 15 x by transmitting via Electronic Mail the above listed document(s) to the Electronic Mail 16 address(es) set forth above on this date before 5:00 p.m. pacific daylight time. 17 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the 18 foregoing is true and correct. Executed on February 22, 2021, at Fresno, California. 19 20 21 Vf Vi incent Soliz 22 Litigation Paralegal 23 24 25 26 27 28 Proof of Service Fresno Superior Court Case No. 11CECG00706